Australian Industry & CASA Meeting, 17 December

[CYHeli]

On the 17th December, Peter Crook the AHIA President and myself attended a meeting at Aviation House in Canberra.
The meeting was called by CASA and a number of industry associations were invited to give Part 61, 141, 142 post implementation feedback. The meeting was opened by Mark Skidmore who expressed that he was there in a listening mode only as he has not yet taken up the position formally. There were also heads and major players from many CASA departments present and it was clear from the outset that they were there to take note of what we had to say, like it or not! Having said that, it was a very polite and helpful meeting.

The format of the meeting was that each of the industry invitees were given five (5) minutes to list the major points of concern that they held. (There was a request prior to the meeting to provide a detailed email list). We then broke for a coffee and then discussed the list in more detail with CASA the opportunity to come up with solutions.

The major points that I made were;
- The whole premise of the new legislation is reliant upon FE's, and CASA should have created the FE course first and provided a final copy of the Part 61 to industry with a caveat. You have two years before this comes in, make note of what your FE needs are and get them qualified now. Then run loads of courses and later roll out Part 61. Obviously that didn't happen, so now they need to roll it back. It will not go back to CAR 5, but an instrument is being examined that will allow Grade 1 instructors and C&T pilots who previously issued aircraft endorsements to be allowed to conduct the endorsement training and the issue of a type or class rating. I also suggested that some operational ratings, such as low level also be included.

- Aligned with the lack of ATO's / FE's, I requested that a list of every aircraft type be created with a corresponding list of ATO's qualified to conduct tests on that aircraft type. It can be done and a previously list did exist. As Mr Skidmore commented, we can produce a list of DAME's, why not ATO's. Then a pilot needing a flight test can look up the list and know who to book in. I also commented that they will need a plan when they find a type without an ATO qualified.

- Information flow and the use of Grapevine was very poor. Mr Skidmore was not aware that 3 Safety Advisors had been made redundant this year, just when we need need more education, they take away the teachers! I also made a point that within CASA the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing and their education needs to be internal before they take it on the road. There is no consistency of advice.

- The MOS needs more work and the process of changing and reviewing the MOS needs to be more stream lined. The expected changes to the MOS will not be out until January or February.

There was plenty of agreement with all parties and it was interesting to hear from the Qantas and Virgin guys how they are just as hamstrung by the system as GA is. We all made similar lists in different ways and all of them effected costs.

There is still more work to be done and when we walked away there was no change to legislation or new instruments issued on the spot. That was never going to happen. But we have some structure and have identified some things to move us forward and they will be emailed out for us to review before changes are made.

On another note, the instrument varying the aircraft types should be out before Christmas. Read the aircraft type instruments carefully. For example an A109 A or C training can be done by a Part 141 operator, but an AW109S, etc must be done by a Part 142 operator as the aircraft is considered more complex. If a school or organisation was already conducting that training before Sept and had an approved course, then they continue to teach it under Part 202, continuing authorisations. They are in effect a Part 142 school.

Finally, the question has been asked what is the point of being a member of the AHIA. Here is my answer. Because it funds a number of things, not least of all for me to go to this meeting and raise issues with CASA and get a meeting with the incoming Director. The AHIA has the respect of the regulator and they are listening. They also answer my questions quickly, which is very important to business. The wheels turn slowly, but they are turning.

The other associations out there are also pushing their barrows, but Qantas and Virgin have different needs to us. Phil at the Aerial Ag has some overlap with what we do. but is not going to represent a Helicopter Flight School or EMS, that's not his job. That's the interest of the AHIA. The volunteers that have stepped in to their roles have accepted the responsibility to represent our industry. We don't travel business class and we don't stay in the best accommodation, but it does cost money for us to get around. We couldn't afford to do it without your help. For those who are not members, you will still reap the benefits of our work, but imagine what else we could do if there was more in the kitty.

Enjoy Christmas and there is some hope on the horizon.
Colin Clarke
Legislative Change Officer,
AHIA.
CASR @ Austhia.com

[helopat]

Thanks, Col, for helping to represent our concerns to the regulator.

I'd like to hear the inputs and impressions from some of the other reps who went to this meeting.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
The first question that should have been asked:

If US, NZ, Canada etc. can cover the field of licensing in under 100 pages of regulations, why does it take something like 1600 pages of legislation in Australia??

Make no mistake about it, the MOS is a legislative document. Even if it wasn't, the question would only change to ask why we need 600 plus pages of legislation, compared to less than 100 in comparable countries.??

If you add the internal CASA policy/training documents, that adds about 500 more pages.

How can you seriously expect, even with time and training for FOIs and their managers (and the CASA lawyers) to be intimately familiar with 2200+ pages of documentation, and expect each and every one of them to have the same standard of knowledge of 2200+ pages, let alone each and every one to have the same "interpretation".

Part 61/141/142 is a guaranteed failure. It is not just about time and training, the whole licensing structure is now a grotesque nightmare.

Ask yourselves, what has Australian aviation done to deserve this nonsense.

Tootle pip!!

PS: Wait until you see what Part 135 is going to do to light GA, it will put the Part 61 debacle in the shade. Why have they done it? Because they can.

[triadic]

Show me the justification for these changes, and the cost benefit analysis....

What problem is CASA trying to fix??

Thanks for the update Col, keep it coming pls

[Arm out the window]

I'm not usually one to join organisations, but having seen your efforts publicising and making sense of the Part 61 changes here and on another well-known bulletin board, I will do so now.

Thanks mate, you've done a sterling job, so please be aware it's very much appreciated.

On the subject of the changes themselves, I think most people must be getting sick of the flood of venting which ensues as soon as anyone mentions the acronym CASA, and I'd like to respectfully suggest that rather than bash them at every opportunity, we aim to be constructive and forward-thinking in our criticism from here on in.

Cheers

[aroa]

Many, many folk put forward to the ASRR constructive criticisms of CAsA and practical remedies on how the serious issues with CAsA might be dealt with.

After a long wait we got the 'dust bunnies' from under the sofa.
Lots of ifs and maybes and how time consuming some of the changes might be. ie the fluff. And like so much promised in the past , much will evaporate with the passing of time with this lot.

CAsA is corrupt, morally bankrupt and unethical... the venting will continue until real changes are made....which are unlikely

AOTW Are you aware that there are serious governance and issues with "investigations" out of the Cairns office?. What constructive forward thinking remedies do you suggest to rectify those situations.
This sort of sh*t is going on all over the country...how to stop it?

[LeadSled]

I think most people must be getting sick of the flood of venting which ensues as soon as anyone mentions the acronym CASA, and I'd like to respectfully suggest that rather than bash them at every opportunity, we aim to be constructive and forward-thinking in our criticism from here on in.Arm-out-the window,

Do you work for CASA?

Do you have any conception of the damage CASA ( and its predecessors) has done to the whole of the Australian aviation industry.

Perhaps you would like to explain the why all the many inquiries into whatever the aviation regulator was called at the time --- including the "Morris" inquiry, the longest inquiry conducted into a Commonwealth Government entity since federation.

I use the term inquiry to include all formal inquiries, from the Royal Commissions downwards.

"Most people" in the industry are getting progressively more vocal due to the lack of action of the Forsyth Report. I am more than a little amused at the frantic efforts within CASA to denigrate the Forsyth (ASRR) report --- all characterized as just being a few malcontents --- not your "most people" --- probably a view, with which you would agree.

Well, that handful of malcontents, the ones described by a senior CASA person as being an examples of the "ills of society" include both major airline groups, every aviation representative body in Australia, and several hundred individuals, many of them notables in the industry.

You really should re-consider your thoughts on the matter, you are way off the pace.

Tootle pip!!

Whether you accept it or not, the various ICAO and FAA audits have been damning of CASA, with Australia narrowly avoiding a downgrade to Cat 2 after the last FAA audit, I assume you understand the commercial carnage that would be visited on both Qantas and Virgin, if that happened.

[Jabawocky]

Colin, well said.

All pilots and owners should be participants of the relevant associations. Problem is apathy gave way to "don't give a ****" attitude long ago.


Leadie, stop posting things I can agree with would ya :}


Ask yourselves, what has Australian aviation done to deserve this nonsense.

The answer is nothing. Literally. :sad:

[Arm out the window]

Arm-out-the window,

Do you work for CASA?


No.

You really should re-consider your thoughts on the matter, you are way off the pace.


We are all free to think what we want. I've only had positive direct dealings with CASA on the few occasions I've needed to. I sympathise with those who feel they've been wronged by them, but I don't like the extreme negativity which surfaces whenever they are discussed, which achieves bugger-all except to cloud the way forward, whatever that is.

[Creampuff]

I think that suggesting Australian aviation has done "nothing" is a bit of an overstatement, Jabba. :=

Lots of people put in lots of work to make well-reasoned, factually-based and constructive submissions to the Senate Aviation Accident Inquiry and the Aviatian Safety Regulatory Review Panel. They were encouraged to put their faith in those processes and are now expecting real action, not the usual empty rhetoric.

We all know who'd prefer to do "nothing" and let things like the regulatory reform Frankenstein continue to gobble up millions and produce thousands more pages of rules that make no substantive contribution to safety, indefinitely. It's not the people who have to pay money to cop this crap.

[dhavillandpilot]

There is a very simple fix to a lot of the CASA problems.

If I remember rightly Dick Smith tried to have it implemented.

Basically make each CASA employee personally liable for their actions and decisions.

If my accountant or Doctor stuffs up I have the legal right to sue them for either breech of contract or mal practice. It then gets taken up by their professional insurer and eventually right is corrected.

In the case of CASA, either the organisation or the individual would need professional indemnity insurance.

This simple change to make the individual responsible for their actions would see CASA staff at least think twice before going off on some tangent other than the law.

But I forgot CASA lives in a very special world of do what I say not what I do.

[Sunfish]

Arm Out The Window:

On the subject of the changes themselves, I think most people must be getting sick of the flood of venting which ensues as soon as anyone mentions the acronym CASA, and I'd like to respectfully suggest that rather than bash them at every opportunity, we aim to be constructive and forward-thinking in our criticism from here on in.

I agree with you that it is generally in your best interests to be both "constructive and forward thinking" in any discussion and negotiation.

However that only applies when you are dealing with someone who shares your values, beliefs and accepts that you have a right to continue to exist. This is generally termed as dealing in good faith.

CASA, if even ten percent of the evidence tendered is true, does not meet the criteria of dealing in good faith and therefore cannot be treated "constructively" and in a forward thinking manner as you would a reasonable person.

This is at the core of the review which found that there is a total lack of trust between regulator and regulated. Furthermore CASA again demonstrated a total untrustworthiness last month when it published a proposed rule making that would destroy the Jabiru brand if it was enacted the day before a scheduled consultation meeting on engine reliability was to be held.

Hence the advice of others here never to talk to CASA at all if possible and if absolutely necessary, take a witness, tape recorder and perhaps a lawyer as well.

To put that another way, you can't negotiate at all,, let alone be constructive and forward thinking with someone who has tried to kill you with an axe moments before and could just as easily try again. You overpower them, disarm them and have them locked up.

Anything less than condemnation of CASA and keeping them at arms length is just plain stupid until the beast demonstrates its changed.

[Aviater]

Take a moment to read through the Aviation Trader.

"For sale - Sick of CASA. Want out ASAP"
'For sale - Tired of CASA. Getting out of GA"

Sentiments echoed by everyone that I know from inside the industry. Even those with long standing friends in the department.

"Yeah he's a good mate. Just have to be a bit careful with conversations over lunch"


Late 20's LAME and Pilot and I am very much afraid of CASA.

I'd love to hear that I'm mistaken, but am yet to be shown otherwise.

[LeadSled]

Sunfish,

Well said!!

Aviater,
It is so sad to hears such sentiments, but they are brought about by experience.

Tootle pip!!

[Jabawocky]

Creamie, I agree and disagree :confused:

The vast majority have done nothing. The few who really care get burdened and burnt out trying to do the right thing.

Does that make more sense?

Sadly, right or wrong, aviators observation is not uncommon.

[Jabawocky]

Sunfish, that is the best post in a year or two. :ok:

It really is simple. Skidmores goal needs to be simply prove Sunfish is wrong. Not by BS words and argument, by actions.

Not holding breath....... :hmm:

[4Greens]

Ref the FAA rules:

Use to do reviews of some business ops in OZ. One day I was given a job on a business op and then found out that the aircraft etc came under FAA rules. Mild panic and then looked up the rules and did the job. The rules were so straight forward that it was easy.

Scrub CASA rules and adopt FAA rules.

[Arm out the window]

To put that another way, you can't negotiate at all,, let alone be constructive and forward thinking with someone who has tried to kill you with an axe moments before and could just as easily try again. You overpower them, disarm them and have them locked up.


Yes, but what do you really do, in the real world?
This is the kind of rhetoric you hear from a lot of people but it just boils down to posturing and venting. No offence, and I understand that there are people who've been wronged, but it doesn't achieve much.

I'm not trying to tell people who've had seriously bad experiences with CASA to forget it, but if everyone adopts a 'they're all a bunch of bastards and the whole organisation must be scrapped before anything else can happen', then nothing will happen.

It sounds like the acceptance of most of the recommendations of the Forsyth review (e.g. the need to ensure regulations are reviewed and rewritten in plain language if needed) and the appointment of a new DAS are a good start. Expressions and actions of good faith on both sides will be needed to start and keep the ball rolling, however slowly. That's all I'm saying.

[Oracle1]

The only way to get results with CASA is to run orchestrated political campaigns in the electorates of relevant ministers. Having been involved in a few it requires money, determination and balls of steel. There can be no compromise it is a fight to the death. Forget the courts they are stacked with yes men and you will be bled dry before you achieve a result. Watching the industry being divided and conquered is heartbreaking for me. However given the total wankers that exist in the industry, getting a united front is like herding cats. The industries malaise is mirrored by the whole country, and the Commonwealth of Australia is now in the hands of a very wealthy few.

[Dick Smith]

Australian Aviation reports that the number of bus jets sold to overseas from Australia has increased by 82%.

From 11 in 2013 to 20 in 2014. Can't fathom out why. Nothing to do with $130,000 Adsb leading the world by 5 years. Or new part 91.

All the go. Unaffordable Safety!

[C206driver]

But of a side note however can anyone confirm when Navathe is departing avmed???

[rutan around]

Expressions and actions of good faith on both sides will be needed to start and keep the ball rolling, however slowly.I've been flying for 42 years. How bloody slow do you want? Crash through tactics can work. Look at the huge backlog of absolutely necessary changes the Whitlam government pushed through in just 3 years.

Even this current government may be capable of sudden and radical change. On today's news it was mooted that the Federal Department of Education might be dumped entirely and its' role be entirely assumed by the states. Think of the $s saved with that removal of duplication.

If they can do that they can easily sack CASA and outsource aviation regulation to NZ or USA.

A precedent is already out there. Asylum seekers are imprisoned and guarded by a pommie security firm. Pilots and aviation companies seem to be held in no higher esteem than asylum seekers so why not be run by a foreign nation?

Good faith in CASA was lost years ago. If we continue down that track all us older pilots will be dead long before one iota of meaningful change comes about.

[Sunfish]

Arm out the window:

Yes, but what do you really do, in the real world?

In the real world one does lots as I have had to do with venture (vulture) capitalists.

1. Immediate ban by industry and associations on consulting or cooperating with CASA. One achieves this by a polite refusal to consult stating that you "fail to understand" what it would achieve. Be aware that if CASAs mind is already made up, all you are doing by consulting is providing them a fig leaf in the form of diffusion of responsibility for the regulators actions.

If consultation is unavoidable, ask for a written and prearranged agenda. Prepare your own position paper, present it, ask for questions, stick strictly to the agenda and then leave. Refuse to engage socially except for a cup of coffee.

2. In dealings with CASA beyond simple submission of forms, ask for a lawyer to be present and permission to record the conversation.

3. Do not engage in the show cause process as has been explained by others.

4. Apply political pressure using the mantra "jobs, investment, growth" as in "how will this (action by regulator) affect jobs, investment and growth?". Repeat this mantra at every opportunity.

If everyone does this without exception, CASA is effectively in coventry until it demonstrates by its actions that it is dealing in good faith.

To put that another way, pretend your next door neighbour is a venture capitalist who will sell your children into slavery if given half a chance.

[rutan around]

Some more ideas for the real world.(Originally posted on the Thanks CASA post)

We need a very strong union. Most people think of knuckle draggers in the AWU or BLF or some water side union when strong unions are mentioned.

Actually the strongest union in Australia is the Australian Medical Association (AMA) Most don't associate them with knuckle dragging nor do many associate them with many losses in a stoush.

We need to form the APA (Australian Pilots Association) It should have a once only joining fee of $1,000 and all pilots should be strongly persuaded to join not by force but logic. Show the history of what has happened to perfectly innocent pilots and companies chewed up by an arrogant out of control administration. $1,000 is real cheap compared to a do it yourself defence.

If 30,000 pilots joined up we would have a $30 million fighting fund which could be used to defend pilots through the civil courts where only real evidence can be used. We could persue criminal CASA and ex CASA agents through the the courts where they have been found to have fabricated evidence.

We could act politically in marginal seats and highlight the utter waste non data based decisions cause. We could highlight the lunacy of spending 20 years and $200 million rewriting regulations in a language not understood by 99% of pilots and not available anyway.

We could push to adopt the FAA system and show how millions could be saved.

We might even bring about a miracle and see Warren Truss rise in Parliament and give a scintillating speech lighting the fire to bring these sorely needed changes to fruition. After all if Jabiru is not in his electorate it's not far away.

But first we have to light a fire among our fellow pilots. If things keep going the way they're heading Australia will only have Military and Airline flying.

We we need to return to government of the people by the people FOR the people and not have the CASA system where it's government of aviation by CASA for CASA.
http://www.pprune.org/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=8788998) http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/edit.gif (http://www.pprune.org/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=8788998)

[rutan around]

Don't you mean no GA pilot can afford not to join. We're in the almost hopeless position we now find ourselves because of addle brained thinking.

What does $1,000 represent? A few % of the cost of a basic licence, less than 1% of a commercial licence, a quarter of one years insurance for a private aircraft and less than 10% of one years insurance on a charter aircraft.

If CASA was pulled into line and forced to operate on data and evidence the once only $1,000 would be recouped many times over and no pilot would live in fear of drawing the short straw in the insane lottery of interpreting correctly CASA's impossibly numerous , poorly written conflicting rules or doing battle due to some arbitary decision of some incompetent inexperienced officer.

United we stand,divided we fall.

[rutan around]

Until recently it was a fortnight's pay AFTER tax. You're kidding yourself. I rest my case.

[rutan around]

principles of economics? Prince of where? I'm just a busted arse occasional pilot who always thought you have to spend money to make money.

If you have a commercial pilots licence you have already spent in the vicinity of $50k. If you had a $50k car I'm sure you'd pay $1,000 every year to insure it yet you balk at a once only payment of $1,000 to protect the licence you worked so hard to obtain and the aviation future you hope to make for yourself.

You may think you will never fall foul of CASA because you don't break any rules. If that's the case you need to think again.

I personally know 6 people who have had their lives put through the wringer over essentially nothing. Two eventually recieved some sort of half arsed compensation from CASA, two gave up the unfair fight as costs approached $1m ,one was found not guilty and is still chasing compensation and one has a case ongoing with exceedingly dubious evidence from CASA.

There are many others I know about but don't know the pilots personally. If you want to educate yourself about what might happen to you a good place to start would be to read Paul Phelan's work. Perhaps start with 'Birds, what birds'?

Of course a strong united union would have many other benefits as such as ensuring aviation has a future in this country and that you have a job that pays more than $500 per week.

[LeadSled]

Show me the justification for these changes, and the cost benefit analysis....
What problem is CASA trying to fix??Triadic,
CASA must have done a full risk analysis and cost/benefit justification, because CASA told the ASRR, in a written submission, that all recommendations of the Hawke Inquiry had been fully incorporated by CASA (The same Dr. A.Hawke, AC who is "Chairperson" of CASA), and one of the Hawke recommendations was that the Byron Directive 1/2007 be adopted (as it had been by Bruce Byron -- over much near revolt by the "Iron Ring" -- resulting in the immediate involuntary departure from CASA of the leader of the revolting).

For those of you who don't remember, (and it is no longer on the CASA web site, presumably because it has been incorporated -- or is there another reason it has disappeared, like so much else that used to be available -- "Year Zero" being about 2010) Directive 1/2007 required all regulation to have a risk management justification, and resort to regulation was to be a last resort, not the first, and then it had to be cost/benefit justified -- in short, Government legislative policy/OBPR guidelines were mandatory.

I do hope nobody suggests that the CASA submission to the ASRR/Forsyth Inquiry contained a few porkies -- they wouldn't do that, would they, to their own Chairperson???

Tootle pip!!

[rutan around]

Have a happy Christmas Cynical Pilot. We'll continue this discussion in a couple of days time. I note the time you posted and I am making allowances that your apparent lack of comprehension of the subject being discussed may be chemically related. I want some of whatever you're on. :E It must be good.
Cheers RA