June 2019 | www.sayer.com

HE theme of the talk

was ‘The Rules’. The

Rules are there largely

for our own benet. We

learn best from our own

mistakes but it is an

aviation axiom that you

won’t live long enough to learn from all the

mistakes that pilots often make.

WIN-WIN

We therefore have a set of rules that

were derived from the many other pilots

who have previously made those mistakes.

If we follow The Rules unquestioningly, our

chances of survival are enhanced. But it is

not a perfect system: some common sense

and cogitation and above all, practice is

required.

The workshop was aimed at sharing

knowledge and experience among pilots in

the area, many of them farmers who use their

aircraft as tools in their agricultural pursuits

and as personal transportation between the

many small airelds in the region.

The event was held on the farm Rexeld

and kindly hosted by Reid Wardle, a sheep

and cattle farmer, and avid pilot. The farm

is typical of many in the area: hilly terrain

covering large areas, soil prone to erosion

caused by vehicle trafc and remote

boreholes, dams and pump installations

necessary for watering the livestock.

Smaller STOL aircraft are well-suited

to this environment. Rather than arduously

travelling around the farm in a 4x4 bakkie,

tearing up the terrain and deepening the

dongas, short grass airstrips provide quick

and easy access to equipment installations.

In addition, the aircraft are an invaluable

tool for counting livestock, checking fences

and dams, as well as swiftly locating and

assisting sick or injured animals.

Evidence of the environmental benets

of using aircraft rather than ground vehicles

is clearly visible from the air. Not only is there

an abundance of various buck, warthog

and other wildlife, but bat-eared foxes are

also often seen. These cute insectivorous

creatures are usually the rst to leave

ecologically damaged environments.

The aptly-named Kitfox is a popular

aircraft in this region, as well as Piper

Cubs and ‘cub-alikes’. Their short-eld

performance and toughness are suited to

the short, rough airstrips, especially those

in valleys where the pumps and dams are

located. Approaches and departures from

these strips must be well planned and

AOPA BRIEFING

REPORT: CHRIS MARTINUS

I was recently invited to do a

presentation at a “short-eld

workshop” which was being held

over a weekend on a farm in the

Eastern Cape.

WIN-WIN OR

WIN-LOSE

Bat-eared foxes are often seen in the region.

www.sayer.com | June 2019

executed where there are ridges and hills in

the way.

Student pilots in the process of earning

their wings at Border Flying Club in East

London also joined the event, camping in

the bunkhouse and partying in the evenings.

They were part of the invaluable lectures,

mentoring, demonstrations and general

discussion with the more experienced

aviators. It is an essential part of producing

another generation of safe and competent

pilots.

Everyone beneted from the weekend

experience, even if only to have had a good

time. A truly win-win experience.

WIN-LOSE

For more than a decade, AOPA has

been defending small airstrips such as those

found on Rexeld and surrounding farms

and villages. CAA has been trying to regulate

small private airelds out of existence for a

long time through amendments to part 139

of the Civil Aviation Act. These amendments

would outlaw taking off or landing at any

place other than licenced or ‘registered’

airelds.

Licensing or registration entails

considerable expense and commitment

from the owner, as well as accepting liability

for any accidents which invited or uninvited

aireld users may have. Although CAA

have tendered many and various reasons

for these bizarre regulations, none of them

seem to make any sense. And where

developers have attempted to properly

licence public-use general aviation airports,

CAA has also refused to issue licences for

grossly irrational reasons.

This has resulted in a souring of AOPA’s

constructive engagement with CAA to the

extent that the matter has been through

the courts, CAA having been lambasted

by judges of the High Court. But, they still

persist in trying to damage a very happy

status quo of hundreds of small airelds that

provide infrastructural support to agriculture,

tourism and many other industries. This

has bafed many people, who wonder why

CAA would be so hostile to little airelds.

Why can’t AOPA and other players simply

settle this over a beer with CAA? Surely

this is merely a clash of personalities

and if the parties would just bury their

egos, they would see each other’s point of

view and reach some mutually benecial

agreement instead of incessant conict?

The problem lies a lot deeper than that. We

at AOPA have also been bafed by the fact

that we never make any headway by trying to

protect general aviation’s interests through

sweet-talking, respectful and mature

negotiation or any other legitimate means.

The only remedy is through presenting our

members’ case to the courts, who then

thump CAA into submission, only to have

them rise again and try a different angle.

There are many such conicts.

Previously in this column, we set out how

CAA is rendering the licence validations of

foreign pilots who want to tour South Africa

in hired aircraft, a virtual impossibility. The

damage to the economy is obvious, but CAA

remains largely unmoved. Talking nice is not

working.

A similar scenario exists in discussions

on social media regarding the grounding

of regional airline CemAir. This successful

regional airline, which provides invaluable

air connectivity to otherwise isolated towns,

was progressively set upon by CAA ofcials

who grounded all its aircraft for bizarrely

trivial reasons. CAA did this again and again,

even preparing TV presentations which

proved to be absurdly wrong. Ultimately, the

courts found that there were no safety issues

whatsoever and that the CAA’s actions and

CAA Director Poppy Khoza’s decisions

were “irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable and

procedurally unfair.”

These words echo the words of Judge

Elizabeth Kubushi in last year’s AOPA-

sponsored judgement regarding airelds

where she found that CAA’s actions were

“frivolous and/or vexatious” and “without

sufcient grounds and was just an abuse of

process”.

Yet CAA and Poppy Khoza soldier on,

keeping CemAir on the ground, despite

there being no obvious reason to do so.

Surely, say the social media

commentators, there must just be a clash

of personalities behind this. Surely Poppy

Khoza and CemAir CEO Miles van der Molen

should just bury their animosities and come

up with a win-win solution for themselves,

as well as for the people who have lost their

jobs and the isolated economies of those

destinations not currently served by air. A

win-lose situation, whether CAA wins or

CemAir wins in the end, is not really a happy

solution.

And herein lies the rub. Poppy Khoza

and her grossly overpaid and under-qualied

team have no choice. They are not even in a

position to make any decision. My personal

experience of many years’ in regulatory

committees veries this. I have spent long

hours pleading for general aviation while

looking into the empty eyes of some of the

CAA’s minions. There simply is no empathy.

Indeed, when I have shown them in

detail the damage their actions are causing

to our members and our industry, I think

it merely provides them with ammunition

COLUMNS

Delegates to the Short Field Workshop

take time out for a braai.

June 2019 | www.sayer.com

and intelligence in what they see as a war

against the very people they are supposed to

serve and protect. Why is this? The answer

is that CAA ofcials are not necessarily all

nasty people. However, they are mere foot-

soldiers in a greater political war of liberation

that simply does not end. They are “cadre

deployees”, as the ANC calls them. They

are unqualied and largely unskilled people

who are not equipped, either by experience

or training, for the positions of authority

they hold. But they were appointed to those

positions, paid handsomely and placed in

a position without any real expectation of

providing a good performance, as long as

they obediently do as they are told by the

politicians who appointed them.

This is pervasive through almost every

aspect of South African civic life, as the many

current commissions of enquiry are exposing

every day. The policy of cadre deployment

of the ANC has been openly discussed. It

also forms part of policy documents. As far

back as 1993, in an ANC “Circular No 213-

6 to Senior Staff and Marshalls”, the post-

apartheid policy is set out: “All positions in the

public service will be replaced by comrades,”

it says. Well, that has largely been done. It

goes on to say “The security forces will be

reconstructed with our comrades to protect

our people. Whites were protected for 350

years. Get them to experience to be second

class citizens!”

We have naively believed this to be just

so much posturing, and some have even

suggested that documents such as this are

forgeries. But, the rhetoric from politicians in

the recent national and provincial elections

loudly echo these policies: “Surplus land

will be redistributed among our people,” it

blares. And the policy platform of our current

President goes well beyond this: it will not only

be the surplus land that will be redistributed.

Also, “No ammunition will be available to

white settlers.” Current amendments and

implementation of rearms laws conrm this

is happening right now.

It is not necessary to go into further

examples from this document but what is

clear is that ANC policy was, and very much

still is, the pursuit of a liberation war based

on race. The ANC has never had any other

policy and has been unable to change from

their chosen path, despite liberation having

been gifted to them 25 years ago. That is

their policy platform and any deviation from

it erodes their electoral supremacy.

This ultimately destructive pattern of

liberation movements has repeated itself

all over the world. The challenge that faces

those of us who want to move forward, to

live in the world of win-win is to somehow

change that win-lose philosophy. The win-

lose philosophy has pervaded our society

and is reected in everyday life and business

dealings. It has become ingrained in so

many people, black and white alike, that

there can be no successful contract without

there being a loser. I so often in business nd

that, despite a deal which should have both

parties walking away happy, one party will

deliberately torpedo the contract, just so that

there is a loser – even if there is no possible

benet to the “winner”. I’m sure many of you

are smiling as you recognise this strange

psychology.

Many of the beneciaries of this win-lose

cadre deployment policy are recognising

that it is not sustainable and is beginning to

come apart. This is very likely the thinking

behind some proposed amendments to the

Civil Aviation Act, such as a provision that

the Director of CAA is to be appointed by the

CAA Board, not by the Minister of Transport

as is currently the case. A little mistrust by

Poppy that she will not forever be kept in

overpaid pastures, perhaps?

AOPA BRIEFING

REPORT: CHRIS MARTINUS

The SFW was hosted on a working farm by Reid Wardle.

The Kitfox is a popular aircraft in this region, also Piper Cubs and cub-alikes.