Sarcs,
I have concern as to the CASA logic here.
The Jetstar text messages & go around event at Singapore was in May 2010.
The Tiger Airlines go around event at Avalon happened on 30th Jun 2011.
Using CASA's logic & I quote their response:
Comparing Jetstar to Tiger is like apples and oranges – Tiger did not respond proactively to issues identified over a period of time and the safety systems were not effective.
Reading CASA's response, one would (incorrectly) believe the grounding of Tiger Airlines was BEFORE the Jetstar event in Singapore.
My issue remains with the statement "the safety systems were not effective"
Four issues remain outstanding:
1. At the time of the Jetstar go around in Singapore, the Tiger go around in Avalon was not to occur until another some 13 months later.
2.If CASA identified 16 Jetstar safety deficiencies, wouldn't this be considered as "safety systems were not effective" as they found in Tiger 13 months later.
3. Is the sticking point with CASA the "proactive response" component?
Can you commit unsafe acts & continue to operate as long as the later response is proactive?
4. At the time of Tiger Airlines grounding, CASA's quoted Tiger as not having adequate Fatigue Management.
Tiger Airways Grounded | CASA lost confidence in airline
Quote: "The authority imposed a number of conditions on Tiger air operator certificate, requiring actions to improve pilot proficiency and training and checking processes as well as changes to fatigue management".
If Jetstar had exhibited the same deficiencies in pilot proficiencies & fatigue management 13 months earlier, why the "apples & oranges response to Tiger 13 months later?
MC