Originally Posted by
Ixixly
You don't think that CASA would have been alerted to a Mayday call being made? Really? This isn't a rumour reaching them, it's ATC receiving a Mayday call from a LCPRT IFR Aircraft that was well within range of ATC, that'd get to them pretty bloody quick I'd dare say!
** Correct particularly if no injury - ATSB most likely contacted. Ever called a CAsA office at 4:21pm on a Friday?
The SFP can easily be fast tracked depending on the situation and all those details are sitting in an office waiting to be gathered and can be done pretty promptly when a fire is lit under the ass of a Maintenance Organisation who are worried if it's something they did that caused it.
** BS on that - there is no fast tracking of a SFP that info can be gathered and updated and then forwarded on, but it takes time and is always checked to confirm ones head is not being put on a block - I always spend much time confirming before passing on info in such cases.
They don't take a while to issue an SFP because it takes a certain amount of time to grow on a tree they issue it when it comes up next in the Queue and that queue is dictated by CASA and I've seen dispensations handed out by them pretty quickly when the right person is called for far less reasons in the past.
** BS again CAsA have policy to follow and will not deviate from it at risk of in house penalties - rules are rules and CAsA will follow them to be 100% non accountable.
The incident happened at 4.20, so they would have likely still been in the office as well. How often is the CASA office in Broome manned as well I wonder?
**They are out the door at 4:21pm - exactly what manned office in Broome it is Darwin that covers Broome and they are not often there.
You'd also think that the ATSB would be pretty quick to include if an Aircraft had been illegally flown out without the SFP as well wouldn't you?
** No ATSB do not assign blame or get involved in CAsA responsibilities such as illegal flight if it is not directly related to the incident flight.
They equally have that fact to hand, if you think they should mention if it was flown out with an SFP then it's equally as likely they'd mention if it didn't have one as required.
** As above this is not an area of control or concern of ATSB but that of CAsA.
As I said Bend Alot, you're making a lot of assumptions and they're to fit the narrative you've already decided upon.
No I just have had to work with the ATSB and CAsA and applied for and cleared SFP's on many occasions and know the legal requirements and CAsA requirements on the issue of SFP's. With area specific knowledge of CAsA in both areas that could be investigating (Perth and Darwin).
So no mention of my comment on no way to sign the defect off with in relation to approved data! or will a nice CAsA female AWI just give you a SFP if you ask nicely? with no cause provable for running out of gas?