76 SA Flyer

The State of South

Africa blundered

heavily into the first

quarter of 2016,

much like a huge

old three-ring circus

coming to town on

its final tour.

L

AST year’s circus was

very disappointing. The

dog and pony show

failed to amuse the kids.

The ringmaster with

his toothless old lions

and scornful laughter

also did not impress. The

new show with the Three

Stooges from the Finance Ministry tanked

badly, causing several spectators to leave

the tent, vowing never to return.

The scal roller coaster behind the big

tent careened on its rails, the anguished

passengers screaming as they realised that

the last steep slope ended in the junkyard.

As evening came, the last lights went

out, the growling animals settled in their

cages and the trapezes hung motionless.

But within the caravans and trailers

laagered together, there was tension,

intrigue and dissent. Money was running

out – drastically. The spectators were

fewer, but the competition for their hearts

and minds – and money – was ever greater.

What to do?

THE FLYING TRAPEZE

At centre stage in the circus is our

national airline, South African Airways. It

was bleeding cash ever more profusely,

after years of consuming billions in citizens’

money. Panicked meetings revealed

that not only was the fairytale goose not

laying any golden eggs, but the state of

bankruptcy was so severe that there was a

real risk of directors going to jail.

Pilots who had the temerity to contradict

their CEO’s feeble excuses that they, the

pilots, were the problem were ruthlessly

bullied and framed. When the press got

hold of all this information, the courts were

drawn in to try to shut them up.

Back at the Civil Aviation Authority, any

phantom of public consultation had been

buried and the regulatory committees had

devolved into a Punch & Judy show. Safety

issues were long gone from the agenda.

Only regulations that fortied special

interests or covered up the CAA’s inability

to comply with international standards or

issue invoices would pass through the

system.

Again, any dissenting voices would be

bullied into silence. CAA even had several

of their employees issue summonses

against AOPA-SA on the imsy basis that

criticisms of CAA’s processes and functions

were defamatory. Naturally, these were

vigorously opposed by AOPA.

PROPOSAL TO ‘REGULATE’ AIRFIELDS

Back in 2008, the CAA proposed

amendments to Part 139 of the Regulations

that could criminalise any ights anywhere

in the country – other than from licensed or

‘registered’ aerodromes.

In order to license or register such an

aerodrome, the proposal stipulated that

there would not only be the usual onerous

requirements of payment of fees and

regular inspections, but also require re and

medical vehicles and personnel among the

myriad other required compliances.

The proposal was based on the premise

that the regulations would be aligned with

those in Australia, but that turned out to be

a complete misrepresentation. Australia

places no restrictions on unlicensed landing

areas other than for regular commercial

operations with aircraft exceeding 5,700 kg.

There were obvious negative

implications for the thousands of formal

CHRIS MARTINUS, PRESIDENT AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION – SOUTH AFRICA

Th e CAA launches

ANOTHER AT TACK on airelds

Losing unlicensed airfields would kill general aviation.

And the proposition that they are unsafe is unfounded.