Creamy me old, who me, naughty ?:roll eyes:
I agree, my point was ONLY that the conclusions drawn by Up into the Air, are not based on a large enough sample of the total to be statistically significant.
And no I don't know the content of all of the other submissions.
I absolutely agree that in terms of regulatory reform and the regulators behaviour it has been like watching a train smash of epic proportions in super slo mo with a peripatetic in charge of the jogging control with a melange of Groundhog Day thrown in for good measure.
I don't believe ANY of the other like minded or culturally aligned NRA suites are fully compliant with the ICAO, nor do not, in one way or another, have maybe a similar number of oddities as does the CASA suite.
So grabbing at any of them holus bolus is not IMHO the answer and would bring more trouble than in we are already.
Difference is and its only IMHO, the other NRA's (definitely not EASA) at least share a coherent structure with a reasonably rational philosophical foundation for their being.
They will all have what they will tell you, justification for their differences to the ICAO to which they are all signatories, how does that work?
We here have been endlessly educated and berated about the fact that Australian air is somehow different to that in North America and Europe and that we are a world leader.
it is not and we are not, by any definition.
What we do have is a reasonable base from which to work. Its not perfect but we know which bits work and which do not and where to go for the missing bits. We can not nor should not throw 20 years and $250M in the bin, some of it is usable,
Its not rocket science, nor beyond the people it affects most and that is the industry who have actual real world experience.
Fox's and chickens you say? Not if it is constructed by industry people who understand that unless the result has a clear and demonstrable safety benefit, and after all thats why we have regulations, it will not work.
At the end of the day you have to have trust that good people with good will, will want to do good things. We trust our "licensed" personnel to exercise the privileges of heir "license" to do the right thing. its how its supposed to work.
We're not quite there yet but with CRM and SMS now taking firm hold with higher supervisory responsibility and an increasingly transparent economic imperative that requires this behaviour is exercised to a very high level the responsible operators are almost self saucing.
My personal view from here is that we can take the overall numbering suite 1 thru 198 or so with Headings, work through them against what we already have use the best of the rest for what we haven't and the make them ICAO compliant and SMS based or justified, then we will have a world class system.
All reviewed and written in "plane talk" by a panel of industry peers and free of tortuous
legalese. Most importantly simple enough for pilots, users and the public to understand, that you don't have to go hunting through a dozen different documents to find that there as actually 2 or 3 different answers, then you can shop for the result you need.
Existing CASA staff may contribute for their individual expertise but the final result must be driven by the industry in compliance with Government policy.
The industry has some seriously competent and experienced people whom led competently can be trusted to get it right.
i think maybe there has been a sufficient flushing out of the dodgy bros operators and general maturing, that we can reset the enforcement regime to a more tolerant one by changing the mindset from offence to violation and placing the liability where it belongs.
Trust, the fundamental basis on which this industry works, must be restored.
Otherwise a certifying signature is not worth the paper its written on?
Confrontation has no place in the safety agenda under any circumstances.
This will of course require a pretty vigorous retraining and re education of a goodly number of the staff, but given the will and full Government support i reckon 12-18 months to finish the process to everyones satisfaction would not be out of bounds.
Rant off.