Mr Skidmore Similar to Mr McCormick

[Dick Smith]

Just after I was appointed Chairman of CASA I received a letter from an angry respected leader in the aviation community. I can’t remember what the issue was about, however I do remember clearly that the bureaucracy in Canberra prepared an answer for me. Basically the answer told the industry leader to “get lost” and did not address any of the points he was making. Naturally, I refused to sign the letter and I realised then that this was some type of “test” to see if I would comply with the system that existed in the days of “two years in the Aviation Hall of Doom”. This was a system of “group think” and no individual accountability for anything.

I now believe Mr Skidmore has been tested in a similar way.

Not long ago I received a circular letter from Mr Gerard Campbell (Executive Manager, Operations Division, CASA) asking when I was going to fit ADS-B in my CJ3. I wrote back to Mr Campbell in what I considered was quite a reasonable, but tough, letter explaining that the original Regulation Impact Statement was a flawed document and had not been ethically completed. I expected a letter back at least addressing the issues. However, Mr Campbell did not reply but instead I received the following from Mark Skidmore:

Dear Mr Smith

I refer to your letter of 30 March 2015 to Gerard Campbell. I have advised Gerard to not reply to your letter, but that I would do so here.

I found the language and tone of your letter unacceptable. Gerard Campbell is a highly qualified, highly experienced and highly principled member of my senior executive team. Neither he, nor any other CASA manager or staff member, should be written to in this manner.

I would like to remind you of the letter sent to you by the former Director of Aviation Safety, John McCormick on 31 August 2010 after a similar occurrence. I also request that any complaints you may wish to make about CASA staff members are addressed directly to me.

Yours sincerely
Mark Skidmore AM
Director of Aviation Safety


Note how none of the issues I had written about have been addressed. Mr Skidmore has decided to follow the “group think” that protects the system at all costs. That is, a system of no individual accountability at all for any practices which have not been honesty and ethically undertaken.

By the way, here is the text of the letter I sent Mr Campbell. It does not claim that Mr Campbell was responsible for any of the decisions in relation to the Regulation Impact Station (RIS).

Dear Gerard

Re Your Letter - ADS-B Mandates and Expiry of Exemption – March 2015

I am sure you are aware that the Regulation Impact Statement which was undertaken by CASA for this ADS-B requirement is a completely fabricated, dishonest document. Fabricated and dishonest because it shows alleged “savings” to airline aircraft and then implies that these savings would accrue to all aircraft.

As well as this, I have spoken to various airline companies who have had ADS-B equipment fitted since the December mandate and they have not seen any measurable reduction in costs because of the fitment of ADS-B.

The exemption you have given me is no exemption at all – that is because it is an exemption for radar airspace and because I already have a Mode-S transponder the separation standard that is provided is already the same that is provided between aircraft that are not ADS-B fitted.

At the present time I haven’t gone ahead with the fitment because the cost is more than $140,000 for absolutely no benefit at all. I, fortunately, can afford this but I have spoken to a number of small aviation companies who have actually had the equipment fitted at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars and it is quite clear that this money must have come from other areas where safety could be improved.

You say, “let us know your plans”. Well, my plans are to sell my aircraft back to the United States where there is not an ADS-B requirement for another five years and, no doubt, when the requirement comes in there the cost of fitment will be quite low. Then I plan to spend the time I have available in communicating to everyone how dishonest your organisation is and how it is amazing to me that you can sleep at night.

Yours faithfully
Dick Smith

It is amazing to me that CASA expects the industry to operate honesty and within the law but considers that it does not have to – or at least CASA considers that it does not have to address any issues that it may not agree with.

So there you have it. I believe Mr Skidmore has accepted the letter he has been given and signed it so he is part of the existing system - not a “change agent”. I cannot see that with the present management and with the Department that things will change too soon. My suggestion for those who have invested in the general aviation industry is to get out as quickly as you can - there are going to be huge losses in the next four or five years. It’s all very sad.

[yr right]

Gezzzz dick. Look out you may be charge with insubordination him being ex military an all. And don't laugh I had an ex military clown in Casa telling me he was going to do that. I laughed the told him to go "f" himself. Surprisingly I didn't get charged.

Said from the start nothing will change with this clown ether.

[Squawk7700]

I am not an executive level employee, however I have an excellent grasp of the English language and it is clear that the punishment may not fit the crime in this instance, however I do understand how they appear to believe that it was a personal attack verus at an organisational level.

The exemption you have given me is no exemption at all
You say, “let us know your plans”.
how dishonest your organisation is and how it is amazing to me that you can sleep at night.

I would say that your use of the word "you" in a number of sentences has pushed his buttons. Directing your venting at CASA and re-phrasing the above may have resulted in a less formal response.

[Dick Smith]

I have written and spoken to them nicely for two years on this RIS issue. Got absolutely nowhere. Some in the management probably recognise that errors were made but it looks as if the policy is to never admit to making an error .

Interesting that Mark did not suggest a letter that addressed at least some the points I was concerned about .

The military ethos appears to be that of sticking with the decision. - no matter how unfair it may be !

[OK4Wire]

The military ethos appears to be that of sticking with the decision

Maybe, maybe not; but what really grips my s***t is that the tone of the reply is so offensive.

These guys have forgotten that they are PUBLIC servants, paid by us to provide a service. The tone of his letter is more like a master talking to a slave. :suspect:

[Lookleft]

He's not telling you to get lost he's telling you to come directly to where the buck stops, with him. Apparently you were told the same thing by the bloke in the same position previously. Your letter gets very personal with statements such as:

Then I plan to spend the time I have available in communicating to everyone how dishonest your organisation is and how it is amazing to me that you can sleep at night.

From what I can tell about Mr Skidmore's reply:

I found the language and tone of your letter unacceptable. Gerard Campbell is a highly qualified, highly experienced and highly principled member of my senior executive team. Neither he, nor any other CASA manager or staff member, should be written to in this manner.

he is defending his staff which was one of the attributes we expect from a good leader.

With your public profile I am surprised that you would not have just spoken to Mr Skidmore directly instead of publishing private correspondence between you and CASA.

[IFEZ]

If you get a chance, go back and have a look at his performance at Senate Estimates (on another thread) and the way he addressed Senator David Fawcett in response to questions on the CVD matter. Certainly showed his true colours there I reckon..! Exactly the sort of response I would have expected from his predecessor, but was hoping for better with his replacement (foolishly it seems).

[Creampuff]

You don’t understand your proper place, Dick.

Like every other Australian citizen, you exist to be regulated and taxed.

Think of how many punters would die in 30,000’ death plunges, but for our fearless aviation safety regulator and the thousands of pages of world-class regulations it administers.

A life is, by definition, priceless. Therefore, all safety regulations are justified and all RISs are foregone conclusions.

It must be true, because no government in recent times has done thing one to get the regulatory Frankenstein under control.

I was very disturbed to read this in AIPA’s submission to the ASSR:From our viewpoint, blaming the delay in implementation of Part 61 on the industry was indicative of an unacceptable regulatory arrogance. The problem was clearly one of inadequate change management by CASA. AIPA often is forced to take CASA to task about poor regulatory consultation due to a persistent absence of supporting GM/AMC documentation, insufficient consultation time and notification periods combined with excessive amount of documents required to be reviewed prior to working group meetings and inadequate allocations of time at meetings to properly review not only the draft legislation but how it will work in practice. We are sympathetic to the CASA staff who appear to be faced with multiple complex tasks and unbending deadlines and even to CASA managers who find themselves in a political corner to roll out the new rules, but in the end the responsibility for effective change management rest with CASA management.

The current prospect of continuously rolling out new rules to overwhelmed industry stakeholders and inspectors alike must be increasing the risk profile of the industry – and what starts out as compliance and financial risk has a habit of morphing into safety risk!It is from this kind of lunatic fringe that CASA is, fortunately, protecting us.

Be thankful, Dick. Think how much safer you and everyone else will be, once your CJ3 is fitted with ADS-B.

[yr right]

Look left well not hard to see which side of the fence you sit on.
The major trouble is that Casa and the staff have no accountability to anyone. They make there own rules up and then enforce them onto the aviation community. The simple fix is make the staff accountable for their actions and then let's see where that takes us. Until then we have mindless fools driving the ship into the rocks.

[chimbu warrior]

This was a system of “group think” and no individual accountability for anything.

I think all new recruits to CASA are greeted at the door with a large jug of Kool-aid. Most take a long drink, and the effects are immediate. Others drink slowly, so are placed on an intravenous drip.

Either way, the effect is the same. Some of the ex-military recruits are the biggest and most willing drinkers...........:(

[yr right]

Oh creamie bit of the pot calling the kettle black don't you think !

[Arm out the window]

You should have fixed CASA up while you were on the board, Dick, then you wouldn't have to worry about complying with the regulations they make now.

I didn't like it when the department of main roads reduced the speed limit on a stretch of road not far from my house when there was no particular safety hazard I could see, but the cops will still book me if I ignore the new sign!

This isn't about Skidmore at all, it's just more propagandist CASA bashing.

[Creampuff]

Some more “propagandist CASA bashing” from the lunatic fringe:AIPA suggests that the behaviour most often complained of by industry, that of inconsistent and non-standardised decision-making, is a product of a structure that inadequately or incompetently mirrors (if at all) the structure (i.e., the processes, procedures, organisational arrangements, systems and resources) demanded of industry. CASA cannot operate as a collection of free-styling decision-makers free of regulatory constraints – the industry reasonably expects consistent and standardised decision-making and we believe that it has the right to be free of unnecessary and indefensible cost burdens imposed by decision-makers who are exercising personal whims in the absence of any organisational supervision or constraint.

[aroa]

Lookee leftie..." defending his(sic) staff is one of the attributes we expect from a good leader"

And with CAsA this defence, also in the case of indefencibles is legion.:mad:

The late Loud Screamer made a pitch in a Senate hearing, 2011?, on how he would protect "his staff" at all costs from "unwarranted demagoguery" and he rattled off a litany of other things maybe alleged, and ended up choking on his own wordy vomitus and failed to complete the sentence.!
Had he passed the English licence test, ya reckon?.

So he even took that defence ..at very great expense to the taxpayer, for three staff persons who had committed gross illegalities, in the "process" of dealing with an aviation client, all aided and abetted by "The System".
Which immediately proved to me his "ceo" credentials had absolutely NO value whatsoever, except to corruption and cronyism.:mad:

Its a game still being played out in the halls of Fort Fumble, as I can attest. having recently received a three page "thesis" from Dr Hoodoo Voodoo on how lies are not lies or untruths, but "just discrepancies in wording".
Dontja luv 'em! Wonderful think there Doctor !
Its CYA 101 in full swing...protection is all. :mad:
We, the CAsA people do no wrong:mad:

Response letter from bureaurats are not supposed to deal with the issues, they either attack you or hit you with a fluffy response that actually says nothing....hopefully then you will tire of corresponding and just go away.

[hiwaytohell]

Well at least you got a response Dick.

So far we have found Skidmore to be a black hole on fairly serious issues raised directly with him.

At least McCormick would reply.

[LeadSled]

Well done, Dick.

Just a couple of thoughts ---- the biggest problem with a RIS is that it comes at the end of a process, when all the decisions have been made. It is an estimate of how much the shaftees will be shafted, not whether they will be shafted at all.

What we need, (and it is in the CASA's own manuals, as well as being a mandatory Government requirement) is justification of any rules in advance, including proper cost/benefit analysis -- and ADS-B is no exception.

Cast your minds back to the original ADS-B propositions, where a CASA cost/benefit analysis postulated all sorts of benefits for airlines, but naught of any significance for GA.

When we went through the first CASA cost/benefit analysis, we found the old "shift the decimal point" trick, when this was corrected, the airline benefits evaporated.

Miraculously a second CASA cost/benefit analysis appeared, suddenly discovering all sorts of benefits for GA, that hadn't been "noticed" before. In my opinion the "benefits" were bogus. The CASA employee responsible (no fan of Dick) left CASA not long after.

'Tis all in the pprune archives.

I am not surprised at the practical experience of the airlines in Australia with ADS-B, it was all quite predictable, and was predicted by those who could do simple arithmetic, as opposed to being gullible enough to uncritically swallow the propaganda. The major reason ADS-B had to be mandatory (and this also applies to US) is very few would fit it voluntarily, given the lack of real, as opposed to claimed, benefits.

ADS-B will not, and never will, produce the alleged cost savings claimed by the promoters of ADS-B. The major beneficiary is the Government, not the aviation sector.

Tootle pip!!

[Lookleft]

The question raised by Dick Smith was whether Skidmore is the same as McCormick. The answer Dick got was, if you have a problem speak to the man in charge. For Dick to proclaim"Now we see the violence inherent in the system!" is disingenuous as he would know that wealth gets you access to decision makers and that he would not need to resort to finger pointing letters.

As far as ADS-B is concerned from what I can tell the horse has bolted on that one and its time to move on to the next issue.

[cogwheel]

Dick et el, The largest problem CASA have is the way they are set up and how they interact with industry, not to mentiion their legal department! The different departments within don't talk to each other any more (they used to) and there is no realisation of how CASA worked a decade or more ago. It would be fair to say it seems to have got much worse. There is very little consultation, even with the forums set up for that purpose such as the SCC etc.

Most of the time they consist of presentations at which the industry get very little warning or time to research and then CASA says there was "Consultation" - sorry but that is not what it is about! Even the attendee's at most of the forums are controlled. So what about those that have someting to say and are not let in?:ugh:

I have an associate that presented a detailed response to a change made by CASA that had significant safety issues, including pointing out that there was no safety case etc. The response from the corporate letter writer basically said we are not going to discuss this any more..... Oh! Is that the way a trusted regulator should work? I don't think so!:=

To be fair to the new DAS, I believe it may take him a bit of time to sort the wheat from the charf, however I would like to believe he can fix it, and certainly there are few within that should be asked to walk, for the sake of the industry if nothing else. Certainly making officers responsible for their decisions and having their name on the bottom of the letter would assist.

We live in hope..... Otherwise we wont have an industry at all.:mad:

[Frank Arouet]

Problem is the bureaucrat who got the communication first. My bet the bloke is next in line for a job with macwhichbank like many Sir Humphrey's before him. This bloke runs business in Australia from the head honcho to the factory floor delegate. Read Senate Estimates, look at the movies or read from Hansard. Both Albo and Truss are weak and useless in any matters aviation. CAsA only exists because of their inability to do anything about it.


Dick, I know you are a proud Australian, but surely to God you can see you must register the jet in New Zealand. As un tasteful as this seems, you would be sending a better message to the Australian public who support you because everyone will see just how desperate things are for you to take such drastic measures.


I'm guessing Skidmore is in line for an OA and Australian of the year Award.


I note the 'horse has bolted' so we should move on. (Sarcasm Lefty).

[chimbu warrior]

Dick, I know you are a proud Australian, but surely to God you can see you must register the jet in New Zealand

Unfortunately the state of registry has nothing to do with whether or not you are required to fit ADS-B.

It is required for all aircraft flying above FL280 in Australian airspace, effective December 13th. You can register your aircraft (or spaceship) on Mars if you wish, but if you penetrate Australian atmosphere you must have ADS-B. Of course you could continue to operate at or below FL280, but just to make sure you comply ADS-B is required if you want to fly in or out of YSSY, YMML, YPPH or YBBN (and presumably surrounding airspace), effective next February.

[Dick Smith]

Look left. You say I should talk to the man in charge. Nearly two years ago I spoke to the minister about the flawed ADSB RIS process. He appeared concerned and said he would get back to me.

He did and said that he had been informed by CASA that as the process was completed in 2009 that it was now too late to do anything about the decision.

When I first met Mr Skidmore I explained that the ADSB RIS appeared to be a flawed document and the very credibility of CASA as an ethical organisation was at risk because of this.

There has not been a hint from CASA that the issue will be re looked at even though CASA people have told me that many within the organisation are convinced the RIS was not properly completed.

In about 18 months all aircraft which file an IFR flight plan in Australia will have to be fitted with expensive ADSB. This will cover small training aircraft in country areas that only fly in uncontrolled airspace . No country in the world has such a mandate. The aircraft will not be separated by ATC using ADSB- they will be given traffic information and use 1930s radio procedures to keep apart .

The very high costs of fitment will further damage the australian GA industry.

I will attempt to stop this happening by any legal and moral way available.

[Ultralights]

So, if your not ADSB compliant, and heading for bankstown, does the new rules from Feb next year mean you cannot name YSSY as and Alternate from then?

[TBM-Legend]

Dick, check Gerard's real aviation qualifications..

CEO of Royal Qld Aero Club, CEO of Archerfield Airport neither of which were in the YBAF users a scintillating success. Then to CASA.....not a pilot/engineer but a university bred type..

[Dick Smith]

TBM I bet Gerard is a really decent bloke that has found himself part of a system that he has never experienced before.

He would have had the decision to answer my letter taken from him.

They have a weak minister who they know will not stand by them if they make changes. And standing out as an individual would be a career ending move.

Just imagine the low morale of working for the organisation. If you stood up as an individual for what was right you would likely be destroyed by the group think of the worker collective.

Let's hope it can be fixed before lives are lost.

[Lookleft]

You say I should talk to the man in charge. Nearly two years ago I spoke to the minister about the flawed ADSB RIS process.

I would suggest that the Minister is not the man in charge and many would suggest that Skidmore is not either but he is the person who signed the letter that you received.

When I first met Mr Skidmore I explained that the ADSB RIS appeared to be a flawed document and the very credibility of CASA as an ethical organisation was at risk because of this.

I think there are many reasons why the credibility of CASA as an ethical organisation has gone the way of the dinosaurs e.g. Lockhart River, Pelair, McCormick.

Your specific question was, is Skidmore similar to McCormick? As the man invited you to contact him if you have a problem and he has stated that he wants to listen to industry then I would say he is not. Can he unilaterally wind back the clock on ADS-B? Probably not but as you have said:

I will attempt to stop this happening by any legal and moral way available.

You are probably one of the few individuals in the aviation industry with deep enough pockets and a profile who can do this. As I stated before I think the horse has bolted on this issue, just don't rely on public backing because they wouldn't have a clue. Good Luck

[Sunfish]

I would like to make a number of observations in the interests of generating more light than heat.

Firstly Mr. Smith, I saw you at the Ark with the sceptic and Doug some years ago but avoided talking to you since you had a heap of science minded ankle biters in tow. I appreciate what you are trying to do and the logic that underpins it even though I am a mere PPL etc. etc.

Secondly. I am afraid you have fallen, like me, into the error when dealing with public servants of calling a spade a spade. This of course begs the question of whether CASA is public service or a statutory corporation and they jump from one side to the other when it suits them.

The answer you got was what passes for the classic response to a personal attack on a public servant. A public servant has no power. His career rests on his file and there had better be no blemishes.

The response you got is exactly what I would expect from an alleged attack on the integrity of a public servant. I say "alleged" because of the chameleon like behaviour of CASA - one minute dedicated limp wrested public servants merely giving effect to Government policy, the next independent leaders of the aviation safety movement on a mission from God.

To sum it up you wrote in the tone of voice to the "leader" and they quickly adopted the supine public servant role and that required Skidmores response.

One should have then asked the obvious question: If CASA are merely public servants worthy of AVM Skidmores spirited defence, then where did the Ukase regarding fitment of ADS=B come from? Obviously not the aforementioned Mr. Campbell, he is just by his own admission a clerical functionary and you should not have abused him.

This is the game CASA are very good at playing: Fearless Regulators bandleaders of the Safety crusade one minute and merely simple public servants doing the Governments will, the next.

P.S. Not that it would have produced a better result, the safest method of querying such decisions is to "fail to understand" which leaves room for face saving, but I'm sure you know that.

P.P.S. I would assume that any letter coming to CASA from Dick Smith would automatically be handled with Asbestos gloves. The only way out of this mess is via politics in my opinion. Aviation is just too hard for politicians unless they have their noses shoved in it.

[Dick Smith]

Look left. What's all this sic stuff. To embarrass me? Don't worry it won't work!

There are now thousands in the industry who are rightly angry -that's who I will use. Fortunately we are still a free country and a form of democracy.

[Sunfish]

P.S "N" registration is starting to look attractive, even with the costs of getting American LAME's to do the maintenance

[Lookleft]

I am not sure why you thought that I was trying to embarrass you as the quotes were verbatim

The anger of the constituents does not guarantee an army of more than one. Remember the Caravan to Canberra? They also considered that they were being supported by thousands of righteously angry aviators. As you said, it is still a free and democratic country so all the best with your crusade.

[Checkboard]

The Latin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin) adverb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverb) sic ("thus"; in full: sic erat scriptum, "thus was it written")[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic#cite_note-1) inserted immediately after a quoted word or passage, indicates that the quoted matter has been transcribed exactly as found in the source text, complete with any erroneous or archaic spelling, surprising assertion, faulty reasoning, or other matter that might otherwise be taken as an error of transcription.Sic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic)

[Up-into-the-air]

Thanks Lookie-left!!

I was not going to raise this again, with the last thread I commenced being shut down - [Lockhart River 10 years on] (http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/560749-lockhart-river-10-years.html).

Probably trod on a couple of self-interested toes!!

The cairns to canberra caravan to canberra [can'tberra], was always, as indicated on the original closed and then removed threads, a mission that had some particular ideals.

These were expressed in a series of articles. (http://vocasupport.com/the-caravan-to-canberra-from-cairns/)

The caravan sought to raise issues with individuals, and not expose those [or other] people to further damage or potential damage, as happened on pprune where the greatest threat to free speech that I have seen in a while occurred during that 2-week journey. (http://vocasupport.com/interference-in-freedom-of-speech-cairns-to-canberra-caravan/)

The caravaner's had the audacity to put their "heads-up above the parapet' and there was horrific incoming fire from the regulator, supported by those on pprune, who could only be called "casa-compliant".

The question is - whose rice-bowl were they protecting and why??.

What do they have to hide??

The mission met it's objectives (http://vocasupport.com/cairns-to-canberra-caravan-reaches-the-capital-for-meetings/) and in fact has exposed more issues that should have been public much earlier.

The Senators have further information.

(http://vocasupport.com/cairns-to-canberra-anti-corruption-caravan-to-attend-senate-estimates/)These issues are being carefully evaluated (http://vocasupport.com/the-anti-corruption-caravan-meets-the-senators-with-a-manifest-of-problems/)and that such as the Lockhart River travesty, being subject to further new and un-exposed information.

[Dick Smith]

The industry may be interested in the other letter of 31 August 2010 from John McCormick which Mr Skidmore refers to in my first post. Here is an extract from that letter from Mr McCormick…

Dear Mr Smith

I refer to your letter of 19 August 2010 addressed to Peter Cromarty. I have advised Peter to not reply to your letter, but do so here myself instead.

The language and tone of your letter is absolutely unacceptable. Peter Cromarty is a highly qualified, highly experienced and highly principled member of my senior executive team. Neither he, nor any other CASA manager or staff member, should be written to in this manner.

John McCormick’s letter then goes on to say,

I believe you owe Peter an apology, and I trust one will be forthcoming.

My letter to Peter Cromarty that John McCormick is referring to was about an issue I had been discussing with Peter Cromarty over a number of years. It was a very important issue where I had considered that he had not treated various issues in a fair way. I also wanted a number of serious questions answered.

After receiving John McCormick’s letter, I phoned Peter Cromarty and apologised to him; he accepted my apology. However, did this elicit any responses to my complaints? Of course not! I am sure Peter Cromarty knew he would be protected by “the system” and that even though I had rung and apologised there was simply no way he was going to address any issues that he didn’t want to address. He knew the system would protect him – and it did.

I believe the morale in CASA must be incredibly low. When you work for an organisation which basically follows corrupt practices and lacks ethics, this is what happens. I just wonder how many years it will be before this is “cleaned out”. The Australian aviation industry doesn’t deserve this.

By the way, it is interesting to note the almost identical wording of John McCormick’s letter, written some five years ago, to Mark Skidmore’s letter written only a few weeks ago as reproduced in my first post, viz…

Dear Mr Smith

I refer to your letter of 30 March 2015 to Gerard Campbell. I have advised Gerard to not reply to your letter, but that I would do so here.

I found the language and tone of your letter unacceptable. Gerard Campbell is a highly qualified, highly experienced and highly principled member of my senior executive team. Neither he, nor any other CASA manager or staff member, should be written to in this manner...

Mark Skidmore AM

Is this a coincidence? Or is it possible that the position of Director of Aviation Safety could actually be made redundant seeing that correspondence from the Director appears to be automatically computer generated?

[Squawk7700]

That is a clever find Dick and quite embarrassing for them.

Does the Director have a Personal Assistant? (I assume so) it would seem highly probable that a PA or similar wrote this. If that is the case, you could expect to receive more such replies. He probably said to his PA, "draft something up to get this guy off our back" and didn't check what they wrote you last time.

[Lookleft]

Actually your reprinted letter from McCormick goes to the heart of your original question Dick: Is Mr Skidmore similar to Mr McCormick?

The wording of the replies you received are almost identical so on first glance the answer would be yes. For those prepared to take a closer look Mr Skidmore then goes on to write that you should approach him directly if you have a complaint about his staff whereas McCormick replies (according to what you have posted)

I believe you owe Peter an apology, and I trust one will be forthcoming.

A significant difference in style and response. McCormick does not want to listen but Skidmore does. So the answer to your original question, which has been lost in the discussion about ADS-B, is no he is not similar to McCormick.

Can you keep us posted on how your discussions on ADS-B, face to face with Mr Skidmore, go please.

[yr right]

What's offensive is that skids in your underpants has even had this sent to dick. Let's face it who has not been offended by someone from Casa. If he so offended and has had it passed onto skidy my suggestion is we all send a letter to a Casa official and all wait for a return letter from skidy.
I have seen a letter from him on another matter taking responsibility for something which at this time I cannot release. But if the ****e hits the fan it will be.
I thinly skidy is in for a busy time.
It's also time to stop this dictatorship and get back to relatety.

[josephfeatherweight]

Bit early in the day to be smashing back the cans, isn't it yr right?

[yr right]

Bit early in the day to be smashing back the cans, isn't it yr right?

I'm I don't drink for a start. And no not really. A life time of working in the industry and it no better than when I started

[josephfeatherweight]

I'm I don't drink for a start. And no not really. A life time of working in the industry and it no better than when I started

I rest my case...

[YPJT]

I rest my case...
haha Snap!:D

The old saying of keeping one's friends close but enemies closer could work in our favour. Childish comments aimed at the director are not the way to go IMHO.

[yr right]

Wow another legend in your own bath time. What can I say.