CASA Research Grants - Beware!
Thread Starter
CASA Research Grants - Beware!
I have just read the CASA Research grants guidelines and I am filled once again with despair because the research outcomes are only going to be used as a pretext for imposing more regulations.
Im too busy to comment in more detail, but the purposes of the research are all to do with safety outcomes "in Australia".
Ominously "colour vision" is mentioned.
Having had way too much to do with academics, I am sure that there are plenty who will lower their trousers (and their standards) to get a chunk of CASA money to produce a CASA required outcome. In particular, the occupational health and safety academic oxygen thieves will already be lining up.
If any grant money is to be spent by CASA, it should be allocated by an arms length committee made up of relevantly skilled academics, industry representatives and perhaps chaired by a member of the CASA Board. Most importantly any application for a grant must be peer reviewed.
The NHMRC process is the model to follow.
To put that another way; if the process I outline is NOT followed, then CASA has just awarded its managers with a slush fund to feed their own prejudices, biases and pet projects.
Readers might like to dream up titles for such manager inspired research for a bit of comedy.
"The effect of seawater on cockpit voice recorders" comes to mind immediately.
Im too busy to comment in more detail, but the purposes of the research are all to do with safety outcomes "in Australia".
Ominously "colour vision" is mentioned.
Having had way too much to do with academics, I am sure that there are plenty who will lower their trousers (and their standards) to get a chunk of CASA money to produce a CASA required outcome. In particular, the occupational health and safety academic oxygen thieves will already be lining up.
If any grant money is to be spent by CASA, it should be allocated by an arms length committee made up of relevantly skilled academics, industry representatives and perhaps chaired by a member of the CASA Board. Most importantly any application for a grant must be peer reviewed.
The NHMRC process is the model to follow.
To put that another way; if the process I outline is NOT followed, then CASA has just awarded its managers with a slush fund to feed their own prejudices, biases and pet projects.
Readers might like to dream up titles for such manager inspired research for a bit of comedy.
"The effect of seawater on cockpit voice recorders" comes to mind immediately.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh look, another post by Sunfish, and he's not happy......again. 
Instead of spending all your time writing out these long winded pointless complaints on Pprune, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually apply for one of these grants.
Instead of spending all your time writing out these long winded pointless complaints on Pprune, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually apply for one of these grants.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: YMMB
Age: 58
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA need to make decisions based on facts, and academic-standard independent research should be a good basis for determining the facts.
We need more R & D in Australia and if some of that is going into aviation it's a good thing.
We need more R & D in Australia and if some of that is going into aviation it's a good thing.
Sunfish makes some very good points. Didn't anyone watch this week's episode of Utopia? You can get a research report to say anything you want. Which is why the PROCESS is important.
As a board member of an NFP which overseas a modest but significant research grant budget, I can say that NFP's go to great lengths to make the research allocation process both transparent and independent. I see no reason why CASA should be exempt from the governance processes that non government bodies are required to follow.
As a board member of an NFP which overseas a modest but significant research grant budget, I can say that NFP's go to great lengths to make the research allocation process both transparent and independent. I see no reason why CASA should be exempt from the governance processes that non government bodies are required to follow.
Go and watch the Yes Minister Episode 'The Greasy Pole' it pretty much covers this exact issue and that is circa early 1980's!
Academic research will say whatever you want it to say.
Academic research will say whatever you want it to say.
