I'll give myself up on Monday.
In my last days of feedom let me tell you what a "grey area" is.
Some examples.
"Flight Safety Australia", the CASA blurb of volume 5 number 4, particularly pages 20 and 21. A quote from the analysis by Steve Bell, a LAME and CASA safety promotions officer.
"the maintenance release is the only tool pilots have at their disposal to determine if an aircraft is airworthy. It is the only safe and difinitive method of communicating the aircraft's state to other pilots, maintenance personnel, the operator and the owner". (I concur).
I now quote from some letters to an owner pilot who having relied upon a MR to attest to the airworthiness of an aircraft in a purchase, went through an extended CASA investigation, a Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation, a Senate inquiry, 5 years of political lobbying, obstruction by CASA, seizing and loosing of vital evidence by CASA and the loss of many, many thousands of dollars;
Dr Paul Scully-Power:
"I have to say to you, as I think has been made clear before, that CASA does NOT suscribe to the view that a maintenance release is the primary document that provides information to a pilot / purchaser about the airworthiness of an aircraft". (I don't concur).
Peter Langhorne, Chief of Staff to Hon John Anderson:
"a maintenance release is a record of required maintenance. It was never intended to be a document that on it's own should be relied to purchase an aircraft. Although it plays an important role, it CANNOT be a guarantee of an airworthy aircraft". (I don't concur).
Honourable John Anderson, Deputy Prime minister and minister for things that fly:
"I am advised that while a maintenance release plays an important role in recording the maintenance of an aircraft it cannot be a guarantee of an irrworthy aircraft". (I don't concur).
This is but one of many examples of "grey areas" and are documented in Paul Phelan's "phelan Papers".
If you feel this information to be less than the truth, ask him for specific examples and get him to give you their contact details.
I'll say again my theory on CASA's problems:
They are "sh*t scared" of being sued and are rewriting the regulations so that everything is "illegal", thus allowing no discretionary movements by their field staff.
I must say, that my dealings with the lower eschelon of CASA have been cordial, however I do remember blokes like "Colonel Klink" (not his real name), who were real bast*rds.
Ask Arthur Pape for some examples of "grey areas" in medicine.
I'll be off to pack my toothbrush now folks, see you in about five years. I'll bet everything is in black and white in my case ???
