Did Barrier get their AOC back?

[curiousflyer]

Couple of BA aircraft moving around in Darwin last week and a couple of boys walking around outside the office. Did they have some success in the end with CASA and/or the tribunal? Their website is still up offering services.

Haven't seen anything on here about it though....

[717tech]

Their AOC was cancelled, but that probably can't stop them flying their fleet privately? Thought I saw some movement in Cairns the other day too...

[falconx]

Been doing quite a few CAirns, Gove,Darwin runs

[curiousflyer]

falconx, so they are operating again or were they just bringing some planes home?

[RR69]

JFC out of ypjt is looking at trying to get them up and running again Owner & CP were up there last week. CP did bring back a 402 for DE.

[Horatio Leafblower]

CAO 82.1 says that somewhere under "Borrowed Certificates"

[dibloc]

I think a 310 is currently cross hired by a private operator out of DN.

[my oleo is extended]

No. The AOC remains deep within the bowels of CAsA's giant shredder. The AOC is now part of history. The day the AOC was cancelled is the day Barrier died. Sorry lads.

[601]

CAO 82.1 says that somewhere under "Borrowed Certificates"

From CAO 82.1

3 Conditions relating to ―borrowed‖ certificates
3.1 Each certificate authorising charter or regular public transport operations is subject to the condition that its holder (“the AOC holder”) must not, without the prior written approval of CASA, enter into an arrangement with a person whose certificate is suspended or cancelled (“the other person”) under which the AOC holder agrees:
(a) to use, in any operation covered by the AOC holder’s certificate, any
aircraft that the other person was authorised to operate under the
certificate that is suspended or cancelled; or
(b) to use, in connection with any operation covered by the AOC holder’s
certificate, any person employed or engaged by, or otherwise working
for, the other person in connection with any operation covered by the
certificate that is suspended or cancelled; or
(c) to conduct any operation, or any part of an operation, that the other
person intended to conduct under the certificate that is suspended or
cancelled.

Does anyone really think that CASA is going to give written approval.

I am afraid that oleo is correct.

[curiousflyer]

The Darwin office might give approval. I know those blokes disagree with the decision to cancel the AOC in the first place. They had a really good relationship with BA.

Mind you, I think it might be like raising the dead. Don't know how they are able to continue right now.

[outnabout]

What a bastardised system it is, if one office can take away an AOC, and another office OF THE SAME AGENCY has the power to restore it. Seriously, folks, that's just :mad:....

On the other hand, I hear our good friends are currently in Broome.

Kunners, Darwin, now Broome - is Jandakot, Gero, Alice or Kal next?

[Creampuff]

You’ve misunderstood the discussion. It’s not about one office giving back an AOC taken from an operator by another office.

It’s about an operator, who doesn’t have an AOC, conducting operations under the authority of someone else’s AOC. That someone else has to get approval from CASA to do that, and takes on responsibility for the lot. Complicated and risky, for obvious reasons...

[outnabout]

My mistake, Creampuff.

The post above by Curiousflyer suggests, to me, that Darwin CASA are rumoured to be looking at re-storing BA's AOC - not how BA can operate under another AOC.

[my oleo is extended]

CAsA has always been a divided entity. What you will find is their are some CAsA employees in DRW and possibly CNS who liked BA and found them easy enough to get along with, for better terms. Then you will have the other CAsA people who thought BA was pooh an wanted them assigned to the history pages.
In a situation such as this it is easy to find out CAsA's motives if you know all the players involved and their extensive histories.

As with any game of smoke n mirrors, things are not always what they appear to be.

[601]

CAsA has always been a divided entity.

And it is getting worse:ugh:

[717tech]

Could other companies simply cross hire BA aircraft?

[RR69]

Operating under JFC's AOC at the moment, great to see they've been thrown a bit of a lifeline by the looks, and JB will look after them, maybe in more ways than one ;)

[ContactMeNow]

JFC out of ypjt is looking at trying to get them up and running again Owner & CP were up there last week. CP did bring back a 402 for DE.

The owner of said C402 belongs to a LAME out of YPJT - he cross hires them out all over Oz (Broome, Jandakot and Cairns). So with no hours being put on it, it makes sense to cross-hire it out to another compnay.

Several years ago JFC did cross hire out one of DE's C402s, but that friendship fell apart when it came time to pay the bills.

I would doubt CASA will allow JFC to conduct operations in QLD under the JFC AOC. But there isn't anything stopping JFC to buy Barrier.

CMN :E

[max1]

Divided safety entities with short term, self absorbed, numpties at the top create 3 categories of employees and it is akin to a war situation.

1. Collaborators- those who believe that the new regime is here to stay and see a personal benefit in collaborating. These are the most dangerous and devious. It is the 'me' crowd.
2. The Occupied- those who are just trying to survive the current regime and hope for a return to normalcy.
3. The Resistance - those who are still fighting for what is right. They may, on the surface, resemble collaborators or the occupied, but are working behind the scenes. They need to be clever and keep their heads down.

Overt Resistance fighters are also known as terrorists by the incumbents. They don't last long. Internal mechanisms, designed to protect the organisation, like Codes of Conduct, Values, are unleashed to neuter and marginalise these people.

[owen meaney]

Max1
there is another group, those that accept the change is here and working with industry to ensure we get heard.

[Two_dogs]

I would doubt CASA will allow JFC to conduct operations in QLD under the JFC AOC. But there isn't anything stopping JFC to buy Barrier..If JFC cannot operate in QLD under their own AOC, why would they buy Barrier, they don't have an AOC to operate under.

[RR69]

I think you'll find CASA are currently allowing Barrier to operate under the JFC AOC and that the CP will be up in Darwin and Cairns over the next couple of weeks getting the guys all checked and good to go.

[outnabout]

JFC operating Barrier's fleet from Barrier's premises under a new name..

Wrightsair at William Creek advertise on their website as

Wrightsair, The Lake Eyre (http://www.wrightsair.com.au/lake.htm) Scenic & Charter Flight Specialist: A division of Freycinet Air (http://www.freycinetair.com.au/)

So what's the difference between a borrowed AOC, and "operating as a division of"?

As an aside, at the same time, on CASA's safety material, Trevor Wright is promoted as Chief Pilot, Wrightsair - which I am not sure how he could be if Wrightsair are a division of Freycinet Air? Perhaps CASA's left hand doesn't know what it's right hand is doing? (Not having a go at Wrightsair or JFC, just trying to get my head around how the rules & regs work).

[601]

I would doubt CASA will allow JFC to conduct operations in QLD under the JFC AOC.

Since when did an AOC become State or region specific.

It does not matter where an AOC is based or in which region their AOC is administered by their friendly FOI. An AOC Holder can operate within Australia. I cannot recall seeing an AOC restricted to a specific area within Australia.

Wrightsair, The Lake Eyre Scenic & Charter Flight Specialist: A division of Freycinet Air

From a search of CASA AOC data base neither Wrightsair nor Wrightsair Pty Ltd appear to have a current AOC.

From reading the Wrightsair web site I would conclude that Wrightair is a "Scenic Flight Specialist" and that it is a division of Freycinet Air.

However a search of business names does not bring any results for Freycinet Air. But there is a company in the name of Freycinet Air Pty Ltd which is the holder of an AOC VT559856.

On the Freycinet Air there is a link to Wrightsair.

Does the Freycinet Air Pty Ltd AOC show the trading names of Wrightsair and Freycinet Air?

So who is the CP of Freycinet Air Pty Ltd and is he/she based in William Creek or Coles Bay in Tasmania?

[outnabout]

Freycinet Air (on their website) advertise only have 172s available for charter.

Wrightsair (on their website) advertise 172s, 182s, Airvans, 207s, 210s and an twin engine Aerostar.

Good luck to them...

[seneca208]

I think Wrightsair operate under the 'Opal Air' AOC. I could be wrong however.

[601]

I think Wrightsair operate under the 'Opal Air' AOC

OPAL AIR is the trading name of LA & AM Mathews Pty Ltd that was formerly Opal Air Pty Ltd.

[aroa]

"Since when did an AOC become State or region specific " 601

It happens when some CASA bum thinks it might suit his purpose. Its on the CASA logo,"Any old bull**** will do !"

Had this issue twice....1. You need an INTRAstate licence to do jobs outside QLD. ? Que ? Non passenger carrying op. Transport Qld said Really.. are you an airline? And we had a good laugh.

2 When operating in WA that was deemed to be too far away for the CP, AOC QLD...said CP based in NT.. to monitor the op.
Funny that,,competitor company AOC and CP in WA had no prob operating anywhere in OZ. Mmmmmm.
Another CASA trait..Inconsistency. Different strokes for different folks.
Where do they get these ignorant "make-it-up" merchants from.? :mad:
Dont ask and I wont say. :mad:

[megle2]

This is getting interesting, none of us seem to be able to work out who operates under who's AOC. From where I sit it doesn't appear casa knows either

[aroa]

TWO other things that CASA is confused about too....
AR$E--- ELBOW.:eek:
:mad:

[DirtyDash]

First post :) The other night we overheard a barrier 172 heading into cairns trying to conduct various approaches. However, we were not quite as busy as this person seemed to be. I only picked up little of what was going on (or rather not happening). We did think to ourselves here we go again. I used to hear the plane doing scenics out of cairns so maybe they're doing training in cairns again. The only thing worse than ****y equitpment is strugglers. Quite surprised the instructor did not take over.

Dirty Dash

[megle2]

DD looks like your a bit of a struggler also. Seems to have been a struggle to put up a decent first post. You can do better than that!

[Arnold E]

The only thing worse than ****y equitpment is strugglers

Oh! excuse me your great magnificence.:rolleyes:

[Flying Bear]

I believe they are up and running again this week - borrowed AOC I suppose (Jandakot Flight Centre) - so ops normal as they work their way back under the stewardship of DK and the supervision of an organisation in Perth.

I assume that CASA is getting the outcome they are after, as they must have approved Barrier to operate with JFC in writing. The concept of the borrowed AOC seems to be becoming more and more prevalent (ie AV8 and QAS in Darwin, Barrier and JFC in Cairns/Darwin - Torres and Gove to come? - just to list two).

Just not sure what fewer AOCs but same number of operators is supposed to achieve, unless it is a way to keep industry alive with the smaller operators not having to work their way through the roll out of all the new CASRs by being "grandfathered" by some larger companies, but this seems contrary to the intention...

[Cirronimbus]

Borrowing an AOC? If any operation is not good enough to operate under its own AOC, how does 'borrowing' someone else's AOC change things?

Operating under someone else's AOC still did not seem to help AV8 (if it really has closed). What is the point? Shifting responsibilities of the operator or the regulator?

[Lasiorhinus]

Doesn't matter who's AOC you're operating under if you run out of money.
Av8, DirectAir, Ansett...

[thorn bird]

There you go..
See CAsA...knock us down...and another will rise up
Make peace with the industry..you cant win!!

[Sarcs]

Some quotes from a Paul Phelan article called “A skilfully mismanaged stuffup (http://proaviation.com.au/news/?p=1279)” (my bold).

“Most of the documentation of these events would never have surfaced, had the affected operator not dug its heels in and fought for their release. Uzu Air’s friends, as well as many of its commercial rivals, were united in their belief that these events represented an ongoing threat to the orderly conduct of aviation, and ultimately a negative impact on air safety. They also observed that CASA had developed a tactic to subvert the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) process, by cynically sheltering behind Section 9A of the Civil Aviation Act. That belief has been strengthened many times since the Uzu Air debacle.”

“Jan 20 99: Uzu filed a notice of application for review of the CASA decision to suspend its AOC, claiming that the Authority had acted ultra vires (outside its legislated authority); breached rules of procedural fairness and natural justice; failed to provide adequate reasons for the decision; misapplied administrative principles, and ‘failed to correctly interpret and apply the law.’ ”

Sounds oh so familiar, read it and weep!:{

Sounds oh so familiar, right or wrong operators/pilots deserve 'due process' and 'natural justice'. However FF still believe they're above the 'rule of law' and until industry unites to say enough is enough the longer the strangulation of a once vibrant industry will continue!:yuk::yuk::ugh:


ps Noticed BASI weren't afraid to call FF out back then for telling/insinuating untruths about a pending prelim report...sheesh FFS these days we've got ATSBeaker sitting on the lap of Fort Fumble..'God help us!'

[anothertwit]

Sounds oh so familiar, right or wrong operators/pilots deserve 'due process' and 'natural justice'. However FF still believe they're above the 'rule of law' and until industry unites to say enough is enough the longer the strangulation of a once vibrant industry will continue!

Can I get an Amen!

[Kharon]

Posted by Onslope on the GA meeting thread. Food for Barrier thought - maybe.

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL)
No N2000/1697 GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION )
Re SYDNEY HARBOUR SEAPLANES PTY LIMITED
Applicant
And CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY
Respondent

39. In reaching these conclusions about the scope of its review the Tribunal also wishes to express its sense of disquiet and frustration about the way in which it has been asked to determine this matter. It is quite remarkable that the respondent's own legal advisers seem to have been so ill-informed about the status of the regulatory framework applying to the issue of the AOC for the applicant that as late as 15 January 2001, when the respondent filed its detailed written submissions, no mention was made of Civil Aviation Amendment Order (No.20) 2000. It would seem that this particular CAO was only discovered through the diligence of the applicant's legal advisers - a discovery which as has been noted was only drawn to the attention of the Tribunal on 18 January 2000 after all of the evidence had been heard and in the course of closing oral submissions.

The Tribunal has no doubt that the applicant must have been prejudiced in the way in which it presented its case by these actions of the respondent. They are not the actions of a model litigant, nor those of a regulatory body which appears well-informed concerning the way in which its own senior officials exercise their very extensive delegated powers.
8 February 2001

[anothertwit]

so what's the latest? any interesting news

[Two_dogs]

Today at YHID I saw the Sunbus driver working the checkin counter at Qlink.

Does this mean the Qlink AOC is at risk? :\:E

Sorry, not really funny, but I couldn't resist.

[Two_dogs]

My mistake then. Was sighted from about 15 metres.
Striking resemblance though.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Warren Ench has come out swinging tonight in the adjournment debate. CASA Cairns and three individuals have been named. Warren will be pushing for an enquiry post September 14th...have to wait for hansard to catch up tomorrow.

[004wercras]

Surely the young kid running the CAsA comedy capers in Cairns can handle Warrens 'intrusions'? After all, he did most of his time on Level 3 in Brisbane and was held in high esteem after trialling CMT in Melbourne (even though the concept had been trialled several years earlier).
How this kid could even remotely have a grip on 'those' FNQ Inspectors that have spent many a year as a law unto themselves lauding, bashing, bullying local industry? I mean, the inspectors had it over the last field office manager who is back in Melbourne, and now the 'kid' is in town has the broom been shoved through the place? Yep, I thought as much.

[Creampuff]

Ooh errr. Wazza has named names!

Surely heads will roll this (27th) time... :rolleyes:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

There.is a lot more than that ten second grab. Bullying, unlawful entry, warning off prospective buyers, questionable interpretations, charges not tested in court,.

ah what the heck! You can only hope that THIS TIME just maybe!

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Quote from Senator Xenophon additional comments section of the senate report.
Senate Committees ? Parliament of Australia (http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=rrat_ctte/completed_inquiries/2010-13/pel_air_2012/report/index.htm)


1.23 It is my view that CASA, under Mr McCormick, has become a regulatory bully that appears to take any action available to ensure its own shortcomings are not made public. This poses great risks to aviation safety, and the safety of the travelling public. Equally, the ATSB—which should fearlessly expose any shortcomings on the part of CASA and other organisations to improve aviation safety—has become institutionally timid and appears to lack the strength to perform its role adequately. Both agencies require a complete overhaul, and I believe it is only luck that their ineptness has not resulted in further deaths so far. There is an urgent need for an Inspector-General of Aviation Safety, entirely independent of the Minister and his department, to be a watchdog for these agencies.

[Sarcs]

Serious shot across the bow, love it!:E:
Mr ENTSCH (Leichhardt—Chief Opposition Whip)(21:30): I rise tonight to outline a very serious issue —the seemingly corrupt and anticommercial conduct of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority office in Cairns, which appears to hide in the shadows and cites 'safety' as a reason to advance personal vendettas against local aviation operators. Numerous operators in Cairns have been subjected to incompetence, threats and demands from individuals who make decisions outside of CASA's authority. Barrier Aviation is the most recent victim, but I know of at least three other operators who have been irreparably damaged by the gestapo tactics of a few individuals, namely, Phil Lister, Mark Ayrey and Gerard Campbell, and with the Director of CASA himself turning a blind eye.

The complaints include: totally incorrect interpretations of regulations, requiring operators to jump through unnecessary hoops at the inspectors' commands; the inexperience of inspectors, not knowing how to interpret regulations or legislation; inspectors entering aircraft unauthorised and unsupervised and interfering with master control switches; inspectors threatening regulatory action if operators do not do as they are told even when the inspectors are wrong; formal complaints being buried and never responded to.

It is common knowledge within the aviation industry that, if CASA want you shut down, they simply bury you with regulations and wear you down with costs until you go broke. In Cairns the personal vendetta against David Kilin, an industry stalwart of almost 40 years, has led to the closure of his life's work.

It started back in 2011 when a complaint was made by Barrier to the Industry Complaints Commissioner. This complaint implicated a number of individuals within CASA Cairns who had displayed incompetent, unethical and irresponsible conduct towards Barrier. In a blatant conflict of interest, the main subject of the complaint, Mr Phil Lister, remained as an inspector of Barrier Aviation and associated companies and, incredibly, received a promotion. Despite requests, CASA's office refused to assign Barrier to another CASA office. Meanwhile, the complaint was never responded to and, in retaliation, CASA spent almost 18 months setting Barrier Aviation up. This included a complaint that was lodged against Barrier by a disgruntled ex-employee, who then fled back to his home country of New Zealand, resulting in the cancellation of Barrier's AOC.

Barrier has serious concerns with CASA Cairns's procedures, including the total lack of collaboration between CASA and the industry, unilateral decisionmaking, reversal of the onus of proof and the lack of procedural fairness and rights of appeal. At no time did CASA try to work with the operator to address their concerns. It was simply a witch-hunt to seek revenge on David Kilin. CASA has lied about evidence and padded their investigation to make Barrier into an unsafe operator despite Barrier previously excelling in this area.

What is also unbelievable is the abuse of process. Six months after Barrier was forced to shut its doors, they still have not been able to test a single allegation in court—and at the cost of $28,000 per day in lost revenue. And to top it off, CASA has sent press release after press release with statements that have never been tested.

Around 50 people have lost their jobs, investors have lost millions of dollars, and David Kilin has lost his life's work. And even now, CASA is not content with just burying Barrier, they want to dance on the grave as well. I was disgusted to learn that CASA Cairns has been speaking to potential purchasers of Barrier aircraft, threatening that they will not approve their airworthiness.

Since Barrier's very public demise, I have had numerous calls from right across the country from people telling me that CASA Cairns has a history of destroying small businesses. The most troubling thing is that, while these callers are keen to express a huge amount of sympathy for Barrier, they are too scared to speak publicly. This industry urgently needs an independent body and rights mechanisms to hold CASA Cairns accountable for their own inadequacies and conduct. After 14 September, I will be calling for a full inquiry. I will not let Barrier be destroyed without holding those individuals who are directly responsible for this sordid business accountable for their actions.
Top stuff Wazza!:ok: Almost follows verbatim Wazza's previous media release back on the '19th of March' (http://www.warrenentsch.com.au/Media/MediaReleases/tabid/73/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/284/CASA-must-answer-to-their-actions-says-Entsch.aspx)and also covered by 'Paul Phelan' (http://proaviation.com.au/news/?p=1364).:rolleyes:

[004wercras]

Promotions?? Warren forgot to mention Mr Campbell's 'rise and rise' within the ranks of Fort Fumble. His invitation to become an honorary member of the iron ring is in the mail! As for the other individuals mentioned by Mr Entsch, oh how so true. Most dealings with them end with a 'we are watching you' type of subtle message.

[lostwingnut]

Those are some serious allegations coming from Mr Entsch, how far can you push parliamentary privilege? I hope there is some form of follow up.

Real shame the mainstream media has not pick up on this, especially following on the heels of the whole CASA/ATSB debacle last week. If an MP speaks up like this, accuses a federal government department of corruption surly there has to be some coverage and a follow up investigation?

[thorn bird]

Wing nut,
something that has puzzled me for a long time.
This particular event is but a tiny instance in a multitude of instances of corruption that pervades our regulator. Good grief we are talking about a Quarter of a BILLION dollars in tax payers money frittered away on regulatory reform alone, compounded by businesses unnecessarily destroyed, jobs lost, and its not as though the industry has been entirely silent about it.
Yet the so called guardians in the main stream press have entirely ignored it, almost as though a nudge, nudge,wink, wink, has been played.
They are great trotting out the "last bastion" etc when threatened, but defenders of the "Public Interest" B...ll sh...t!!! defenders of self interest more like it.

[tail wheel]

Warren will be pushing for an enquiry post September 14th

Get real!

Warren Entsch and many others have been pushing for an enquiry for more than a decade, through both Coalition and Labour Governments. Warren had contact with John Anderson (Minister for Transport 1998 - 2005) and is close to Warren Truss (Minister for Transport 2005 – 2006) but was unable to establish an any form of enquiry or even influence CASA actions and policies during those years.

As Creampuff indicates, Warren Entsch knows an enquiry into CASA will never happen. There is absolutely no votes in an enquiry.

The problems go back to the early 1990, post Leroy Keith, but an enquiry will never happen. Governments never have a broad spectrum, uncontrolled enquiry into one of their own Authorities. The Skull's contract won't be renewed and he will drift off into the sunset with his golden hand shake, another will accept the poison chalice and destruction of the Australian aviation industry will continue unabated.

Facts of life: Barrier's AOC no longer exists and Barrier is consigned to the history of Australian aviation. Many operators, good and bad, have been wiped out by CASA over the last 20 years and there will be many more yet to be destroyed in the future.

And there is at least another couple of Directors of Aviation Safety in the regulatory review. Eventually a Director will declare it "a living document, continually evolving to meet the ever changing demands of contemporary aviation" thus removing any need to end the process and guaranteeing careers in perpetuity for many new generations of incompetents unable to hold a real job in aviation.

That is life. If you think any differently you are dreaming!

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Tail Wheel, you have far more experience in this particular area. Have you ever seen individuals named under privilege and yet not continue to some sort of investigation?

[tail wheel]

I have no experience in bringing CASA to heel although I've had a few interesting stoushes with them over the years! Won some, lost some! Merely an interested observer of the circus that is DCA/CAA/CASA over 40 plus years.

I would think perhaps a couple of mutually agreeable, quite lucrative golden hand shakes may be in order, although being CASA Cairns, there may be a fuel depot near Ipswich (http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/273081-casa-un-ing-believable.html) up for grabs or possible a position in PNG aviation? Or maybe a CASA consultancy? A job assisting Counsel at Coroner's Inquests? Or a book on aviation safety (http://www.rdcollins.com.au/rob-collins-books) to be written?

Nothing wrong with having a failed CASA career on one's resume. A golden hand shake from CASA opens so many new, lucrative doors!

So Warren names a few CASA miscreants in Parliament - naming in Parliament are mere words on a piece of paper. Surely you don't think Albanese will do anything, especially in his last 98 days in office? Like John Anderson and Warren Truss before him, he doesn't really have a strong record of taking any interest in CASA, now does he?

And who is the current Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and presumably Minister for Transport after September? Warren Truss!

[OZBUSDRIVER]

True! I must concede.

[Sunfish]

My view of the future is a little more dystopian Tailwheel. When institutions go bad through corruption, for that is what we are talking about, the industry won't die, instead it will devolve to an African model.

What differentiates western first world economies from Third World economies is the levels of trust and cooperation in the society. This has been ignored by economists, wrongly, because the level of trust is inversely proportional to the transaction costs in doing business.

The less we trust CASA and vice versa, the more expensive it becomes to conduct business as both sides fight to protect themselves from each other. The net result is that nobody benefits because business just isn't transacted.

To put that another way, suppose you see an opportunity to build a sight seeing operation, you figure the market is big enough for four aircraft, Ten pilots and Two mechanics plus support staff. However our hypothetical corrupt regulator decides to sting you for establishment "fees" of $200,000 and ongoing costs associated with "audits" - in other words, a huge and ongoing transaction cost burden that adds no value to the business. Once you realize this, you forget about investing and everyone loses, tourists, investors and employees alike. The economy accordingly stops growing.

As a practical example, I dived in New Guinea with a well know live aboard operator. Few times. He eventually was forced out of the country by the burden of "fees" and the constant requests for "gifts" from officials of all sorts. Everyone lost, divers, local employees, the villagers who "owned" various dive sites, etc.

What will happen in Australia is that if you are "mates" with CASA then you will be allowed to operate provided you supply the lunches, free trips, "Christmas Presents", etc. that will become customary. The loser will be the Australian economy.

[tail wheel]

Everyone lost, divers, local employees, the villagers who "owned" various dive sites, etc.

Not so. In corrupt societies like PNG and parts of Asia, the few recipients of corrupt payments do not lose. Indeed, in the 20 plus years since I left PNG, an extremely wealthy elite has emerged. Rumour has it that a hand full of past and present politicians have wealth measured in hundreds of millions of Kina. They are surrounded by a society of guards, fixers, enforcers and hangers on, all of whom live off that wealth.

The little guy suffers but the wealthy elite don't give a dam.

Australian aviation is fundamentally safe, professional, competent and innovative with an acceptably low accident rate. That is a result of the integrity, professionalism and training of the operators, pilots and engineers. CASA can not take any credit, indeed, CASA's involvement may on occasion, be detrimental to the safety of aviation in Australia.

[thorn bird]

Taily,
Unfortunately you are probably right, the Philippines is a classic example. The country is run by a cabel of about five or six "Families" who divide the country pretty much as a medieval feifdom.
Singapore is really just a giant corporation under the control of a few elite.
The problem here is our regulator is not just corrupt but stupid.
As the cost of doing business continues to rise under the ever increasing regulatory burden there will reach a point where customers will no longer be able to afford the services. A smart investor today would look at aviation and the risks apparent in becoming involved and walk away. That's why only the dreamers continue, under resourced and continually struggling to survive.
So our regulators, happy with the odd brown paper bag on Friday arvo, free lunches and "Study" trips continue to "regulate" the industry into oblivion. What will these people do when there's nothing left to regulate, no free lunches then.

[aroa]

unfortunately, thorny, those who have stuffed GA...being good little "public" servants will just job hop to another division of DoT and go feral again with impractical regulations, NCNs, Certicates, Approvals, Licences, manuals etc... to work over Roads or Rail.
And history will repeat itself.

If they do to drivers and car maintainers as they have done to pilots and engineers, then your best friend will be the guy/gal that owns a horse.!
Advance Australia where ???? while you build your own cart to go with it.

And now to needle the thread...

From the outset ALL of Barrier was shut down, because "something" ?? was dodgy ?? in TI and they were ..." a serious and imminent threat to (passengers and) aviation safety".
SO with such a heinous event to hand...and of course all the evidence to support it... yet to hear exactly WHAT it was..:confused:

WHAT WAS IT that was so dire, so terrible, so dangerous that the whole show is decimated and 50 workers/ families traumatized ?
Or has the mangy rottewieller found there was little or no meat on the bone of contention, for the GROSS action taken.:mad:
Dont hear any noise from the kennel,... is the dog back licking his wounds/balls?.

While the Hon. Warren Entsch MP is calling for an Inquiry (at long last) into the CNS office..that's only one scratch on the whole rotten edifice.
NOT NEARLY enough Warren!! TVL is the same, ditto BNE AF BKN and everywhere else.
Full Judicial Inquiry or Royal Commission wanted ...and warranted. :ok:
Just ask all the CAsA "clients/victims..!!!!

[004wercras]

Aroa, I am sure they uncovered some of the standard parlous findings at Barrier that CAsA usually concentrate on;


Pilots observed wearing partially un-ironed shirts. PENALTY 25 points.
Pilots log book not having the correct spelling (i.e letter 't' not crossed and failure to dot an 'i'). PENALTY 50 points.
Aircraft tyre found to have a blade of grass laying upon it. PENALTY 25 points.
DG storage bin - found to contain an unlabelled bottle of mineral turpentine. PENALTY 75 points.
Pilots flight manual - Ring binder found to be slightly corroded due to humidity levels. PENALTY 50 points.
Chief Pilots Office - Failure to have a framed portait of Fuhrer McCormick hanging on the wall. PENALTY 100 points.
Flight Deck - An aircraft flight deck found to contain lose and hazardous materials laying on the floor which could interfere with a pilots ability to operate the aircraft safely (i.e they found the job section of Friday's Australian and one copy of American Hustler on the floor). PENALTY 75 points.
Pilot failing to wear hi-vis vest while kicking two tyres during pre-flight check. PENALTY 25 points.
Grand total = AOC removal.

[tail wheel]

While the Hon. Warren Entsch MP is calling for an Inquiry (at long last) into the CNS office..that's only one scratch on the whole rotten edifice.

I think it would be the fourth or fifth time Warren has called for an inquiry into CASA FNQ, the first two times during a period of Coalition Government.


What benefit would any Government gain from an inquiry into CASA?
How many votes are there is FNQ GA?

[owen meaney]

Big Wazza has been led astray a bit.
The BN2s are not serviceable until the maintenance issues are rectified.
Phil, the named CASA bloke has a very good reputation in the industry.

[aroa]

"Phil the named CAsA bloke has a very good reputation in the industry". :eek:

Certainly NOT what anecdotal evidence is telling folk in FNQ...!! :mad:

Reputation for what, exactly.????

Does the BN2 maintenance issue have legs???

[owen meaney]

Aroa, until someone is willing to certify the outstanding maintenance I don't see them flying.
Phil has a good rep in the circles I travel.
Different strokes for different folks I guess.

[thorn bird]

"Phil has a good rep in the circles I travel."

On the dark side of the moon perhaps ??

"What benefit would any Government gain from an inquiry into CASA?"

Maybe a viable industry that could grow and contribute to the economy?

[tail wheel]

Maybe a viable industry that could grow and contribute to the economy?

I wonder if that crosses a Prime Minister or Minister's mind whilst passing the time in an RAAF BBJ, or at very worst, the Qantas Captain's Club and airline First Class travel?

[thorn bird]

Taily,
its sad but aint that the truth.
When corruption, or if thats too strong a word, incompetence, is apparent
in any of our statutory authorities and its politically accepted, then there is no hope for this country. Head up for everyone, the trick is picking out the right person to throw the money at, thats the secret of doing business in those countries that accept corruption as the norm.

[tail wheel]

The vast majority of those in Canberra have no idea of the hardships faced by rural Aussies often totally reliant upon very expensive GA and low capacity air services.

The days of the "commuter airline" in under 5,700 kg aircraft are virtually over, killed off by far better roads than 50 years ago, better vehicles more suited to long distance travel, hub and spoke airline operations between major centers, high aircraft operating costs and a concerted effort by CASA to kill off GA.

[thorn bird]

"and a concerted effort by CASA to kill off GA."

Taily,

Again, "aint that the truth".

Remember the Maslings, the Hazeltons, the Kendels, who provided our country folk with a vital link with the big smoke? Can you imagine today under the current "Regime"them even getting past "There is obviously a need"...to be crushed by "It's not finacially viable".
When it costs upwards of a million dollars, and months of trying to figure out exactly what the FOI of the day wants, just for the AOC, its little wonder.
I have heard of an operator where it cost a hundred grand and over twelve months just to put a simple aircraft, which in the US would be considered not much above a 172 in complexity, on their AOC. Today companies with a need, are giving away air travel, because its too expensive, for road transport, which of course is "Safer".
Of course when their avis car collects a road train and wipes out the senior management of kickatinalong mine the statistic dosnt get attributed to CAsA and their B..ll Sh..t regulations.

[tail wheel]

The pilots that worked for Maslings, Hazeltons, Kendels, Davey, Norfolk Island and the many other "third level airlines" that built Australia serving the bush and Australia's protectorate, Papua New Guinea, occupy a unique place of honour in Australian aviation history.

Changing circumstances, increased aircraft operating costs, demise of the Rural Air Services Scheme (RASS) and other rural subsidies and changing CASA philosophies ensure there will probably never again be a viable third level airline industry in Australia.

[thorn bird]

"occupy a unique place of honour in Australian aviation history."

They should Tailey,
to everyone except our regulator who considers their experience and knowledge with utter contempt.

[tail wheel]

I should have also added ANR or Reg 203 services to low capacity airline services and third level airline services.

Unfortunately the ludicrous insanity of the 1988 CARs effectively killed off essential low capacity airline services in rural Australia.

[Kharon]

Just my two bob's worth, I can't believe the 'issues' are any longer just about Barrier (and others) or Quadrio (and others) or Pel Air (and others). All have played a small part in exposing 'the system' for what it truly is and form part of the matrix which defines the awful state aviation finds itself bogged down in. To allow the closure of Barrier or any carrier under the present system only reinforces it.

There are, for probably the first time, several political types interested. The Pel Air debacle has great potential to become the catalyst for much needed reform. It is up to industry now to keep that interest focussed. The Hon. Entsch now has a speech on Hansard proposing an inquiry, that needs your support; Sen. the Hon Macdonald has picked up a bat along with the now bi partisan RRAT committee, there is a 176 page report, produced at great expense which goes some way toward assisting industry. The least anyone can do is send an email supporting and reinforcing the efforts made on industry behalf; bit like the local footy team, they do better, much better (win loose or draw) with support from the sidelines.

This is no longer just about "Barrier" but about this industry getting involved and using the tools available to prevent a travesty, like Barrier etc. etc. ever happening again. The tools are there, just need some willing hands encouraging the politicos to get the job done.

Dear Sir - I applaud your speech in the adjournment debate, June 5, 2013 and fully support the call for inquiry into the behaviour of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) at Cairns base in the matter of Barrier Aviation.. Which, in my opinion, has been disgraceful and ... etc. (as you like).

Hon. Warren Entsch MP, Member for Leichhardt, Qld.
Chief Opposition Whip.
Tel: (07) 4051 2220
Fax: (07) 4031 1592
[email protected]

[Sunfish]

Six forlorn aircraft and no action when we taxied past Barrier on Monday.

[aroa]

all well over, unless there is some divine intervention. Few parked at YMBA as well.

Nothing has changed at the CNS *cantoment/northern outpost of Fort Fumble.
Latest word is that "Bent Robbo" Haslam & co is up to his tricks again..this time with a charter PA 32.

The Robbo moniker story has MANY interesting twists, and since he would be aware of breaches of regs by the pilot of...shouldnt there be some prosecutions.?? Being "senior investigator" and all that....
Or are we looking at NONfeasance..or just different strokes for different folks.

Or does the CDPP just reject briefs from CAsA CNS as duds straight off.

Oh, such a place of integrity, fairness, honesty and consistency...NOT :mad:
Have always wondered who took credit for writing that crapdoc, the code of conduct? (so called)

* cantonment, fr Fr canton. ...a permanent military station of slighter character than barracks. Webster.
But still bloody dangerous.!:mad:

[004wercras]

Aroa, the legacy of Herr Campbell alive and well in the North still?
His Gestapo still reeking havoc up there? Bullying, threats and intimidation are a standard way of life in the tropics. But that's what happens when you mix together a group of grown men who are hen pecked husbands, have spent to much time baking in the North Queensland sun, and have undersized penises.

[Josh Cox]

I noticed Barrier appeared to be taking CASA to the AAT in sydney this week, i thought yesterday, yet no decision listed on the AATor austlii website.

Who knows what? ?

[004wercras]

I wish them luck, but the card deck is stacked. What CAsA want CAsA get.
The AAT is a crock of ****e.... Barriers Epitaph was written the day they were grounded.
R.I.P

[jas24zzk]

The saddest thing, is that there are people out there congratulating themselves on a job well done. :uhoh:

[004wercras]

Barrier update. Alive but barely kicking.

Barrier Aviation fights to overturn grounding decision - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-07/barrier-aviation-fights-to-overturn-grounding-decision/4870086?&section=news)

Too many good people there to deserve this ****. Keep your heads up boys.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Today's directions hearing is expected to set the matter down for a 10-day hearing in December.

I hope Dave scores more than a "Moral victory" if he has to wait to December.

When Yanda was grounded they had the good sense to quit the field instead of eroding the capital they had built. I can only wish the Killens well. :(

[Cactusjack]

Qld airline withdraws grounding appeal (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/10/28/13/07/qld-airline-withdraws-grounding-appeal)

[seneca208]

Torres Strait Air | Air Charter Company (http://www.torresair.com)

Rebirthing begins perhaps?

[Me_3]

Domain Name.........: torresair.com
Registrar...........: CRAZY DOMAINS FZ-LLC
Registrant Name.....: Flightech Pty Ltd


Not barrier....

[Kharon]

I have heard recently that Dave K is 'not well', the stress, strain and money have all been detrimental. I suspect the Entsch back down did not help; at all. Ah well, cross that one off the potential employer list. Disgusting.

[Car RAMROD]

Maybe it's a better choice to not try overturn the current ruling?

[Cactusjack]

I heard today that Barrier are not done and dusted, and that just because they aren't appealing the AAT ruling it doesn't mean they have given up the fight. Supposedly Warren Entsch has received a commitment from Truss that CAsA will be thoroughly reviewed by an international aviation expert (or possibly two), who have no ties to CAsA or any agenda (hard to believe really). Wazza is pretty fired up again and once more he states that he is on a mission to bring the CAsA Barrier Buggerers to account! So I guess it could be a case of watch out Team FNQ and the Bald Eagle in Brisbane? Then again, it could all be a smokescreen, a little hocus pocus, a robust deflection of IOS observations by Team CAsA?

[Kharon]

FWIW the article published in –Torres News– (https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=312986be5f&view=att&th=1424b020b1ce5a1e&attid=0.1&disp=safe&zw) seems to suggest that good sense may yet prevail. Parliament is up and running, estimates next week; better stock up on the old popcorn, chips and suitable libations (that's a fridge full of beer).

íso̱s, tal vez, peut-être, mozhet byt', vielleicht: maybe the chooks will come home to roost yet. We shall see....

[GedStreet]

JFC did do some operations with Barrier Aircraft and crew out of DN and YBCS. I warned the CP not to put his head into the lions mouth and guess what happened today?

...CASA Canberra descended on JFC today. Will be here for a full week and brought 6 investigators. And an SMS from the CP a few minutes ago declared that CASA didn't bring any lube. :eek:

I predict the Show Cause will arrive at 16:29 on the day CASA switches the lights off for Christmas - 1st anniversary of Barriers S.C.N.

:ugh:

[Up-into-the-air]

Some interesting questions by Senator David Fawcett in Senate estimates today.

A short summary of these:

CASA in Senate estimates hearing McCormick tries to justify slowness | Assistance to the Aviation Industry (http://vocasupport.com/?p=2434)

Post of Hansard shortly.

[lostwingnut]

Here is a link with some details on the upcoming enquiry Aviation regulation back under the microscope | Pro Aviation (http://proaviation.com.au/news/?p=1756)


GedSteet, just to correct some of your reporting - no offence intended in any way. JFC has not operated out of Cairns at all, just Darwin.

Their Darwin operation seemed to have picked up staff and aircraft from Av8, Barrier and Direct Air. I know they currently lease the old Barrier building, but surely CASA can't get upset over a building lease - I could be wrong, they have gotten into a tiff over other odd things :rolleyes:

Let's hope CASA doesn't do the Sunday before Christmas media storm again :ugh:

[GedStreet]

Thank you for the correction. I know, my mate the CP of JFC did go to both Darwin and Cairns so I assumed both had kicked off.

Well, poor old JFC smells horribly like what happened to us at Alligator and to my friends at Barrier too.

I just hope I'm wrong. CAsA doesn't win - it just drives you to an untenable situation.

[aroa]

:mad:
Be advised TFNQ still beavering away at cock-ups supreme = ops normal.
Recent very deficient "investigation" into a broken Robbo and all those CAsA should be charged with mis, mal and NON feasance because their failure to act on serious breaches of the regulations has had dire consequences for innocent individuals, causing stress and financial/legal imposts as a result

And a load of work and $$s over SFA..none of which would have occurred IF they had done their job properly.

Does FF give an airborne fornication about that?..stress and financial hurt to others.
Not likely.. just keep it quiet, in-house and all will hopefully fade away.

So Mr Truss...and Warren Entsch..you better make it a bloody big broom or shovel if you want to clean the place out.
And the sooner the better..:ok:

[Up-into-the-air]

The following is from the Hansard of the Senate on Monday [18th November 2013]:

In part:

Senator FAWCETT: There are a few issues I would like to cover off on. First, can you give us an update on what is happening with Barrier Aviation. It is some months now, I understand, since they were given a 'show cause' and ceased operating. Can you give us an update on what has occurred there?

Mr McCormick: I will ask my general counsel to give you the time line on that. While he is coming forward to the desk I can tell you that we started on 23 December with a 'serious and imminent risk' situation. At this moment we have no application on record from Barrier Aviation to continue or appeal their air operator certificate cancellation. But I will leave that to my general counsel.

Senator FAWCETT: You say you have nothing on record. My understanding is that they have sought, numerous times, to appear before the AAT. Are you saying that they never have or that there is nothing currently on record?

Mr McCormick: I will defer to my general counsel.

Mr Anastasi: In relation to the question you just asked, there was an application by Barrier on 9 May 2013 for the reissue of its AOC, air operators certificate. That followed CASA cancelling the air operators certificate on 13 March 2013. In relation to the more recent application for the AOC, CASA refused to issue that AOC on 31 July, and that was largely on the basis of the reasons for which it cancelled the AOC. Barrier sought review in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of both of those decisions and, ultimately, after a hearing was listed in December, withdrew both those applications on 16 October.
The rest is at: Barrier Aviation and Senate estimates Hansard report | Assistance to the Aviation Industry (http://vocasupport.com/?p=2467)

[Up-into-the-air]

Published today in Cairns:

Barrier Aviation considers separate legal action after withdrawing appeal against CASA decision | Business News | Business and Finance News | | Cairns Post (http://www.cairnspost.com.au/business/barrier-aviation-considers-separate-legal-action-after-withdrawing-appeal-against-casa-decision/story-fnjpusdv-1226764034398)

[Sarcs]

Wazza's media release: FNQ aviation industry urged to speak up (http://www.warrenentsch.com.au/Media/MediaReleases/tabid/73/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/387/FNQ-aviation-industry-urged-to-speak-up.aspx)

Entsch quotes:
...“I welcome the minister’s Review,” Mr Entsch said today.
“The Terms of Reference outline how the panel will consult closely with general aviation, industry and public stakeholders. This will provide an opportunity for operators like Barrier Aviation – and others from around Australia who have contacted me – to provide information on the appalling way in which they have been treated by CASA officers.
“The fact that they will be dealing with a panel of well-respected overseas experts should mean that at least they will get a fair hearing, unlike the blatant prejudice to which they’ve been subjected to date"....
...“I would absolutely encourage anyone who has had an issue with CASA procedures - and in particular their officers - to put in a submission,” Mr Entsch said.

“In addition, if they have experienced repeated and unresolved problems with individuals within CASA, they can give evidence in Canberra and name them. Testimony will be subject to parliamentary privilege and cannot be intimidated by legal threats.”
Kind of falls in line with the questioning by Senator Fawcett at the tail end of the Fort Fumble inquisition at Senate Estimates..

Warning - Features an appearance from Wodger's fellow anthropomorphised mate from the fable 'Bankstown Down' :yuk::yuk::E:
Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)I would like to come back to a few more questions about Barrier Aviation. I am still trying to understand exactly the process that has gone on here.

Mr McCormick, you had a company that you obviously had grave concerns about in terms of its safety. You obviously did audits of that company. What kind of resource would normally be allocated to an audit of a company, as you have described it—a family run company? How many people and for how long—what sort of resources—would normally be thrown at that?

Mr McCormick : I will ask our Executive Manager of Operations to give you a better idea about that. The ownership structure does not drive the number of inspectors; it is the size of the operation that drives that, as you would appreciate.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)Sure.

Mr McCormick : As a background to Barrier Aviation, when the documentation was first brought to me suggesting that there was a 'serious an imminent risk' issue I was not satisfied that there was sufficient information given. By the time we did issue that order I was more than satisfied that the information was sufficient, as was confirmed. I think we have taken a couple of questions on notice about our way through our discussion with Barrier Aviation. The option has been open to Barrier Aviation for some time—all of this year—to take some action.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)One of the problems we have is that we hear complaints from industry. Without an AAT process having occurred we do not get to see the objective facts of a matter. One of the few vehicles we have to try and get the other side of the story is this process of Senate estimates, which is why I am trying to get the balance of the facts to understand what has eventuated in this process. I want to see whether, in fact, we have a problem with our system or whether appropriate process was gone through.

Mr Campbell : I think your question was about how much resource would be put into an audit of an organisation of that size. The audits we have done recently would have been done within our certificate management team structure. So, in an audit like we would expect to involve flight operations inspectors, air worthiness inspectors and safety systems inspectors. Within the certificate management team, the CMT will decide how many people are appropriate for the audit and how long the audit will take. Audits, as you would realise, are sometimes like following a trail. You cannot always be sure how long it is going to go. Sometimes when you do an audit you find that everything is great; it does not lead to anything else. Other times things move on because the guys gather evidence which says that we need to go an look at this or that, and that sometimes leads to other things. I would expect three or four people to be involved in an audit like that and for it to take place over several days on site. Then, of course, often they will take away photocopies of material or logbooks and do a whole lot of work off site as well.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)So three to four people over several days is what you think would be normal?

Mr Campbell : Depending on where it led and the size of the organisation, and Barrier have several locations, so we would have had to move people around to those various locations.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)So you think four people for two weeks twice is an excessive amount at just their Cairns headquarters?

Mr Campbell : Like I said, it depends where it leads—and where it was leading was not that fantastic. I have to say that before we even had the information from Horn Island we were looking seriously at show cause action at that time. There had been a couple of audits done that year. There was one done—if I recall, it was a special audit???—which resulted in quite a large number of non-compliance notices and, if I recall, the issue of about 12 ASRs against aircraft, four of which were coded ASRs and required maintenance on the aircraft before further flight. There was a lot of concern about that organisation and about the things that were going on there.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)What kind of concerns would normally be conveyed in the verbal outbrief at the end of an audit? Would they normally give the AOC holder a broad understanding of the nature and seriousness of a concern?

Mr Campbell : Yes, I believe so.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)Do CASA hold any records of what the content of those verbal outbriefs are?

Mr Campbell : I think you are talking about an exit meeting. I believe that we still have an exit meeting under our current processes and our current surveillance manual, and I believe there would be records of that meeting.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)Are you able to provide those to the committee? Again, I am only getting one side of the story at the moment, and my understanding is that the exit meeting did not indicate any serious problems that would indicate a show cause notice forthcoming.

Mr Campbell : I would not expect our inspectors to be talking about show cause at an exit meeting, quite frankly {Hmm kind of conflicts with.."I have to say that before we even had the information from Horn Island we were looking seriously at show cause action at that time..."}. I think that is a decision that we make as part of our coordinated enforcement process, and it requires input from more people than just the inspectors to start talking about things like a show cause notice. I would expect them to say, 'We found this and this and this,' and we will be in touch with them.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)I believe Horn Island was the area where the most concern was. I think there was an audit done—I think Twin Otter was the aircraft that was of concern. Can you tell me how many defects were found on that aircraft when you did the audit?

Mr Campbell : I do not recall the Twin Otter. I will have to take that one on notice.

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)My understanding is that it was less than a handful of things like landing lights. Again, there is no AAT process we can look at to understand the balance of this argument. Are you able to provide me—even if it is in confidence—with a record of what the deficiencies were that caused the concern in CASA, because I am certainly not seeing the same story from the other side that would lend weight to a grounding situation, which is essentially what has occurred?

Mr McCormick : Yes, we will take that on notice and provide you with all the documentation we can. I am cognizant that the committee had a discussion earlier today with Mr Mrdak about FOI versus committee requests, and we acknowledge that anything we give to you will be in confidence. We will do our utmost to give you anything we have available on that, and we will certainly find the reports you refer to and the recommendation paperwork that came to me which led to the serious and imminent risk decision. Is it satisfactory that we go up to that decision point?
Very interesting...:cool: I could be wrong but this statement..." if I recall, it was a special audit" bythenew trough dweller is not in fact correct and there in lies the problem for DK i.e. there was no heads up for his company's impending doom.

As was highlighted in the PelAir debacle, once the company became aware of the FF intention to Special Audit them, the company took the proactive action to ground their operation and were subsequently allowed to enact a management action plan to address their significant safety issues within their AOC. I don't believe any such 'olive branch' was offered up to DK, the first heads up DK received was a SCN on Xmas eve.

FF may then argue that the maintenance issues highlighted were so serious and disturbing that they were given little choice but to issue the SCN. Hmm..wouldn't it have been more prudent to ask DK to ground the suspect defective aircraft until the 4 most disturbing (to FF at least) ASRs were addressed and then conduct a special audit early in the New Year??:=

Coming back to the apparent FF 'us and them' mentality we should remind ourselves of the number of ASRs and RCAs issued to PelAir in the course of the special audit, here is a couple of examples: ASR 251813

For rectification:

Standby Compass bubble;
Evidence of lightning strike;
Numerous exterior decals missing;
Compass correction card dated April 2000 and 2002; and
Damage to RH nosewheel.
RCA 321071 has been issued for failure to comply with CAR 50 - Reporting of Defects.
Of course history will show that the good work of the audit AWIs in the PelAir Special audit was subsequently white-washed by Wodger and shelfwared by his fellow anthropomorphised mate...:E

More to follow...:ok:

[Josh Cox]

Senator FAWCETT: (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22handbook%2Fallmps%2FDYU%22;queryty pe=;rec=0)I believe Horn Island was the area where the most concern was. I think there was an audit done—I think Twin Otter was the aircraft that was of concern. Can you tell me how many defects were found on that aircraft when you did the audit?


That is a very smart question, Barrier don't/didn't operate a "Twin Otter"and I am pretty sure the good Senator knew this, that was an ambush by Senator Fawcett. Very interesting.

[Kharon]

To understand the Barrier 2012 audit it is essential to examine the 2009 audit, conducted in YYYY by Agent X. The syntax has varied little throughout, the 'stretch' of black letter law and liberal applications of subjective opinion have provided 'conclusions' and 'summary' which have been used to frame the case.

It is noteworthy that Agent X was under severe pressure at the time, both he and Agent Y were subject to a very serious operator challenge to have Agent X removed. Several operators fully intended to sue CASA for exactly the same reasons as those demonstrated throughout the Barrier 2009 audit. Happily, the complaining operators won the day and Agent X was demoted and sent South; ostensibly to sharpen the pencils.

It is also worth contemplating the curious responses from CASA to NCN and the repetition of acquitted NCN. It is passing strange that CASA accepted 95% of the proposed remedies, but rejected 100% of the identified 'root cause'. Subjective opinion stridently denies logic; if an identified problem has been accepted as cured, it must follow that the root cause has been correctly identified. Not so for Barrier.

For an example: there is much made of CAO 48 issues, the word 'intent' is freely used. Had there been 'intent' then the industry exemption, freely offered could have been applied for. Application of SIE 5 latitude negates any 'grave concern' over the very few, minor technical breaches alleged to be serious Barrier FDP control issues. Barrier FDP records demonstrate compliance with SIE 5. Had there been operations outside of the standard industry exemption latitude, then perhaps a safety case could be brought. But it could only be against one, isolated, disputed 'rest period' allowance, with the pilot at fault. This is not the provable, chronic, systemic aberration of CAO 48, claimed to be enforced by the operator.

It gets worse, when the dust settles perhaps some of the NCN can be released for peer review. Perhaps between Wazza and the Senate committee, some of this can be brought out into the open.

[Paragraph377]

Kharon, there is logic in what you are saying good sir about 'CASA accepting mitigation of the NCN finding, but not closing off the NCN due to the 'root cause not being identified'. However the issue is this - CASA like lots of paperwork, evidence, confessions etc etc. By the operator filling in the root cause they are admitting in writing that they admit and accept that they stuffed up. This is as good as a murderer admitting in writing that he committed a murder, annotating how he did it and then providing evidence to back his confession (maybe a fingerprint or DNA sample). CASA couldn't give a smear of donkey pooh whether an operator 'understands how they screwed up'. It's about ensuring that CASA aren't scrutinised, implicated or have blame attributed to them for any cock ups, and of course it is about building those 'secret files', you know, the ones that don't exist on operators or individuals apparently, but are miraculously tied up in a bundle and shoved up your Hershey highway on a day that suits them! (Perhaps after a complaint to the ICC??)

And in Barriers case it is very interesting. You see Barrier was never one for 'towing the CASA line', and I mean that in a political sense, or as Sunfish would say; 'to put it another way', Barrier didn't take any CASA bullsh#t. They had received support from local politicians and other operators over the years (this is not a revelation of secrets, it is a well known fact), and CASA FNQ didn't like this. But life goes on, slowly slowly catch the monkey, and when the timing was right Barrier received a Class A piece of CASA wrath at its very best - show cause at Xmas!! Ding ding that's it folks, down tools, pack up and go home, the show is over, no replay and no encore, done, goooone.

Anyway, on a separate note, I know that CASA, in its charter, must apply due diligence. Also, as an example to industry it must record its data, trend information, secure documents in a robust workable system (funny how TRIM and Sky Sentinel fail at this), and produce said information upon request by someone such as the ICAO or even the ANAO.
So my suggestion to the Senators would be this. Once the scope of the upcoming estimates/inquiry/inquisition has been set, ask respondents to supply documentation on how they received an unscheduled audit, regulatory action, a show cause, increased surveillance, persuaded to remove a key person such as HOFO or HAAMC, after a complaint was made to the ICC or taken up with the AAT! If the operator can supply detailed notes including dates, times and locations, even go so far as to create a gant chart, timeline or flowchart to help paint the picture, I think all will be very very surprised at what they see unfold := This pattern of documented evidence could be perhaps compared to Fort Fumbles record of events (only if they can find them of course), after all an admin clerk could have accidentally shredded them, perhaps a power outage occurred and then a subsequent power surge corrupted those specific TRIM files? Oh dear, these things can happen I have heard!

Anyway, it is past 1659 on a Friday and I have more data searching to undertake. As Leadie would say, Tootle Pip.

[Kharon]

377 # 104 –"So my suggestion to the Senators would be this. Once the scope of the upcoming estimates/inquiry/inquisition has been set, ask respondents to supply documentation on how they received an unscheduled audit, regulatory action, a show cause, increased surveillance, persuaded to remove a key person such as HOFO or HAAMC, after a complaint was made to the ICC or taken up with the AAT!" Is the incoming 'panel' prepared and briefed for what is coming at them ? ready or not. If they expect an elegant little sit down to chew over, along with the shortbread and Orange Pekoe a way to sketch around the appalling mess in which the regulatory reform has landed, then gods help them.

Perhaps they should call for submissions first, hire a team of the quality Steven Palethorpe ran for the Senate Pel Air inquiry (superb) and then reassess the ToR. The Reg mess is merely a symptom, not the disease: that is internal, deep seated and chronic. The "You can't deal with truth" quote from the movie comes to mind. The question is not can they, but will they? Watching, waiting, watching, waiting.

Sponsor – the IOS Integrity chapter (Forensic Investigation Baffles Shysters) sub committee.

[Cactusjack]

I flew in to YBCS this morning. Was told that the locks have been changed on Barriers building.