Originally Posted by
megan
a link djpil?
This could be it, not sure, but scroll through the 1600 comments.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1091538964311041
Originally Posted by
pilotbm
Essentially, BRM Aero have completed around 260 spins in the aircraft, all recovered as per ASTM standards. CASA refuse this data, without providing any technical explanation as to why the refuse it.
It seems to me that people in CASA (and the RAA) and the ATSB are way out of their depth here. There was a time when staff at CASA's predecessors would document certification issues pretty much on the spot.
Originally Posted by
pilotbm
BRM Aero believe the CASA attention relates to an individual who previously provided CoA certificates for Bristells in Australia, who would then go back to his job at RA Aus as tech manager, and stamp the paperwork as approved by RA.Anderson Aviation, the importer, saw this as a conflict of interest, and sought a new person to provide the CoA.
Two-hatted situations are common and potential for conflict of interest does exist in small organisations. My training to become a USA FAA DER dealt with this and my FAA oversight officer would obviously have it high on their agenda. Rules for DARs are the same per
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...er_8100.8D.pdf I would do engineering work then sign an FAA form approving the data as a DER.
Originally Posted by
pilotbm
BRM and Anderson allege that ever since, this person (now working at CASA) has sought to tarnish the Bristell’s reputation.
He's not the only one to tarnish its reputation as a suitable basic trainer but that's a different subject than compliance with the ASTM which seems to confuse these people.
I have my popcorn ready. I wish Bob Mc and Brett the best of luck.