Flying NZ 2025: Instructors At The Heart Of Aviation Safety And Growth
A highlight of this year's event is the Instructor Safety Summit, held in conjunction with the AGM and free for all powered instructors. Recognising the important role flight instructors play in advancing aviation safety and training, Flying NZ—in partnership with the New Zealand Aviation Federation (NZAF)—is offering a transport subsidy to each club sending instructors. This benefit is available to powered instructors, including those from non-Flying NZ clubs, highlighting both of the organisation's commitment to inclusivity and sector-wide safety.
Attendees will enjoy direct access to key CAA safety advisors, who will deliver the latest updates on safety procedures and investigation processes. The Instructor Council summit on Saturday afternoon provides a unique forum for instructors to share best practices and discuss challenges with peers and CAA representatives. One-on-one opportunities with CAA staff ensure that instructors leave with actionable insights for their clubs and students.
The event also features an Awards and Presentation Dinner on Saturday evening for its members & affiliates, with a special guest speaker from Kea Aerospace - Mark Rocket the first New Zealander in space. Sunday's conference sessions focus on supporting, encouraging, promoting, and growing general aviation, with practical workshops on club development, volunteer retention, and youth engagement initiatives such as the Young Eagles programme.
Beyond the AGM and Conference, Flying NZ—previously the Royal New Zealand Aero Club (RNZAC)—continues to provide invaluable support to its member clubs that support over 4000 individuals across NZ. This includes the pilot proficiency programme, regional and national competitions for skill development, Young Eagles scholarships and support, membership cards offering reciprocal rights at clubs nationwide, and strong national advocacy efforts. Flying NZ's heritage as the RNZAC, which held a royal charter, highlights its lasting commitment to leadership, excellence, and the highest standards in aviation—a tradition that still guides the organisation today. As the national body for recreational and sport aviation, Flying NZ represents the interests of New Zealand's aviation community both at home and internationally, including as the New Zealand representative of the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI). For over 90 years, Flying NZ ( RNZAC), has been at the forefront of advancing safety, excellence, and the growth of general aviation in New Zealand.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
17 hours ago
- Newsroom
NZ's small lifesaving team make big waves at prestigious World Games
Three of New Zealand's most accomplished lifesaving athletes have returned from China with four medals – two gold – from one of the world's most prestigious non-Olympic international multi-sport events. The World Games, with lifesaving events on August 8 and 9, in Chengdu, China, were restricted to athletes ranked in the top eight in the world. It featured 4,000 world-class athletes from 144 countries and regions competing in 34 sports, including archery, gymnastics, squash, and baseball. There were 11 teams from New Zealand, but pool rescue was the sole lifesaving discipline contested. Lifesaving was the only sport New Zealand won medals in. Zoe Crawford hugs Maria Rodriguez Sierra of Spain after the women's 100m manikin tow final. Photo: Supplied Qualification standards were incredibly high, making the World Games a showcase of the world's best. The small New Zealand lifesaving team – Zoe Crawford, Madison Kidd and Fergus Eadie – competed in just two events each but came fourth on the medal table and won more medals than the Australian team of 10. All three are past or current world record holders, and so medals were expected. Crawford powered her way to gold in the women's 100m manikin tow. She was well clear of the field and within a second of her world record. Kidd secured a bronze medal, reinforcing the strength and depth of New Zealand's female lifesaving squad. This event involves swimming 50 metres with fins and a rescue tube, retrieving a floating manikin, and then clipping and towing it back to the finish with the rescue tube. Zoe Crawford in the women's 100m manikin tow final of the life saving event at the World Games 2025. Photo: Supplied Crawford, who has set world records as a senior and a junior, was making her World Games debut. 'I didn't know how I was going to race to be honest, I was just stoked to get it done,' she said of her win. Kidd was determined to hold off two Italians to get on the podium. 'After I fluffed my clip I was breathing towards the Italians, and in my head I was thinking, 'you're not beating me'.' It was the first time a New Zealand lifesaver had won a World Games gold. In fact, it was the only World Games lifesaving event that any Kiwi woman had secured a medal at, let alone two in the same event. Both have been breaking each other's world records in this event in recent years. Kidd broke it three times last year, including winning the 2024 World Championship title. But there was no record broken this year. 'This is probably the first time we haven't got a world record between the two of us for 18 months,' Kidd says. The World Games were also a great opportunity to compete against top European nations, who see this competition as on a par with the Olympics. 'The Europeans rank the World Games highly – way higher than World Champs – so it was quite cool to be in that environment, seeing how full on they are in terms of the way they go about everything, the kick they have – and of course getting medals is sweetness as well,' Kidd says. 'We are going out there to win, so it's good to come out with medals.' Crawford and Kidd also competed in the 100m manikin carry with fins, with Kidd placing seventh and Crawford eighth. Athletes swim 50m with fins, then dive to recover a submerged manikin before resurfacing and carrying it back while swimming. Eadie was unstoppable in the men's 50m manikin carry, becoming the only male athlete to break the 28-second barrier. His dominant swim earned him a gold medal. It followed his bronze medal in the 100m manikin carry with fins on the first day, where he was just 0.01s off a silver medal. 'Getting all three of us with medals and being on the podium on the same day is pretty special,' Crawford says. Gold medallist Zoe Crawford (left) and bronze medalist Madison Kidd receive their medals for the women's 100m manikin tow final. Photo: Supplied Hearing the New Zealand national anthem ring out twice in the stadium was a moment of immense pride, marking not only an individual triumph for these athletes but also a collective win for the sport in Aotearoa. All three athletes are coached by Michael Weston at the Coast Swimming Club on the Hibiscus Coast. Weston was not in China, he was coaching at the World Aquatics swimming championships in Singapore, as Zoe Pedersen, a teenage lifesaver in the Coast club, had recently made her Aquablack debut there with clubmates Eve Thomas and Laura Quilter. Pedersen holds the junior world record in the 100m rescue medley, but flew out again in the weekend to compete at the World Aquatics Junior Swimming Championships in Romania, which started on August 19. Her Coast coach, John Gatfield, is the team's head coach. While pool rescue athletes were getting medals in China, Pippa Nicol was at the Australian Pool Rescue championships in Adelaide. She broke an eight-year-old national record in the 200m super lifesaver, clocking 2:22.22. The team now looks ahead to the New Zealand Pool Rescue Championships next month. This is a selection competition for the 2026 national squad and a qualification competition for the German Cup, an international team competition between the world's top eight nations held in Warendorf in November.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
New Aviation Drug & Alcohol Rules In Effect
AUCKLAND – 18 August 2025 – With the Civil Aviation Act 2023 now in force, aviation operators across New Zealand are beginning the transition to formal Drug & Alcohol Management Plans (DAMPs), a new legal requirement that will form a core part of safety and risk management frameworks across the sector. The first submission deadline is just a month away, 30 September 2025 for Group 1 operators, followed by 30 June 2026 for Group 2. The Drug Detection Agency (TDDA) is encouraging operators to start planning now, saying that building a fit-for-purpose plan takes time, clarity, and the right expertise. The company offers end-to-end DAMP compliance services including policy review, certified training, random testing and secure reporting as required in the DAMP. 'Developing a compliant and operationally sound DAMP can't be rushed,' says Glenn Dobson, CEO, TDDA. 'For high-risk sectors like aviation, there are multiple moving parts from policies and testing protocols to staff training and reporting systems. Some operators can underestimate how much is involved.' Under the Civil Aviation Act 2023, Drug & Alcohol Management Plans (DAMPs) are now a legal requirement under Civil Aviation Rule Part 99 and must be approved by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). These plans apply aviation businesses broadly: commercial airlines and maintenance organisations, adventure operators, agriculture aircraft operations, air traffic services, and more. Each DAMP must set out how the operator will carry out random drug and alcohol testing for safety-sensitive workers, how non-negative results, refusal to test or unable to provide a sample will be handled, and what ongoing education and training will be provided for staff and supervisors. Plans must also clearly define roles and responsibilities across sites and teams, and include a system for regular reporting to the CAA. Full compliance is required in April 2027. 'We're seeing a growing number of operators asking, 'What does good look like?'. That's the right question. Smart operators know that shortcuts, low-cost testing providers, and DIY kits won't meet CAA's expectations, and worse, they compromise safety,' adds Dobson. 'In our experience, the operators who act early are the ones whose operations continue smoothly. As the submission deadline approaches, providers get overwhelmed, delays happen, and work stoppages become likely,' says Dobson. 'It also allows operators time to find the right fit – a compliance partner who truly understands the aviation sector.' TDDA is New Zealand's largest IANZ accredited, workplace drug and alcohol testing provider. It is currently offering free policy reviews to all DAMP- required operators as part of its commitment to industry safety. TDDA delivers end-to-end support for aviation operators implementing DAMPs, policy design, employee training, compliant testing and CAA-aligned reporting. TDDA's services meet the requirements of Civil Aviation Rule Part 99, covering random testing, response protocols, secure reporting and supervisor education. TDDA's reporting platform, IMPERANS, provides operators with real-time oversight, site-level visibility, and tools to manage DAMP quarterly reporting with ease. Supported by a fleet of mobile clinics that meet businesses where they operate, TDDA services both single-site and multi-site operations, including remote and mobile environments. As a specialist in DAMP compliance, TDDA ensures programs are practical, enforceable, and future-ready through to 2027 and beyond.
NZ Herald
5 days ago
- NZ Herald
How to create inter-generational family wealth
'The theory is that each time I have a child born, I would invest $22,000. The key is that the investment is not for my children but for my grandchildren. So for example, my child, let's call him Tim. 'When Tim is born I invest $22,000. When Tim turns 65, the investment is worth, say, $1 million. Each of Tim's children (who would be probably 30-40 years old) would be entitled to get a split of the payout. Note Tim does not participate in the investment. 'For Tim's children to receive their share, all they have to do is make an equivalent investment for their children to keep it running. They could make it out of their share of their payment. 'This may sound complicated, but the only difficulty I can see is the initial investment to be made. However, once past that hurdle, the scheme is self-perpetuating and, if you look forward far enough, covers potentially hundreds or thousands of descendants. 'I'm curious if this is a worthwhile idea or not. Considering the opportunity cost, what do you think? Note I have not yet thought through the funds management aspects or the 'trustee' responsibilities in 65 years.' A: I love it – even though your email makes me feel as if I'm back at high school, and I've been conned into helping someone do their homework! Other readers' main objection to doing something similar themselves, I suspect, will be that many couples making babies don't have $22,000 sitting around. But they could start with, say, $5000 or even $1000, and make a point of adding to it as soon as possible. Or in some cases, a grandparent might help. I like that your son isn't committing others in future to putting in money they may not have, given they can use some of their gift to invest for the next generation of recipients. Some issues for your son and others to think about: Your son suggests a return of 6%. That would have to be after fees and tax. It's probably a reasonable assumption if the money is invested in a share fund or a non-KiwiSaver aggressive fund. You would need to stick with it – not switching when the balance falls in a market downturn. If that's likely to be difficult for you, use a lower-risk fund and settle for a lower end balance. As your son acknowledges, inflation will eat into how much a future balance will buy. But it will still be great for the recipient – for perhaps a house deposit, or to repay a chunk of a mortgage. The amount a recipient puts in to keep the scheme running would need to be adjusted for inflation. If you have more than one child, obviously you would want to do the same for all of them. But what if one of your children has more kids than another?Cousins will be treated unequally. Maybe that's okay, but it's worth thinking about. What if one of your children has no offspring? Perhaps you could specify that they give the money to a charity of their choice. As your son notes, this would have to be set up with legal expertise. Basically, he is making the most of the power of a compounding investment over a really long time. I say: 'Go for it!' Small difference becomes big Q: Not a question, but a spectacular example of how a return of 8% versus 6% makes a massive difference after 42 years, is given in an online table I found. The 6% after 42 years provides $597,000. But the 8% provides $986,000, being nearly two-thirds more. A: You're right. Over long periods, a somewhat higher return makes a huge difference. That's why it would be best if the family in the previous Q&A, or anyone who wants to copy the idea, uses a high-risk fund – probably one that holds just shares. Stay with insurance Q: One of the benefits I received at my previous job was fully subsidised Southern Cross health insurance (Wellbeing One plan). Unfortunately, my new role does not include this coverage. I've since been in contact with Southern Cross, and continuing the policy independently would cost around $230 per month. Given that I've made very few claims in the past, I'm considering the alternative of setting that money aside in a dedicated savings account to cover any potential future health expenses. I'm in my late fifties, in good health and maintain a balanced lifestyle with daily exercise and a healthy diet. That said, I'm mindful that health needs can change unexpectedly. My current policy is on hold until the end of August, so I need to make a decision soon. I would really appreciate your thoughts or any guidance you may have on what might be the best course of action. A: There's no clear answer to your question – or the many variations on it that seem to come into my conversations often, now that my friends and I are no longer spring chickens! Let's just say that if I were you, I would keep the health insurance going. You may look back later and say you would have been better off if you had followed your self-insurance plan. But what people often ignore is peace of mind in the meantime. It's worth a lot to know that if you do suddenly develop a serious health issue, you won't have to either wait for perhaps months to get help or find big sums of money for treatment. The last thing you need at that time is money worries as well. And being in good health in your fifties – or sixties or seventies – certainly doesn't come with a guarantee that it will continue. Clearly, leading a healthy lifestyle must help you to fight any health nasties, but it doesn't prevent them. On the other hand, you will be shocked at how quickly health insurance premiums rise as you get older. You can keep costs down to some extent by limiting cover to specialist care, rather than including GP visits, and by increasing your excess – the amount you have to pay before insurance kicks in. How much? Dunno Q: Another health insurance question. My husband and I are both 65 and face the common question of continuing our health insurance or to self-insure. It is hard to make this decision without a ballpark figure for self-insurance. I totally appreciate everyone's health is so variable and I understand the reluctance by brokers to provide a figure, but some guidance would be helpful and appreciated. Can you help? A: Sorry, but no. Or, if you insist, several hundred thousand dollars. Some medical procedures, including scans and surgery, cost thousands. What's more, you can't predict whether you will need several procedures at much the same time, as different parts of your body decide to misbehave. When to switch Q: You often refer to switching funds as locking in your losses. I never fully understood that. It makes sense to me if one switches funds because they are scared during a market drop and switch to a lower-risk fund long term. But in your view: does that apply to all fund switches? What are the risks when switching a fund? If I switch to a higher-risk fund while the market is down, do I still lock in any losses? I know timing the market is futile, but I don't understand what the downsides to switching at any given point are. A: I've been waiting for the markets to wobble again before running this Q&A. Funnily enough, it hasn't really happened for a while. Then again, it could happen between my deadline time and the time you read this. So let's get on with it! First, we'll look at switching to a lower-risk fund during a downturn. Let's say that your account balance falls from $20,000 to $15,000. If you worry it will fall further, and therefore you reduce your risk, you've locked in the $5000 loss. You won't get that money back again when the markets rise, because your new fund doesn't hold many shares, if any. And recovery always happens – although sometimes it takes a while, and occasionally several years. If, however, you had stayed the course, your balance would have returned to $20,000 or higher. You would have lost nothing. In those circumstances I would say, 'Sorry, but if you can't cope with volatility you shouldn't have been in a high-risk fund in the first place. But okay, if you really can't sleep, just take the loss and move to lower risk. And, importantly, stay there'. On other fund switches, it depends. If you move to higher risk during a downturn, that's a pretty good move. You've bought at a relatively low price and will benefit when prices later recover. That's called contrarian investing – moving in the opposite direction to most people. The trouble is it involves market timing which, as you say, is a fool's game. When the market falls, for example, we never know if it might fall a long way further, followed by a slow recovery. So the rule is: reducing risk in a downturn is bad; increasing risk in a downturn may be good – but only if you're lucky. Usually it works far better to just get your money into the correct risk level for you, and leave it there. There are, however, two circumstances in which moving risk makes sense: You're getting nearer to the time you expect to spend the money. In those circumstances, it can work well to move your money in, say, three lots, a month or two apart. That way you avoid happening to make the move at a bad time. You realise you can't tolerate downturns as much as you thought you could. But, as stated above, you must then stay in the lower-risk fund for the long term. Not so possible Q: In regard to your comments on the use of aggressive funds by the elderly or those entering retirement, it is of course possible to do well by transferring money from an aggressive fund to a cash fund or similar when the aggressive fund is showing a peak balance. Over six months to a year, the aggressive fund will rise and fall similar to the Dow or Nasdaq index. Of course it's all about timing, but for those who follow the world indices figures, such as the VOO or similar, it is not too difficult to do. A: It's not just difficult, it's impossible if you want to get it right more than occasionally by luck. As I've said often, it can work well for retired people to hold money they expect to spend in 10 or more years in an aggressive fund – usually a fund that holds shares only. But it's not a good place for shorter-term money. Your balance in such a fund can quite suddenly plunge – occasionally as much as halving. And, as noted above, recovery can sometimes take several years. Meanwhile, the grocery purchases can't wait. You're suggesting we simply watch how the markets are moving and switch to a lower-risk fund at market peaks – in other words, right before a market downturn. The big question – one that every active fund manager in the world would love to be able to answer – is when a market has peaked. Getting that right repeatedly can't be done. Every now and then a fund manager does well, reducing risk right before a crash. Convinced he – or rarely she – has learnt the secret, investors rush into their funds. And once in a golden moon, the fund manager gets it right a second time or third time, and even more investors jump on the wagon. And then, uh oh! If you want to try to do this with a small amount – let's call it play money – go for it. And good luck! But I would never suggest it for others. * Mary Holm, ONZM, is a freelance journalist, a seminar presenter and a bestselling author on personal finance. She is a director of Financial Services Complaints Ltd (FSCL) and a former director of the Financial Markets Authority. Her opinions do not reflect the position of any organisation in which she holds office. Mary's advice is of a general nature, and she is not responsible for any loss that any reader may suffer from following it. Send questions to mary@ Letters should not exceed 200 words. We won't publish your name. Please provide a (preferably daytime) phone number. Unfortunately, Mary cannot answer all questions, correspond directly with readers, or give financial advice.
