"Why did CASA choose to model its new regulations after JAR/EASA"
Tins,
Casa adopted EASA rules in name only. What they produced is nothing like EASA,
who do not even recognise our engineering standards.
It is interesting to note the Europeans have recognised their "one size fits all" regulations have been a disaster, especially for the GA sector in Europe, they have embarked on a rewrite of their regulations.
Even in the UK they have recognised they have killed off their GA industry with over regulation and are now actively attempting to "Foster and Promote" whats left of their GA industry.
Murky Mandarins in Australia have subverted Acts and directions to "Foster and Promote" even Murkier entities to the detriment of aviation. Our airports and those that control them are a prime example. Our aviation infrastructure is depreciating to third world levels while those entities sock away billions of tax free dollars in offshore tax havens. Is it coincidental that development sharks are also the biggest political donors?
I have heard Bankstown airport has again been sold, even as the last lot are engaged in a law suite war, fighting over the spoils one would imagine. The new owner, another development shark, considers he's bought a bargain. I wonder if he is aware of the levels of contamination that exist under Bankstown's airport soil?