Barwon Heads Airport Closed

[inbetweenthesheets]

VH-EFS

I suggest you sit down and read the report more meticulously, have the CASA and APF regs. handy and you may appreciate some of the following.

CASA always has had the power to remove licences and change airspace and in doing may frustrate contractual relationships.

As to doing so without true cause, I doubt that would occur and if it did the harmed party has the option to have the decision reviewed by the federal Court or the AAT.

As in any legal case the Adjudicator will refer to previous decisions that relate to the matter at hand.
In this case any previous decision relating to right for review is pertinent.

I have not seen any documentation that would support your claim
“Egon Fice did not want to hear the case”
and indeed he allowed all arguments to be heard without constraint (obviously you never attended the hearing).

With regard to para 21 we don’t have to know if the complaints were justified as it is not up to “we” to make the determination in relation to the safety of air usere and members of the public.

The incident reports are forwarded to CASA for investigation and I am sure if the reports proved to be unjustified CASA would not have acted upon them.

The proposed models you refer were just that proposed, they were found to be unworkable and neve introduced.

The airport is private property and CASA cannot dictate to the owner what uses the property will be used for.

In relation to Para 23 you state “some paddock, she has clearly leased it out for parachute operations”
Obviously you have privy to her contractual obligations, or is it an assumption, I am of the belief that the existence of a lease is to be determined in the Federal Court within the next few weeks.

Para. 31 It does appear CASA was happy to continue parachute operations providing those operations were within the regulations, but clearly Luke McWilliam, Greg Bayley and Skydive City were unable or unwilling to comply with those regulations creating a serious risk to air navigational safety and to the safety of general public.

The results of the investigations were made available to those involved; maybe you should have a look at the Magistrates Court cases for the findings.

The findings by Fice do not make it safe for these people to skydive in other areas only BHA, but to place an order to prevent them doing so is restrictive trade.




Your comment regarding the proposed dangers to the public at large being exaggerated is a little over the top, do you believe the public at large in Bankstown are entitled to be exposed to less danger than those at Barwon Heads or is it safety for one and all?
You are right in saying any aircraft has the potential to crash but does mean all that can be done within reason to prevent a disaster should not be done.

In relation to Para 70 one does not have to be a Rhode scholar to appreciate that the Chairman is alluding to the fact that a Fisheries Officer is credible and above reproach.

I relation to jumping thru cloud I suggest you read the regulations placed on organisations that have approval to parachute thru cloud; you should have done so prior to writing.

The breakdown in co-operation was between a skydiver operator refusing to comply with CASA and APF regulations and other users of the airport attempting to have all operations conducted safely.

Obviously all reports stopped outside the Geelong CTAF because that is where McWilliam and Skydive city operated.

It’s clear the rest of the world has a different view on what is conflicting traffic

I have overlooked your sarcastic little digs up to now but the above statement brings you down to the level of The Wizard of Auz.( must be in the WA water)

sheets