Hardy's Aviation Grounded? [Archive]

Rotor Work

8th Dec 2012, 03:01

From ABC Website

NT airline grounded over safety concerns - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-08/nt-airline-grounded-over-safety-concerns/4416704)

The Northern Territory's biggest airline has been grounded over safety concerns in a move that will affect hundreds of passengers.
Last night the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) told Hardy Aviation to ground all of its 32 planes.
The airline, which flies to towns and communities across the Northern Territory, says CASA has told it that it has concerns with some pilots not meeting safety requirements and the type of flight simulator being used by the company.
Hardy Aviation was due to conduct charter flights this weekend and the company says hundreds of passengers will be affected by the suspension of its regular services next week.
The company says it's in the process of informing passengers and its 125 staff members about the grounding.
It comes days after one of Hardy's services, Fly Tiwi, had its planes grounded because two senior pilots failed a qualifications test.

Edit, sorry Ben 93, looks like we posted around the same time
Regards R W

SpyderPig

8th Dec 2012, 03:20

Wow I never thought I would be reading that, Hardys rep is rock solid.

All the best to the crew there and hope its sorted out soon.:ok:

The Green Goblin

8th Dec 2012, 04:33

Well there is some light, the Metro drivers can go to Pearl as a first year Captain, and earn 95k plus an 18k area allowance! (If the EBA is accepted)

Thats some pretty serious coin to work a day or two a week and drive a Metro!

FOs on 65% of that making it a pretty good salary also. In fact it's better than what the competitors are paying their Captains!

Must be some money in Truscott!

Ando1Bar

8th Dec 2012, 05:07

What sim do Hardy's use that CASA are not happy about?

4SPOOLED

8th Dec 2012, 05:48

Probably the fact they don't use sims for the >5700 operation.

Socket

8th Dec 2012, 05:54

Question: How many Chief Pilots do Hardies have?

Word was Hardy was suspended from RPT and IFR operations because senior pilots failed 'safety tests'. I' m just guessing that means IFR renewals or some such seeing as simulators were dragged into the reports.

This post on a thread not far removed from here after the suspension;

I heard one of Hardy's conquests depart IFR out of borroloola this afternoon. Ops normal?

Speculation: Is this a more likely reason for CASA to suspend all operations than:
Managing director John Hardy says CASA is not satisfied with the company's pilot training and wants it to use a different flight simulator.

Just asking.

seneca208

8th Dec 2012, 06:03

Hardy Aviation in Northern Territory grounds its flights | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/hardy-aviation-in-northern-territory-grounds-its-flights/story-e6frfq80-1226532764784)

That report states the CP failed his CIR renewal and it was a subsequent 'investigation' that required the whole operation to be grounded for 'safety reasons.'

Lasiorhinus

8th Dec 2012, 06:09

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/we-didnt-ground-hardy-aviation-casa/story-fn3dxiwe-1226532806591)

Yet the Regulator throws up their hands and says "wasnt me"...

THE Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) says the grounding of the Northern Territory's biggest airline is not a result of an order by the regulator.

Hardy Aviation has confirmed it grounded all its flights on Saturday after CASA wrote to it on Friday about safety issues, which first emerged a week ago.

CASA spokesman Peter Gibson says "instrument rating" issues had been raised in relation to Hardy's chief pilot.

"We wrote to them yesterday about a range of issues and made a series of proposals," he told AAP.

Hardy had been given until Monday to respond to the letter, Mr Gibson said, but CASA had not moved to ground the airline.

"What happens next depends on what their response is," he said.

"If the whole airline is grounded, if that's the case, it must have been their (the airline's) decision."

Socket

8th Dec 2012, 06:20

Hmmmm, subsequent investigation. That against a report of possible IFR ops after suspension.

I dont put a lot of credence in news reports so chances are they have totally twisted a clear statement.

Makes one wonder.:confused:

Connect the dots and it looks like a duck..... or does it?

Old Akro

8th Dec 2012, 06:43

You've still got to wonder about CASA sending a letter to Hardy's on Friday, demanding a response by Monday, relating to issues which have been known at least a couple of weeks. Where would you find a CASA staff member that would respond to anything between Friday & Monday.

Arnold E

8th Dec 2012, 06:50

Where would you find a CASA staff member that would respond to anything between Friday & Monday.

Ha!, where would you find a casa staff member that would respond to anything between January and December?

Socket

8th Dec 2012, 07:08

So now it has been revealed that CASA didnt ground them, and JH did it himself, all of a sudden it is still CASA's fault. Lord give me strength.

You've still got to wonder about CASA sending a letter to Hardy's on Friday, demanding a response by Monday, relating to issues which have been known at least a couple of weeks. Where would you find a CASA staff member that would respond to anything between Friday & Monday

What issues exactly were in the letter. Seems plausible to me that new issues were brought to light that JH knew were not going to show his organisation was operating as well as he would like. Possibly flying IFR when suspended from doing so, if reports from others on this forum are to be believed. Who knows, but it was after all HIS decision.

rutan around

8th Dec 2012, 07:10

If bent on revenge the rules are:- 1 ground your target at the worst possible moment. Here it's school holidays start. With Ansett it was Xmas and Easter. Works a treat. 2 Drop the bombshell late on Friday to guarantee at least 3 days of lost revenue. Question. Is a certain Richard Cranium previously sacked by Hardy's now working for CASA involved in this? Just wondering.
RA

Socket

8th Dec 2012, 07:16

Ixixly

8th Dec 2012, 07:25

We didn't ground Hardy Aviation: CASA | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/we-didnt-ground-hardy-aviation-casa/story-e6frfku9-1226532806591)

"
However, Hardy's managing director, John Hardy, said on Saturday that CASA had grounded all its flights on Friday night over concerns with its pilot training and flight simulator.
Mr Hardy said hundreds of people would be affected by the grounding of the airline's 32 planes.
"How is the Northern Territory going to be serviced? I am really flabbergasted by their action, they're just diabolical," he told the ABC.
"Maybe they've got some concerns with us and we're working through them, most of it's administrative I think, and we'll work through it.
"But to shut the place down just while they flex their muscles with us is quite disappointing."

The above is apparently from John Hardy, so according to this its still say CASA has grounded them even though they say they didn't. So first off, pull your head in Socket, read through it all yourself and you would have seen the above already mentioned in the article posted by Lasiorhinus.

Just a thought, but could it be perhaps that CASA is correct and that they haven't directly ordered Hardys to be grounded. It seems that there has been an issue with the Chief Pilots Instrument Renewal which has lead to him perhaps not being able to legally hold that title and as such caused caused a grounding?

I'm assuming that part of his Renewal would be done in the Sim, if CASA are unhappy with the Sim they are using could they have refused to allow it to count for his renewal which has led to the "Instrument Rating Issues" they have mentioned?

Just throwing some thoughts around...

wateroff

8th Dec 2012, 09:57

"WHAT HAPPENS NEXT DEPENDS ON THEIR RESPONSE"

Well F me - F you.

I'm sure in some bizzarro effing world - it should have read..............

"WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM TO SORT THROUGH SOME ISSUES, and INTERGRATING SOME POLICIES TO ENSURE THIS HOPEFULLY DOES NOT REPEAT" WHAT IS HARD ABOUT THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pack of incompent, inexperienced, unhappy ......................... click effing clicks.

victor two

8th Dec 2012, 11:13

Glad to see the regulator is actually regulating the industry. Sounds like the business has some deeper issues than just the failure of some IFR tests. It's simple stuff Hardy - run a compliant and safe operation and you won't get grounded. Cut corners, skimp on safety and training and it will catch up with you! And stop crying about it like you are a victim!

Lasiorhinus

8th Dec 2012, 12:59

Reading between the lines, it seems that the "simulator issues" are more than likely relating to the company's rush to get as many people as possible endorsed on the Metro before the provisions of CAO 40.1.0p2B come into force in April.

At the moment, they do their Metro endorsements in the actual aircraft: a single flight after two days of groundschool, unlike the other two Metro operators on the same aerodrome, who both have long groundschools and a week in the Ansett simulator.

Is that enough to suspend RPT operations? I wouldn't have guessed so, so there is clearly far more at play behind the scenes.

And I am still confused by the finger-pointing. Either CASA or JH grounded the fleet, that's for sure. Perhaps the FAF (Friday Afternoon Fax) from CASA was ambiguous and JH interpreted it as a grounding, while CASA did not intend for such to happen. Perhaps JH acted to err on the side of caution, but that certainly does not seem to be the tone he is taking with the media over the weekend.
Or perhaps CASA worded it in such a way as to imply a grounding, but left themselves an "out" to say it wasn't mandatory. Why, though, is beyond me.

206greaser

8th Dec 2012, 13:58

Socket are you having a laugh?? Yeah mate JH grounded himself cause he has no idea about aviation! You flipping idiot!

This whole thing is a witch hunt from a certain Richard Cranium that Rutan mentioned earlier. Those of us who operate up here know exactly who you mean Rutan.

I have never worked for Hardy's but wish them every success in getting back in the air soon.

Cheers,
Greaser.

halfmanhalfbiscuit

8th Dec 2012, 14:36

Sunfish

8th Dec 2012, 16:45

If it is correct that a letter was sent Friday requiring explanation Monday then this is a legal tactic equivalent of mailing someone a steaming turd. I've had it done to me in a commercial dispute with a venture capitalist. Such action seems to be unworthy of a government instrumentality. A normal response is five business days minimum.

And how has it been allowed to develop just before a holiday period?

Is it true that a disgruntled former employee works for casa and oversees this airline?

Are there other common characteristics between this action and that taken against others?

I wonder if the good senators may wish to make enquiries....

Edit: Sunday morning - from the CASA media release page:

Northern Territory air operator Hardy Aviation is currently restricted from conducting regular public transport and instrument flight rules operations.

This is because the chief pilot of Hardy Aviation has not met required standards during a routine flying competency check.

At this point Hardy Aviation does not have an approved replacement chief pilot.

CASA continues to look at the relevant safety issues.

Media contact:
Peter Gibson
Mobile: 0419 296 446
Ref: MR9312

Here is hardys version from the Australian:

THE Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) says the grounding of the Northern Territory's biggest airline is not a result of an order by the regulator.

Hardy Aviation has confirmed it grounded all its flights on Saturday after CASA wrote to it on Friday about safety issues, which first emerged a week ago.

CASA spokesman Peter Gibson says "instrument rating" issues had been raised in relation to Hardy's chief pilot.

"We wrote to them yesterday about a range of issues and made a series of proposals," he told AAP.

Hardy had been given until Monday to respond to the letter, Mr Gibson said, but CASA had not moved to ground the airline.

"What happens next depends on what their response is," he said.

"If the whole airline is grounded, if that's the case, it must have been their (the airline's) decision."

However, Hardy's managing director, John Hardy, said on Saturday that CASA had grounded all its flights on Friday night over concerns with its pilot training and flight simulator.

Mr Hardy said hundreds of people would be affected by the grounding of the airline's 32 planes.

"How is the Northern Territory going to be serviced? I am really flabbergasted by their action, they're just diabolical," he told the ABC.

"Maybe they've got some concerns with us and we're working through them, most of it's administrative I think, and we'll work through it.

"But to shut the place down just while they flex their muscles with us is quite disappointing."

Read more: We didn't ground Hardy Aviation: CASA | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/we-didnt-ground-hardy-aviation-casa/story-e6frfku9-1226532806591#ixzz2EUJFGzff)

Sunfish

8th Dec 2012, 18:13

Victor2:

Glad to see the regulator is actually regulating the industry. Sounds like the business has some deeper issues than just the failure of some IFR tests. It's simple stuff Hardy - run a compliant and safe operation and you won't get grounded. Cut corners, skimp on safety and training and it will catch up with you! And stop crying about it like you are a victim!

From V2's posting history he must be a Qantas manager, This suggests that maybe Qantas has designs on the business? Why else would he post on this subject?

Socket:

Can't you read, he grounded himself.

Someone lend him their spectacles, he must be blind.

From Sockets post history he must be a CASA employee. However Socket doesnt appear to know that without the IFR rated CP the airline can't take passengers in IFR situations.

Will the loss of the CP's instrument rating be the first stage in CASA driving the company out of business? If so, we should next expect CASA to trot out a long list of "safety deficiencies". This current move is just the opening shot.

This process is known in bureaucratic circles as "File stacking" one simply puts together a long list of documented insufficiencies, a damaged wiper blade here, a missing lifejacket there, a minor incident at XXX., etc. The process can take Five or more years.

When the file is at least an inch and a half thick you strike. You metaphorically throw the file on the judges desk saying "look at all this ! This proves the airline is unsafe!".

And of course the judge turns to the defendant and says "is this all true?" ..And the defendant says "Yes, but" and the damage is done.

The allegations have been presented in one indigestible lump and the defendant has neither the time nor perhaps the memory and of course the money to dissect the file for the judge and put each tiny incident or infraction in context.

........And I believe the AAT, and senior Judges, fall for it every time.

We wont know if this has happened because all will most likely be sub judice for at least a year, or perhaps never if Hardys goes broke.

Caveat: All this ignores the question of fact. I wouldn't know if Hardys is safe and/or compliant or not. WHat I am interested in is this seemingly adversarial approach to regulation that leaves the public interest far behind and the taxpayers purse considerably thinnner. There must be a better way.

To put that another way:

MPMmC0UAnj0

halfmanhalfbiscuit

8th Dec 2012, 18:57

Sunfish,

Caveat: All this ignores the question of fact. I wouldn't know if Hardys is safe and/or compliant or not. WHat I am interested in is this seemingly adversarial approach to regulation that leaves the public interest far behind and the taxpayers purse considerably thinnner. There must be a better way.

Perhaps all those that have received a Friday afternoon fax should collectively present them to the senate to illustrate the adversarial approach taken. Ok, I'm sure many at casa will claim bigger boys dig it and ran away or they were in Montreal at the time.

Kharon

8th Dec 2012, 19:33

Reading through this thread I am reminded of the old Roman days where, for Saturday night sport, you'd buy a jug of cheap vino, couple bags of rat tails for the kids and toddle off to the arena to watch the Christians v Lions matches. All great fun so long as your arse is parked on a comfy seat and not one the poor buggers in the arena covered in mud, blood and ****e, fighting for life.

No doubt many here will sagely 'tut tut' and go back to the Sunday paper. Cockpit cruise conversations (C) "Shame about Hardy's" – (FO) "Yeah, got my start there, had a ball, shame though". (C) "Me too, great times: who you taking to the company Christmas party?"

Until this industry gets off it's collective rump and faces down the bully boys – but you know the rest, don't you.

Sunfish

8th Dec 2012, 19:56

Is Hardys regarded as a good safe organisation by the industry ot not?

Are we about to see a re-run of Polar?

Skywagon1915

8th Dec 2012, 19:56

After 2 pages of mostly ill-informed comments, it's all a misunderstanding ...

"Hardy Aviation planes will return to Northern Territory skies today after what the airline says was a misunderstanding with regulators over its licence ... Naturally the Civil Aviation Safety Authority regrets any inconvenience to Territory air travellers ... Hardy says it will work with CASA over the coming weeks to resolve the safety issues the regulator raised ... Hardy's subsidiary, Fly Tiwi, remains grounded after two senior pilots failed a qualifications test." ABC News

Sunfish

8th Dec 2012, 20:07

Skywagon beat me to it - its all a "misunderstanding". OK, fuel up, move on, nothing to see here...............

Just one thing. Exactly who rang who this weekend and why?

Rotor Work

8th Dec 2012, 20:08

From ABC Website

Hardy Aviation planes will return to Northern Territory skies today after what the airline says was a misunderstanding with regulators over its licence.
All Hardy flights were cancelled yesterday when the airline thought it had been grounded by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).
But Hardy says it misread a letter sent to it by CASA, which outlined concerns about its pilot training.
CASA spokesman Peter Gibson says the regulator has raised concerns with Hardy but did not force it to ground flights.
"We've given them until Monday afternoon to respond so we can work through this in a constructive manner [and] can reach the right safety outcomes," he said.
"Naturally the Civil Aviation Safety Authority regrets any inconvenience to Territory air travellers."
Hardy says it will work with CASA over the coming weeks to resolve the safety issues the regulator raised.
Hardy's subsidiary, Fly Tiwi, remains grounded after two senior pilots failed a qualifications test.
The airline is confident safety issues with that service will be resolved soon.

thorn bird

8th Dec 2012, 20:20

"Naturally the Civil Aviation Safety Authority regrets any inconvenience to Territory air travellers ... "

Unbelievable!!

Since when did CASA give a sh..t about to anything except directors bonuses?.
The rumour mill has it that this came about because an ex employee, now working for CASA had a disagreement with the head of check and training over whether the CP under check passed his IR or not,
So the disgruntled ex employee failed them both.
Much the same technique used to shut down Airtex at BK and tiger, knock out the key persons and their screwed.
I think this whole thing has suddendly been resolved because CASA realised there was going to be some rather bad press coming their way.
Why anyone would invest money in Aviation in Australia under the current arrangements fails me. Which perhaps explains the stampede of aviation business to NZ.

Sunfish

8th Dec 2012, 20:29

Pure rumour.

The Darwin refueller?

thorn bird

8th Dec 2012, 20:51

hey sunny this is a rumour network.

Trojan1981

8th Dec 2012, 21:48

Much the same technique used to shut down Airtex at BK

C'mon, two fatal crashes helped that along a bit. After seeing the state of their fleet at the time they were shut down I am not surprised. Many of their former aircraft are now being scrapped.

Sarcs

8th Dec 2012, 21:50

From the outside looking in I wonder how much of this is a knock on effect of the Pel-Air Senate enquiry.
Hardy Aviation planes will return to Northern Territory skies today after what the airline says was a misunderstanding with regulators over its licence.

All Hardy flights were cancelled yesterday when the airline thought it had been grounded by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

But Hardy says it misread a letter sent to it by CASA, which outlined concerns about its pilot training.

CASA spokesman Peter Gibson says the regulator has raised concerns with Hardy but did not force it to ground flights.

"We've given them until Monday afternoon to respond so we can work through this in a constructive manner [and] can reach the right safety outcomes," he said.

"Naturally the Civil Aviation Safety Authority regrets any inconvenience to Territory air travellers."

Hardy says it will work with CASA over the coming weeks to resolve the safety issues the regulator raised.

Hardy's subsidiary, Fly Tiwi, remains grounded after two senior pilots failed a qualifications test.

The airline is confident safety issues with that service will be resolved soon.
Top job JH called their bluff and made them back down!

Guess the story line and fill in the gaps….

Once upon a time in the bureaucratic HQ of Oz…Scene: FF executive meeting where nearly all members are left smarting from the negative implications constantly coming out of a certain Senate enquiry.

The members of FF executive management all agree something needs to be done…“ we need to make an example of some reasonably high profile midlevel operator that has only a small risk of political implications and adverse public backlash (i.e. we don’t want to embarrass the minister). Pass the word around the troops and see if there are any individuals with an axe to grind with an operator with the right profile. That way if it all turns to mud we will have a sacrificial lamb.”

Note: Then we have all the dramas of the past week with Hardys leading up to…

Date 08/12/12…John Hardy decides to ground his own operation. Which, as it turns out, is a shrewd, pre-emptive approach. It puts Fort Fumble on the back foot and given the Pel-Air example means it will keep things out of the ‘show cause’ process and leaves it up to the regulator to present their safety issue findings to JH in a timely manner.

This reverberates around the halls of FF (on a Saturday no less) because; given the Pel-Air example, by rights these ‘safety issues’ should automatically trigger a ‘special audit’. FF are very loath to deploy a special audit team this close to Xmas but given the bad press that they are now going to receive they almost have to….

Which ultimately leads to FF backing down. Well done JH no wonder your business has remained successful over a good many years!:ok:

Postscript: If FF still decide to special audit Hardys then JH would be wise and quite within his rights to ask for, on grounds of impartiality, a special audit team from another regional branch (excluding Bankstown).

Mach E Avelli

9th Dec 2012, 00:18

Interesting that in previous threads, Hardy did not feature as Mr Good Guy. Now that he has copped a bashing from CASA suddenly he is flavour of the month. Of course it is very Australian to back the underdog and I am all for it. Just an observation, is all.
Re senior pilots failing CASA check rides. Endemic in GA is a lack of recurrent training. The Check and Training manual will no doubt have lots of nice words about how much and when recurrent training is required and, as wrong as CASA is about many things, if that is in the manual they have every right and indeed responsibility to enforce it.
But CASA should be aware (and would be if they got out in the field a bit more)
that GA pilots typically go a year with maybe a 45 minute base check at the six month point, then struggle through an instrument rating renewal at the 12 month point.
Try telling the boss that you are taking his Metro or King Air out with a couple of pilots for an afternoon's recurrent training! Or that you are going to flog his turbo charged engines with asymmetric work. "Toy" simulators can only do so much to keep a pilot proficient and unless pilots are rostered for simulator, very few will attend in their own time.
Not saying that this is the case at Hardy, but it if was it would be fairly typical of the industry.
Once CASA get an operator in their gunsights, the easist way for them to make life difficult is to home in on the check and training system.
This is not intended to be a judgement on Hardy here; the reasons and facts for CASA 's action have not really been put out there, just some mealy-mouthed 'concerns' It will be interesting to see if a law suit for loss of revenue follows........

Sarcs

9th Dec 2012, 01:30

Mach you make some good points especially in regards to: But CASA should be aware (and would be if they got out in the field a bit more)
that GA pilots typically go a year with maybe a 45 minute base check at the six month point, then struggle through an instrument rating renewal at the 12 month point.
Which is especially relevant with Hardy given that for at least 6 months of the year in the topend you're lucky to see a cloud let alone shoot an approach in anger. The rest of the time the clouds you do see are ones that you'll do best to avoid.

Most midlevel GA operators margin for loss/profitability is so small that management are reluctant to pay for anything but the bare minimum for crew recurrency training and so you inevitably end up with the status quo that Mach suggests.

Once CASA get an operator in their gunsights, the easist way for them to make life difficult is to home in on the check and training system.

That maybe true but surely if there were compliance issues with the T&C system those issues should have been picked up in the last AOC or spot (surveillance) audit?

Audits are supposedly designed to capture safety cultural shifts within a company's SMS and the operating environment before they become significant safety issues.

So did that happen and subsequently these non-compliances weren't adequately addressed? Or did the previous audit totally miss these issues and are they now only discovering what the previous audit team missed? Or is there some other agenda at play? :E

mtrench

9th Dec 2012, 01:31

Hardy's were a great operation, and i have nothing but respect for the operation. Loved my time there, and hope the issues are sorted out.

Horatio Leafblower

9th Dec 2012, 01:52

I have heard rumours about a 19-30 seat RPT turboprop operator using a C152 to keep a C & T captain night current.

...THAT's a quality operation. :ugh:

flying-spike

9th Dec 2012, 02:24

"that maybe true but surely if there were compliance issues with the T&C system those issues should have been picked up in the last AOC or spot (surveillance) audit?

Audits are supposedly designed to capture safety cultural shifts within a company's SMS and the operating environment before they become significant safety issues.

So did that happen and subsequently these non-compliances weren't adequately addressed? Or did the previous audit totally miss these issues and are they now only discovering what the previous audit team missed? Or is there some other agenda at play? "
I don't know what you guys are on but I think you need to lay off it a bit.
It started with the CP failing a rating check probably followed by the deputy doing the same. Which would have instigated a "show cause" or in other words "you have got until Monday arvo to tell us why we shouldn't stop you flying IFR."
As far as hidden non-compliances and the SMS, this has all stemmed from a planned IFR renewal, not an audit.

JH admits to a misunderstanding and consequent over reaction and recommences operations. I don't see that as calling anybody's bluff.
Don't get me wrong, I have known JH for nearly 25 years and he is a smart and honorable person.
As far as the daggers being thrown at Darwin CASA people, I think you will find the audits are done by Brisbane people. At least that was the case until a year or so ago.

Sunfish

9th Dec 2012, 02:50

Nobody is casting nasturtiums , how did the situation end up this way and how can it be prevented from happening again?

Horatio Leafblower

9th Dec 2012, 03:18

As far as the daggers being thrown at Darwin CASA people, I think you will find the audits are done by Brisbane people. At least that was the case until a year or so ago.

Spike,
no rumour about it, the guy who did the test is DN based and ex Hardys.

...from an impeccable source.

flying-spike

9th Dec 2012, 04:54

Fair enough. I wasn't aware that was the case. If it is the case, poor management by the locals if they wanted to appear squeaky clean.i.e. axe to grind etc.

Desert Duck

9th Dec 2012, 04:55

Is it the same guy who had a 'little' trouble with a couple of Metro engines at PKT a long time ago?

gobbledock

9th Dec 2012, 05:25

Regardless of whether Hardy's sinned or not, CASA always look for a 'soft target' at times when they are being scrutinized. I wouldn't be surprised if they are merely flexing some muscle in their time of need? It's happenned many times before. It is a tautological method tried and tested by the CASA throughout history.

SpyderPig

9th Dec 2012, 07:13

DD I am informed that yes it is that same individual and Im also informed that wasnt his first "engine management" issue with the death pencil. Pure speculation tho :E

On topic Im glad to hear Hardys are back in the air and hope this hasnt affected too many people:ok: Im told it was utter chaos with the other Darwin operators yesterday scrambling to meet the incoming job requests from the affected clients.

601

9th Dec 2012, 07:46

At this point Hardy Aviation does not have an approved replacement chief pilot.

If these words were in the CASA letter, then JH had no option but to ground the aircraft.

No approved chief pilot = no current AOC. Clear and simple.

However, if CASA meant to say "the company cannot conduct IFR ops because the CP does not have a current IR", they should have said that.

Sunfish

9th Dec 2012, 10:13

Not engine management, surely?

gutso-blundo

9th Dec 2012, 10:29

How the hell do you "mis-manage" a 331?

trainconductor

10th Dec 2012, 00:39

Hardy's would still be the safest GA operator in darwin. But it must be pretty hard to be a chief pilot and focus on safety, when the chief pilot is too busy making sure he is lining his pockets with dosh. Conflict of interest I say.

Sounds like Hardy's isn't a GA company and now an airline and if they want to compete with the other airlines they need to act more like an airline.

Back in my days up in the NT they were the company to work for.
I hope they get it all sorted out and make some changes to improve the company.

Up-into-the-air

10th Dec 2012, 01:43

NT RAPAC

Meeting: 2010-3
Date: 9th September 2010
Time: 1400 hrs
Venue: Darwin CASA Office
2 Fenton Court
Darwin Airport, NT
Minutes
NT Convenor: Ron Lawford

9.2. Attendance List

Robert Graham RAAF ATC Darwin
Ron Lawford Convenor – AOPA- SAAA
Damien Fairhurst RAAF ATC Tindal
Melissa Sanders Chartair
Ben Coombe Barrier Air Charter
Thyjs Bors Barrier Air Charter
Greg Imlay CASA
Sally Cutter BoM
Peter Ball CASA
Andrew Sparrow Airservices Australia
Ian Smith Airnorth
Bob Calaby NT Airports
Jared Higgerson Vincent Aviation
Greg Hardy Hardy Aviation
Mark Brindell RAAF ATC Darwin
Alan Bridges Chair - CASA

and the most recent RAPAC:

NT RAPAC

Meeting: 2012-3
Date: 27th September 2012
Time: 1400 hrs
Venue: Rydges Darwin Airport 1 Henry Wrigley Drive
Marrara NT 0812
Minutes
NT Convenor: Ron Lawford

9.3. Attendance List

Gregory Hardy Hardy Aviation
Ron Lawford RAPAC Convenor
Robert Karlson Chartair
Peter Ball CASA
Bob Calaby Darwin International Airport
Robert Jackson Defence
Andy McWatters Defence
David Dean Defence
Scott W Airnorth
Kent Quigley Airservices
Steve Allen RA-AUS, Topend Flying Club
Robert M Pearl Aviation
Graeme Rogers – chair CASA

thorn bird

10th Dec 2012, 09:08

Mate,
pardon my ignorance but what does RAPAC stand for?

T28D

10th Dec 2012, 10:28

RAPAC = talkfest of no real importance and questionable outcome.

OpsNormal

10th Dec 2012, 18:28

Thorn Bird: RAPAC = Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Commitee.

U-I-T-R, you'll find Greg has had more than a passing interest in it for much longer than that.

Ever had cause to attend one T28? By the sounds of things I doubt it. Yes sometimes the wheels turn slowly but they would almost if not grind to a halt without it. Get involved and make it better if you feel so passionately about it. You might be surprised at some of the "interesting" ideas that were were nipped in the bud (for good reason) in days gone by. Of course they weren't always able to completely stop every hair brained idea...

We were talking about Hardy's...

flying-spike

10th Dec 2012, 19:20

"Hardy's would still be the safest GA operator in darwin. But it must be pretty hard to be a chief pilot and focus on safety."

What a load of waffle, every pilot has to focus on safety otherwise every flight would finish with a smoking hole in the ground.
If I can quote the RAAF "Mission First, Safety Always"
What can be difficult is when the Chief Pilot has to cover for any inadequacies in the SMS/Safety Manager. I am not saying this is the case with Hardy Aviation. What is also difficult in a place like Darwin is keeping not only himself but all of his IFR crew IF proficient and this can be a real problem if you don't have access to a decent synthetic trainer or aircraft hours for training and recurrency. That may be the problem in Darwin.

kalavo

10th Dec 2012, 23:28

What a load of waffle, every pilot has to focus on safety otherwise every flight would finish with a smoking hole in the ground.
If I can quote the RAAF "Mission First, Safety Always"
What can be difficult is when the Chief Pilot has to cover for any inadequacies in the SMS/Safety Manager. I am not saying this is the case with Hardy Aviation. What is also difficult in a place like Darwin is keeping not only himself but all of his IFR crew IF proficient and this can be a real problem if you don't have access to a decent synthetic trainer or aircraft hours for training and recurrency. That may be the problem in Darwin.

What a load of waffle.

Taking junior pilots from other operators where they've actively been trained to break the rules "if you write it up, you'll have to leave the aircraft parked there and make your own way back to civilisation, just keep flying with the missing window and we'll fix it at the 100 hourly" ... "everyone up here flies through cloud VFR, this is Territory VFR"

Giving those junior pilots all the stick time when in the aircraft - they don't know what they don't know about flying IFR, and while they came with a valid CIR/ME, very few if any of them would be IFR current or have any experience flying IFR.

Having 32 aircraft fly well over 1000 hours/year, and a lot of the pilots sitting around the 800 hrs/year mark.

Competing against other operators that do bend the rules and cut corners to save money and the only advantage you have in your corner is scale of economies.

It would be very hard as a Chief Pilot of such a large organisation to not only keep yourself current, but keep an eye on the 50 or so other pilots some of whom have come with some very interesting ideas about how to comply with the legislation. It would also be hard to ensure all 50 are getting in to the synthetic trainer regularly over the dry season.

The organisation hasn't shrunk recently either. CASA have gone about this completely the wrong way and blatantly obvious they haven't done a risk analysis to determine the possible outcomes of CASA's actions. From a safety and a financial perspective I would say it's time to think about splitting the AOC in two - have a separate chief pilot for the smaller aircraft with more junior pilots, and one for the more experienced guys on the turbine. A little bit of pain involved with separate Ops manuals, 20.11's, CAR217 systems, etc. But a second (or third and fourth if you include HOTAC) set eyes of to keep an eye on the operation and ensure everything is by the book wouldn't go astray with such a large, busy organisation with a diverse fleet. Also may limit the damage if CASA takes an interest in a particular AOC.

Mail-man

11th Dec 2012, 02:25

I'm still curious how you mis manage a Garrett?

gobbledock

11th Dec 2012, 04:54

Competing against other operators that do bend the rules and cut corners to save money and the only advantage you have in your corner is scale of economies.Hush! You will have all the DRW FOI's trawling through Poohtube now, looking for footage of 'rules being bent'.

flying-spike

11th Dec 2012, 05:52

The organisation hasn't shrunk recently either. CASA have gone about this completely the wrong way and blatantly obvious they haven't done a risk analysis to determine the possible outcomes of CASA's actions. From a safety and a financial perspective I would say it's time to think about splitting the AOC in two - have a separate chief pilot for the smaller aircraft with more junior pilots, and one for the more experienced guys on the turbine. A little bit of pain involved with separate Ops manuals, 20.11's, CAR217 systems, etc. But a second (or third and fourth if you include HOTAC) set eyes of to keep an eye on the operation and ensure everything is by the book wouldn't go astray with such a large, busy organisation with a diverse fleet. Also may limit the damage if CASA takes an interest in a particular AOC.

I can imagine operators embracing your mandated structural change. They would love to have to pay for it as well and then have to change it all back when Part 119 kicks in. You should get a hold of JH and put your proposal forward but let me know when you do, I would love to watch.

gobbledock

11th Dec 2012, 06:04

I can imagine operators embracing your mandated structural change. They would love to have to pay for it as well and then have to change it all back when Part 119 kicks in. You should get a hold of JH and put your proposal forward but let me know when you do, I would love to watch I think JH would take the suggestion of 2 AOC's and feed it to the local Croc population!
Imagine that, 2 AOC's means double the attention from Fort Fumble. Double administrative costs for AOC renewal, double the silly paperwork involved in dealing with Fort Fumble and double the mistakes made on behalf of the silly Regulator!

kalavo

11th Dec 2012, 06:04

Ooo trust me, it wasn't my idea :)

SpyderPig

12th Dec 2012, 08:46

The story goes something along the lines of during a taxi an FO accidentally shut the fuel off and after a few seconds of starvation the "accused captain" reengaged the fuel leading to a good over temping.

I how ever have no real understanding of the type so dont know exactly of the details, it is however reasonably well known around the Darwin GA ramp as its not the first time Ive heard it. Said individual regardless of his role in this Hardys issue is not the most popular of chaps in the top end, that I do know.

On topic though, good to see them back in the air and this mess being cleaned up!:ok:

thorn bird

12th Dec 2012, 09:35

Dabz,

wouldn't hold my breath mate.
Trouble is Hardies out maneuvered CASA. CASA cannot lose.
Expect a football team of auditors to turn up shortly and
"Serious Deficiencies" going back to when Hardies first started
to be trotted out, followed by another 1655PM Friday letter under the
door and Bob's your uncle CASA was right all along.

601

13th Dec 2012, 03:26

And how exactly did Hardys out manoeuvre CASA?

From the CASA Media Release

At this point Hardy Aviation does not have an approved replacement chief pilot.

Technically on the wording of the Press Release they could not operate.

So they ground the aircraft and cease to operate.

Then clarification by CASA? What was communicated?

Then Hardys are operating again

??

flying-spike

13th Dec 2012, 04:50

I thought it was the season to be jolly, I must have been mistaken

It is the season to blame every operator's stuff ups on CASA conspiracies without ever referencing the facts to the contrary.

CASA is far from perfect but you can't blame them for everything every time.

Stationair8

13th Dec 2012, 05:35

Is Ray V still doing Metro C&T for Hardey's?

gutso-blundo

13th Dec 2012, 05:55

RV comes up from time to time. Not often enough!

troppo

13th Dec 2012, 08:09

Is Ray V still doing Metro C&T for Hardey's?
I guess this should answer that question

SEEK - Metro training and checking Pilot Job in Darwin (http://www.seek.com.au/Job/metro-training-and-checking-pilot/in/darwin-darwin/23543264)

Mach E Avelli

13th Dec 2012, 18:30

It is probable that CASA forced that advert. The 217 check and training manual should specify a minimum ratio of checkies and trainers according to number of pilots. Operators will run below these minimums as long as they can, but eventually an eagle eyed auditor will call it in. Depending on the size of the organization they can require these people to be full time employees, not contractors.
A salary of $150k is a big overhead for a Metro operator, for what would be mostly administrative and training, i.e. the checkie probably doesn't get to do too much pure revenue flying. But that's the price of doing business at this level of aviation.

CoodaShooda

14th Dec 2012, 00:46

Brief article on ABC Radio News this morning that Hardy's is taking legal action in the Federal Court against CASA over the grounding of Tiwi Air.

seneca208

14th Dec 2012, 01:36

Brief article on ABC Radio News this morning that Hardy's is taking legal action in the Federal Court against CASA over the grounding of Tiwi Air.

That can't end well.

Up-into-the-air

14th Dec 2012, 02:50

The ABC article as:

NT airline challenges CASA grounding of Fly Tiwi
Staff reporters
Posted 2 hours 50 minutes ago

PHOTO: Hardy Aviation subsidiary Fly Tiwi was grounded by CASA late last month because senior pilots failed a review test. (Supplied)
MAP: Darwin 0800

Northern Territory airline Hardy Aviation is taking legal action against the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) over the grounding of its subsidiary, Fly Tiwi.

Fly Tiwi's daily flights to the Tiwi Islands were grounded by CASA late last month because senior pilots failed a review test.

Hardy Aviation has been working with CASA to resume flights.

Managing director John Hardy says it has has been left with no choice but to take action against the conditions imposed by CASA, which include a review of all Hardy Aviation aircraft and pilots.

"Our lawyers have put together a submission and we are are going to before a judge in the Federal Court to try and get some sort of stay of this suspension or these conditions," he said.

Mr Hardy says he has more than 120 staff, and they are worried about what is happening.

"Everybody, to a man and woman, is nervous and twitchy and tense," he said.

"What is so irritating about this whole episode is the lack of care by CASA for the people who are most affected."

He says his lawyers have put together a submission to try and get what he calls onerous conditions overturned.

"Our lawyers said: 'John, make no mistake, they are trying to shut you down; you read the letter carefully, it may be ambiguous but really CASA has lied to you. They don't want you to operate'.''

Mr Hardy says the grounding has left hundreds of people in Tiwi Islands communities without freight and transport

See complete at:

NT airline challenges CASA grounding of Fly Tiwi - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-14/hardy-aviation-challenges-casa-grounding/4427972?section=nt)

flying-spike

16th Dec 2012, 20:00

Lets see if we can make some sense of this.
First of all does "Hardy's subsidiary Air Tiwi have an AOC"
Mmmmm don't think so.
So is it the only part of the whole operation that is run RPT therefore requiring a CAR217 structure for the whole operation?
I think so.
So if the CP and deputy CP fail a renewal it only affects the Air Tiwi operation so they can fly charter but not RPT and resume flying to the Tiwi Islands on an ad-hoc charter basis no doubt organised by their agents there while the continue to take CASA on.

That makes sense to me but I may be wrong. Would anybody else like to set me straight?

601

16th Dec 2012, 22:24

"Hardy's subsidiary Air Tiwi have an AOC"
Mmmmm don't think so.

So Air Tiwi does not have an AOC therefore no CP.

So if the CP and deputy CP fail a renewal it only affects the Air Tiwi operation

That statement does not compute.

The AOC holder is required to have a CP who has endorsements and ratings consistent to the operation, unless approved otherwise by CASA (CAO 82.3.23). So if the CP cannot carryout the duties required by the position and the company's operation, then the AOC holder cannot operate.

T28D

16th Dec 2012, 22:39

Amongst all this scuttlebut I wonder if there is a credible source who knowswhat is actually happening ?????????

thorn bird

16th Dec 2012, 23:15

What's happening? It would appear that the CASA is trying to shut down another GA operator.
The question is, is this payback by a disgruntled ex employee?

flying-spike

17th Dec 2012, 01:25

What I was getting at was no IFR CP or deputy CP so no RPT operations just restricted to VFR charter ops.

mtrench

17th Dec 2012, 07:12

Spoken to senior staff recently and was told they are still flying IFR, no idea about the RPT ops though.

Mach E Avelli

17th Dec 2012, 20:14

So CASA has determined that they are not safe to operate RPT but OK to continue doing charter? How does that work? Like being just a 'little bit' pregnant. If that is the situation, the lawyers will have a field day.

LeadSled

17th Dec 2012, 23:50

Folks,
Does anybody have any idea of the circumstances of the alleged failure --- was it in an aircraft, if so, what type. Or, was it in a simulator, if so what type and which simulator.
Tootle pip!!

Mach E Avelli

18th Dec 2012, 01:15

Yeh, I understand all about CAR 217. If that is their checking and training system, it applies to charter as well. Unless they have separate AOCs and separate systems of checking. Maybe they do?
The point I am trying to make is that they are either safe to carry the paying public, or they are not. If they are not, they should be grounded - period. If they are OK enough for continued charter operations, then Hardy may have some strong grounds for litigation.
Bring on Parts 135 , 121 etc and lose this stupid, stupid differentiation and double standard between charter and RPT for ever, pleeese!

Radix

18th Dec 2012, 06:37

............

AnyGivenSunday99

18th Dec 2012, 07:23

Lets not lose sight of the fact a lot of our aviation brethren are suffering from this, many concerned about losing their jobs.

Might I suggest those that don't know anything about Hardys business structure don't even try speculating, and those that wish to bag their operation take a little time to think of those being affected. Don't come in here and puff your chest out and make anonymous accusations.

On a personal note, JH doesn't need glasses. Still flies a 404 better than the young bucks. There's nothing dodgy about Hardys. Just a company with growing pains. They'll get things sorted. They are still one of the best GA operators around. Many current airline drivers cut their teeth with a HA on the tail, and look back on their time there with great fondness.

Thoughts are with those affected. Blue skies and tailwinds Lads.

Stationair8

18th Dec 2012, 08:09

TVL refueller reckons that some CASA big wig was making urgent mobile phone on a Saturday night to some bloke that owns a large fleet of aircraft that were grounded.

TVL refueller also purchased a large number of Telstra shares on the following Monday, due to inside information on very a large spike in mobile calls.

Dog One

22nd Dec 2012, 06:30

Any updates on how they are travelling?

caa

25th Dec 2012, 07:27

I have been in GA for over 27 years all over Australia and other parts in the world, but much of it in The TOP End, It is the area in Aviation I enjoy. So I feel I am qualified to make the following comments. As always you are welcome to disagree with me.

· I have never directly worked for Mr JH orHardy’s but I know very many who have and for very many years. Without a doubt– This is not a dodgy company!

Words from JH’s mouth when paying for thirdparty maintenance “I what the BEST maintained aircraft in Australia”

I have heard from him very many similarthings – also look at what he pay’s his staff, more than many in CASA in manypositions.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

· CASA well where do we start?

· Known for employing people that cannot make itin the industry.

· Between them they have a different view oncompliance with a regulation but enforce their view.

· Give junior staff the little ASR book that cancripple a company with next to zero training on how to fill it out – (check forany requirement on the ASR – it is a hidden secret)

· Have no justification for their own work – it isa let run wild environment.

Now I have at a time been told by a CASA person, I can takea CASA staff personally to court on something that cost me about 30K – He madeit sound a simple thing! But he did not tell me (I knew) that if I did, he getsfull CASA support from their very large legal team at no cost. Simply put if Iwant to show him as the fool he was it will cost me legal fees to fight a legalteam (Ashby vs. Gov. Rings bells 17 lawyers paid by Gov. & still pay out50K). The chance of going broke is what they count on.

It is high time CASA personal are held accountable for theirown actions Good and Bad. Pay them more and sack the fools. My guess is an80-95% replacement in CASA staff. That would also have a great increase onsafety instead of wasting time on personal things that they like to enforce.

JH, GH, AH. I hope you settle this war, I know you run asgood a ship as you can- all the best.

601

26th Dec 2012, 12:23

If that is their checking and training system, it applies to charter as well

A 217 system does not automatically apply to non-rpt or charter a/c below 5700.

Mach E Avelli

27th Dec 2012, 00:50

But it certainly applies to Metros, and if the C & T Manual so states, will apply to whatever aircraft are in the fleet.
Usually (but I concede that there could be exceptions), if an Operator must go to the hassle and expense of setting up an approved system under CAR 217, they will use that across the board.

LeadSled

27th Dec 2012, 03:01

Bring on Parts 135 , 121 etc and lose this stupid, stupid differentiation and double standard between charter and RPT for ever, pleeese!

Mach E,
Have you actually read and digested in detail Part 135, it sound to me like the answer is no.
The minimum aerodrome standards, alone, will bring a large % of light charter to a screaming halt. Quite a significant proportion of the aerodromes in ERSA do not meet the Part 135 minimum, probably 70% or more in the AOPA Guide would not meet the aerodrome requirement, including almost all strips on farms.
Having to have all maintenance done in a Part 145 workshop will be a huge financial impost, CAR 30 is bad enough for light aircraft, compared to US requirements.
The fuel requirements defy legal definition.
In it's present form (and I see little likelihood of change, unless we get a change of government before it is enacted) Part 135 will be a disaster for light aviation.
Tootle pip!!

27/09

27th Dec 2012, 08:07

LeadSled: Having to have all maintenance done in a Part 145 workshop will be a huge financial impost, ...............
The fuel requirements defy legal definition.

Obviously someone over there has reinvented ("Improved upon" :E ) the Part 135 requirements from what is required in other jurisdictions.

LeadSled

27th Dec 2012, 08:30

27/09,
You've got that in one.

While John McCormick in person and in CASA newsletters has been talking about simplified maintenance regulations based on the US system (which we sort of had here until 1992, and had in draft again in 1998) for smaller aircraft, Part 135 is quite clear --- all public transport aircraft have to be maintained in a Part 145 facility, despite the applicability statement in Part 145. As Mach E called for, let's get rid of these differences, let's maintain a C-172 with the same administrative overheads as a B747.

I wonder if John McCormick actually understands that his minions are doing the traditional CASA "thing", going their own way, despite the boss's policy.

As you may or may not know, Byron's intent was that Part 145 would be based on and harmonised with JAA/EASA Part 145, which is more or less harmonised with FAR 145.

As was entirely predictable, given the minions "policy" owed nothing to the boss's policy, Australian Part 145 looks like nothing else on earth, and is not harmonised with anything except CASA middle management policy. That is why the bigger organizations have got/are getting EASA and FAA part 145 approval, otherwise they are out of the export business.

This is a bit of thread drift, so I will leave it there, but what CASA has been coming up with to "complete the regulatory review" has received far too little attention.

Tootle pip!!

PS: This "Part 135" is really an outgrowth of a previous Executive Manager, Safety and Standards Part 121A, when that era of management decided that there would be no Part 135, it would all be Part 121 for "public transport", based on an, in my opinion, complete misinterpretation of the recommendations of the Seaview Inquiry.
Seaview DID NOT recommend one standard for all "public transport', if you think he did, please read the actual recommendations.

Mach E Avelli

29th Dec 2012, 01:08

Sorry to have initiated thread drift. Perhaps we should go elsewhere, as this is supposed to be about why Hardy was grounded. In calling for one standard for all transport of the paying public, I was alluding to adopting the FAA/NZ models, not some CASA-contrived 'improvement' of same. Clearly no-one would expect B747 standards be applied to BN Islanders, but is it not reasonable that a charter category Islander is operated and maintained to the same standard as one approved for RPT? It p!sses me off as much as the next guy that here in Oz we have to re-invent aviation because no one else in the world knows better than us. The sheer arrogance!
As for airfields, we are not geographically-challenged as they are in places like PNG, where they DO have an excuse. A lot of our sub-standard 'strips' are only the way they are because the farmer/shire/community can't be bothered to get the grader and chainsaw out occasionally. Not helped by the other morons who put microwave towers right in the circuit area because it is easier to do that than grade a kilometre of access road.
Now, let's get back to Hardy. What is the state of play....anyone? Seems all the focus of pre-Xmas shut downs has been on Barrier.