Dick Smith sightings and other atmospheric phenomena
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Opposition to Anderson: Rein in Smith
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1204993.htm
MARK COLVIN: The Opposition is calling on the Federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, to rein in the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
Earlier today, Dick Smith described an incident over Canberra involving a Qantas jet in July as the most serious near accident in Australia's recent history.
There's an official investigation into the incident, but Mr Smith has pre-empted it. In a remarkable attack on Australia's investigators, Mr Smith has called for America's transport investigator to examine the incident.
Qantas says the pilots responded to the situation correctly, and it says that at no stage were the passengers on board QF flight 720 in any danger.
Alison Caldwell reports.
ALISON CALDWELL: This is as much a story about politics and revenge as it's a story about Australia's system of air safety. It involves a Qantas jet, the Transport Safety Bureau, and the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
DICK SMITH: It was just by the look of it sheer luck or the ground proximity warning system, that stopped 150 people from being killed.
ALISON CALDWELL: On July 24th, Qantas flight 720 from Perth went into a routine holding pattern near Canberra shortly before five o'clock in the morning.
Carrying 155 passengers, the Boeing 737 was ahead of schedule. What happened next, according to some commentators, amounted to a dramatic near miss whereby the Qantas jet came within seconds of crashing into the Mount Tinderry Range south of Canberra.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has released its preliminary report into the incident. It says that while waiting to land at Canberra Airport, the co-pilot incorrectly entered information into the in-flight computer.
That error put the plane further south than it should have been over the Tinderry Range. Approximately 600 feet over the mountain range, the plane's warning system issued a low level alert, the pilots responded with the plane climbing a further 700 feet, before it eventually landed safely.
Qantas says its pilots responded correctly, and that at no stage were the passengers in any danger.
Chief Pilot, Captain Chris Manning.
(to Chris Manning) Was there a dramatic near miss involving a Qantas jet over Canberra in late July?
CHRIS MANNING: No, definitely not. The ATSB preliminary report released this afternoon certainly indicates that that was not the case at all.
Our ground proximity warning system went into a very low alert stage. The crew responded to the alert and the passengers, I gather, on board did not notice anything happening, certainly we haven't been told about it, and the aircraft then landed safely.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Transport Spokesman is Martin Ferguson. He's read the Bureau's preliminary report.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Qantas plane was never in serious danger, and nor were any of the passengers.
ALISON CALDWELL: Earlier today the incident over Canberra was described by Dick Smith as the most serious near accident Australia has had in nearly 30 years.
Dick Smith was once the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority. More recently he was the architect of the Federal Government's controversial airspace reforms - reforms which are now being wound back in the interests of air safety.
Dick Smith didn't return PM's calls today, but he did speak to Canberra radio station 2CC about the Qantas incident.
DICK SMITH: Everyone listening in Canberra, you will never get the facts, because the ATSB is part of a mates network. For some reason, everyone kowtows to Qantas. They think Qantas is the old government owned airline that puts safety in front of profit. It doesn't.
ALISON CALDWELL: As the Chairman of the Federal Government's Airspace Reform Committee, for most of this year Dick Smith has kept a reasonably low profile on the issue of Australia's air safety.
In recent weeks, however, Dick Smith appears to have returned to centre stage when it comes to air safety. Earlier this week he announced that he was taking Air Services Australia to court in an effort to stop the reversal of his airspace reforms.
Speaking before the release of the Bureau's preliminary report into the Canberra incident, Dick Smith was calling for America's air safety investigator to examine the incident.
DICK SMITH: This has to be a wake up call, but I have a terrible feeling that we really have to get the National Transport Safety Board of America in to look at this, because I don't think the facts will ever come out.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Dick Smith's accusations against Qantas and the ATSB are about Dick Smith throwing his weight around yet again, and in doing so unnecessarily worrying the travelling public.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Martin Ferguson says Transport Minister, John Anderson, needs to rein in Dick Smith.
MARTIN FERGUSON: It's about time that Dick Smith pulled his head in and enabled professional organisations such as Air Service Australia and the ATSB to do their job in a professional and ethical way.
Aviation safety is of paramount importance. I nail those responsibilities fairly to the mast of John Anderson and the Prime Minister, 'cause they were the ones who, as a result of the deal at the last Federal election, brought Dick Smith back into aviation reform.
MARK COLVIN: Labor's Transport Spokesman, Martin Ferguson, ending Alison Caldwell's report.
MARK COLVIN: The Opposition is calling on the Federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, to rein in the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
Earlier today, Dick Smith described an incident over Canberra involving a Qantas jet in July as the most serious near accident in Australia's recent history.
There's an official investigation into the incident, but Mr Smith has pre-empted it. In a remarkable attack on Australia's investigators, Mr Smith has called for America's transport investigator to examine the incident.
Qantas says the pilots responded to the situation correctly, and it says that at no stage were the passengers on board QF flight 720 in any danger.
Alison Caldwell reports.
ALISON CALDWELL: This is as much a story about politics and revenge as it's a story about Australia's system of air safety. It involves a Qantas jet, the Transport Safety Bureau, and the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
DICK SMITH: It was just by the look of it sheer luck or the ground proximity warning system, that stopped 150 people from being killed.
ALISON CALDWELL: On July 24th, Qantas flight 720 from Perth went into a routine holding pattern near Canberra shortly before five o'clock in the morning.
Carrying 155 passengers, the Boeing 737 was ahead of schedule. What happened next, according to some commentators, amounted to a dramatic near miss whereby the Qantas jet came within seconds of crashing into the Mount Tinderry Range south of Canberra.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has released its preliminary report into the incident. It says that while waiting to land at Canberra Airport, the co-pilot incorrectly entered information into the in-flight computer.
That error put the plane further south than it should have been over the Tinderry Range. Approximately 600 feet over the mountain range, the plane's warning system issued a low level alert, the pilots responded with the plane climbing a further 700 feet, before it eventually landed safely.
Qantas says its pilots responded correctly, and that at no stage were the passengers in any danger.
Chief Pilot, Captain Chris Manning.
(to Chris Manning) Was there a dramatic near miss involving a Qantas jet over Canberra in late July?
CHRIS MANNING: No, definitely not. The ATSB preliminary report released this afternoon certainly indicates that that was not the case at all.
Our ground proximity warning system went into a very low alert stage. The crew responded to the alert and the passengers, I gather, on board did not notice anything happening, certainly we haven't been told about it, and the aircraft then landed safely.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Transport Spokesman is Martin Ferguson. He's read the Bureau's preliminary report.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Qantas plane was never in serious danger, and nor were any of the passengers.
ALISON CALDWELL: Earlier today the incident over Canberra was described by Dick Smith as the most serious near accident Australia has had in nearly 30 years.
Dick Smith was once the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority. More recently he was the architect of the Federal Government's controversial airspace reforms - reforms which are now being wound back in the interests of air safety.
Dick Smith didn't return PM's calls today, but he did speak to Canberra radio station 2CC about the Qantas incident.
DICK SMITH: Everyone listening in Canberra, you will never get the facts, because the ATSB is part of a mates network. For some reason, everyone kowtows to Qantas. They think Qantas is the old government owned airline that puts safety in front of profit. It doesn't.
ALISON CALDWELL: As the Chairman of the Federal Government's Airspace Reform Committee, for most of this year Dick Smith has kept a reasonably low profile on the issue of Australia's air safety.
In recent weeks, however, Dick Smith appears to have returned to centre stage when it comes to air safety. Earlier this week he announced that he was taking Air Services Australia to court in an effort to stop the reversal of his airspace reforms.
Speaking before the release of the Bureau's preliminary report into the Canberra incident, Dick Smith was calling for America's air safety investigator to examine the incident.
DICK SMITH: This has to be a wake up call, but I have a terrible feeling that we really have to get the National Transport Safety Board of America in to look at this, because I don't think the facts will ever come out.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Dick Smith's accusations against Qantas and the ATSB are about Dick Smith throwing his weight around yet again, and in doing so unnecessarily worrying the travelling public.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Martin Ferguson says Transport Minister, John Anderson, needs to rein in Dick Smith.
MARTIN FERGUSON: It's about time that Dick Smith pulled his head in and enabled professional organisations such as Air Service Australia and the ATSB to do their job in a professional and ethical way.
Aviation safety is of paramount importance. I nail those responsibilities fairly to the mast of John Anderson and the Prime Minister, 'cause they were the ones who, as a result of the deal at the last Federal election, brought Dick Smith back into aviation reform.
MARK COLVIN: Labor's Transport Spokesman, Martin Ferguson, ending Alison Caldwell's report.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FEDERAL COURT ACTION
1 Dick Smith, in his personal capacity, has commenced proceedings in the Federal Court, NSW District Registry against AA (the Application). Mr Smith has also filed a notice of motion in the Application (the Notice of Motion).
2 The Application seeks to review the decision, which is defined at its broadest to include the decision "to implement "Option 3" in relation to the National Airspace System, to be effective from 25 November 2004" (the Decision). In the Application, Smith seeks the following orders:
• A declaration that the Decision is void and of no effect.
• An order or, alternatively, an injunction restraining the Respondent from acting upon, or giving effect to, or proceeding further on the basis of the Decision.
• A writ of certiorari directed to the Respondent removing the Decision into the Court so that the Decision may be quashed.
• An order that the Respondent pay the Applicant's costs.
• Such further or other order as the Court deems fit.
3 The grounds of the Application are:
• AA failed to take into account one or more relevant considerations which it was bound to take into account in exercising its powers and functions under Sections 8 and 11 of the Air Services Act (specifically, Section 9, materials provided to AA by CASA under cover of its letter dated 26 August 2004, an offer of a briefing from Professor O'Neill, Government Policy, the report of Jeff Griffith dated 26 August 2004, and submissions and materials provided to AA by Smith)
• AA failed to comply with procedures required by law (specifically, that AA's consultation process was "so seriously inadequate and deficient as not to constitute consultation"; and
• The making of the Decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have made the Decision in the circumstances in which it was made.
4 No interim injunction or other relief has been sought by Smith pending the hearing of the Application.
5 The Notice of Motion seeks an order that the hearing of the Application be expedited. In support of this Notice of Motion, Smith has served an affidavit, in which he seeks to convince the court that the matter should be expedited, primarily on the basis that he has "grave" concerns about the safety implications of the Decision, and that the Ministerial Directions do not prevent AA from implementing Option 3 prior to installing approach radar control service in the requisite airspace.
6 The Notice of Motion was heard by the Court on Tuesday 21 September 2004, at 10.15am. The Court has allocated the date of 1 November for the start of the hearing of the Application.
1 Dick Smith, in his personal capacity, has commenced proceedings in the Federal Court, NSW District Registry against AA (the Application). Mr Smith has also filed a notice of motion in the Application (the Notice of Motion).
2 The Application seeks to review the decision, which is defined at its broadest to include the decision "to implement "Option 3" in relation to the National Airspace System, to be effective from 25 November 2004" (the Decision). In the Application, Smith seeks the following orders:
• A declaration that the Decision is void and of no effect.
• An order or, alternatively, an injunction restraining the Respondent from acting upon, or giving effect to, or proceeding further on the basis of the Decision.
• A writ of certiorari directed to the Respondent removing the Decision into the Court so that the Decision may be quashed.
• An order that the Respondent pay the Applicant's costs.
• Such further or other order as the Court deems fit.
3 The grounds of the Application are:
• AA failed to take into account one or more relevant considerations which it was bound to take into account in exercising its powers and functions under Sections 8 and 11 of the Air Services Act (specifically, Section 9, materials provided to AA by CASA under cover of its letter dated 26 August 2004, an offer of a briefing from Professor O'Neill, Government Policy, the report of Jeff Griffith dated 26 August 2004, and submissions and materials provided to AA by Smith)
• AA failed to comply with procedures required by law (specifically, that AA's consultation process was "so seriously inadequate and deficient as not to constitute consultation"; and
• The making of the Decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have made the Decision in the circumstances in which it was made.
4 No interim injunction or other relief has been sought by Smith pending the hearing of the Application.
5 The Notice of Motion seeks an order that the hearing of the Application be expedited. In support of this Notice of Motion, Smith has served an affidavit, in which he seeks to convince the court that the matter should be expedited, primarily on the basis that he has "grave" concerns about the safety implications of the Decision, and that the Ministerial Directions do not prevent AA from implementing Option 3 prior to installing approach radar control service in the requisite airspace.
6 The Notice of Motion was heard by the Court on Tuesday 21 September 2004, at 10.15am. The Court has allocated the date of 1 November for the start of the hearing of the Application.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smith finally loses it
Will he now completely self destruct?
We can only hope.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1204993.htm
MARK COLVIN: The Opposition is calling on the Federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, to rein in the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
Earlier today, Dick Smith described an incident over Canberra involving a Qantas jet in July as the most serious near accident in Australia's recent history.
There's an official investigation into the incident, but Mr Smith has pre-empted it. In a remarkable attack on Australia's investigators, Mr Smith has called for America's transport investigator to examine the incident.
Qantas says the pilots responded to the situation correctly, and it says that at no stage were the passengers on board QF flight 720 in any danger.
Alison Caldwell reports.
ALISON CALDWELL: This is as much a story about politics and revenge as it's a story about Australia's system of air safety. It involves a Qantas jet, the Transport Safety Bureau, and the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
DICK SMITH: It was just by the look of it sheer luck or the ground proximity warning system, that stopped 150 people from being killed.
ALISON CALDWELL: On July 24th, Qantas flight 720 from Perth went into a routine holding pattern near Canberra shortly before five o'clock in the morning.
Carrying 155 passengers, the Boeing 737 was ahead of schedule. What happened next, according to some commentators, amounted to a dramatic near miss whereby the Qantas jet came within seconds of crashing into the Mount Tinderry Range south of Canberra.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has released its preliminary report into the incident. It says that while waiting to land at Canberra Airport, the co-pilot incorrectly entered information into the in-flight computer.
That error put the plane further south than it should have been over the Tinderry Range. Approximately 600 feet over the mountain range, the plane's warning system issued a low level alert, the pilots responded with the plane climbing a further 700 feet, before it eventually landed safely.
Qantas says its pilots responded correctly, and that at no stage were the passengers in any danger.
Chief Pilot, Captain Chris Manning.
(to Chris Manning) Was there a dramatic near miss involving a Qantas jet over Canberra in late July?
CHRIS MANNING: No, definitely not. The ATSB preliminary report released this afternoon certainly indicates that that was not the case at all.
Our ground proximity warning system went into a very low alert stage. The crew responded to the alert and the passengers, I gather, on board did not notice anything happening, certainly we haven't been told about it, and the aircraft then landed safely.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Transport Spokesman is Martin Ferguson. He's read the Bureau's preliminary report.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Qantas plane was never in serious danger, and nor were any of the passengers.
ALISON CALDWELL: Earlier today the incident over Canberra was described by Dick Smith as the most serious near accident Australia has had in nearly 30 years.
Dick Smith was once the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority. More recently he was the architect of the Federal Government's controversial airspace reforms - reforms which are now being wound back in the interests of air safety.
Dick Smith didn't return PM's calls today, but he did speak to Canberra radio station 2CC about the Qantas incident.
DICK SMITH: Everyone listening in Canberra, you will never get the facts, because the ATSB is part of a mates network. For some reason, everyone kowtows to Qantas. They think Qantas is the old government owned airline that puts safety in front of profit. It doesn't.
ALISON CALDWELL: As the Chairman of the Federal Government's Airspace Reform Committee, for most of this year Dick Smith has kept a reasonably low profile on the issue of Australia's air safety.
In recent weeks, however, Dick Smith appears to have returned to centre stage when it comes to air safety. Earlier this week he announced that he was taking Air Services Australia to court in an effort to stop the reversal of his airspace reforms.
Speaking before the release of the Bureau's preliminary report into the Canberra incident, Dick Smith was calling for America's air safety investigator to examine the incident.
DICK SMITH: This has to be a wake up call, but I have a terrible feeling that we really have to get the National Transport Safety Board of America in to look at this, because I don't think the facts will ever come out.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Dick Smith's accusations against Qantas and the ATSB are about Dick Smith throwing his weight around yet again, and in doing so unnecessarily worrying the travelling public.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Martin Ferguson says Transport Minister, John Anderson, needs to rein in Dick Smith.
MARTIN FERGUSON: It's about time that Dick Smith pulled his head in and enabled professional organisations such as Air Service Australia and the ATSB to do their job in a professional and ethical way.
Aviation safety is of paramount importance. I nail those responsibilities fairly to the mast of John Anderson and the Prime Minister, 'cause they were the ones who, as a result of the deal at the last Federal election, brought Dick Smith back into aviation reform.
MARK COLVIN: Labor's Transport Spokesman, Martin Ferguson, ending Alison Caldwell's report
We can only hope.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1204993.htm
MARK COLVIN: The Opposition is calling on the Federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, to rein in the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
Earlier today, Dick Smith described an incident over Canberra involving a Qantas jet in July as the most serious near accident in Australia's recent history.
There's an official investigation into the incident, but Mr Smith has pre-empted it. In a remarkable attack on Australia's investigators, Mr Smith has called for America's transport investigator to examine the incident.
Qantas says the pilots responded to the situation correctly, and it says that at no stage were the passengers on board QF flight 720 in any danger.
Alison Caldwell reports.
ALISON CALDWELL: This is as much a story about politics and revenge as it's a story about Australia's system of air safety. It involves a Qantas jet, the Transport Safety Bureau, and the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, Dick Smith.
DICK SMITH: It was just by the look of it sheer luck or the ground proximity warning system, that stopped 150 people from being killed.
ALISON CALDWELL: On July 24th, Qantas flight 720 from Perth went into a routine holding pattern near Canberra shortly before five o'clock in the morning.
Carrying 155 passengers, the Boeing 737 was ahead of schedule. What happened next, according to some commentators, amounted to a dramatic near miss whereby the Qantas jet came within seconds of crashing into the Mount Tinderry Range south of Canberra.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has released its preliminary report into the incident. It says that while waiting to land at Canberra Airport, the co-pilot incorrectly entered information into the in-flight computer.
That error put the plane further south than it should have been over the Tinderry Range. Approximately 600 feet over the mountain range, the plane's warning system issued a low level alert, the pilots responded with the plane climbing a further 700 feet, before it eventually landed safely.
Qantas says its pilots responded correctly, and that at no stage were the passengers in any danger.
Chief Pilot, Captain Chris Manning.
(to Chris Manning) Was there a dramatic near miss involving a Qantas jet over Canberra in late July?
CHRIS MANNING: No, definitely not. The ATSB preliminary report released this afternoon certainly indicates that that was not the case at all.
Our ground proximity warning system went into a very low alert stage. The crew responded to the alert and the passengers, I gather, on board did not notice anything happening, certainly we haven't been told about it, and the aircraft then landed safely.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Transport Spokesman is Martin Ferguson. He's read the Bureau's preliminary report.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Qantas plane was never in serious danger, and nor were any of the passengers.
ALISON CALDWELL: Earlier today the incident over Canberra was described by Dick Smith as the most serious near accident Australia has had in nearly 30 years.
Dick Smith was once the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority. More recently he was the architect of the Federal Government's controversial airspace reforms - reforms which are now being wound back in the interests of air safety.
Dick Smith didn't return PM's calls today, but he did speak to Canberra radio station 2CC about the Qantas incident.
DICK SMITH: Everyone listening in Canberra, you will never get the facts, because the ATSB is part of a mates network. For some reason, everyone kowtows to Qantas. They think Qantas is the old government owned airline that puts safety in front of profit. It doesn't.
ALISON CALDWELL: As the Chairman of the Federal Government's Airspace Reform Committee, for most of this year Dick Smith has kept a reasonably low profile on the issue of Australia's air safety.
In recent weeks, however, Dick Smith appears to have returned to centre stage when it comes to air safety. Earlier this week he announced that he was taking Air Services Australia to court in an effort to stop the reversal of his airspace reforms.
Speaking before the release of the Bureau's preliminary report into the Canberra incident, Dick Smith was calling for America's air safety investigator to examine the incident.
DICK SMITH: This has to be a wake up call, but I have a terrible feeling that we really have to get the National Transport Safety Board of America in to look at this, because I don't think the facts will ever come out.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Dick Smith's accusations against Qantas and the ATSB are about Dick Smith throwing his weight around yet again, and in doing so unnecessarily worrying the travelling public.
ALISON CALDWELL: Labor's Martin Ferguson says Transport Minister, John Anderson, needs to rein in Dick Smith.
MARTIN FERGUSON: It's about time that Dick Smith pulled his head in and enabled professional organisations such as Air Service Australia and the ATSB to do their job in a professional and ethical way.
Aviation safety is of paramount importance. I nail those responsibilities fairly to the mast of John Anderson and the Prime Minister, 'cause they were the ones who, as a result of the deal at the last Federal election, brought Dick Smith back into aviation reform.
MARK COLVIN: Labor's Transport Spokesman, Martin Ferguson, ending Alison Caldwell's report
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick Smith sightings and other atmospheric phenomena
To try and keep the Rumour and News relevant to all our users and allow the other topics unassociated with the NAS or Mr Smiths agenda some sunshine, we will for the moment and where we feel it is appropriate merge all the current threads on this issue into this one.
It makes it esasier for us and you to not have to thread hop to get the goss.
Where there is a new issue or subject related we will accept a new thread on it.
Please think hard about what and where you post and/or start a
new thread on this subject.
If you have any doubts PM us and we promise a fast turnaround.
Furthermore any post or thread containing a personal reference that is not directly related to the issue or simply a statement of dislike.
For example:
does not contribute to the debate or discussion on the issue one jot or tittle. NB; derogatory and innapropriate language will continue to be retain a very risk of banning,
However;
here add reasoned and logically thought out response.
It will save us a lot of editing and you from being added to our "persons of interest" list
We have in the last several days taken admnistrative action against a largish number of persons for serial posts containing little but personal harrasment, including one that may yet attract a legal response from the person directly named.
Our advice to that person would be to "save your money" he/she/they have already by their own behaviour here demonstrated their worth.
As a reminder and for the time being we will in a separate thread be posting a copy of the "Ten Thingies" should you need to reset your posting rule defaults.
It makes it esasier for us and you to not have to thread hop to get the goss.
Where there is a new issue or subject related we will accept a new thread on it.
Please think hard about what and where you post and/or start a
new thread on this subject.
If you have any doubts PM us and we promise a fast turnaround.
Furthermore any post or thread containing a personal reference that is not directly related to the issue or simply a statement of dislike.
For example:
I think (insert least favourite person here) is a (insert appropriate favourite term of dislike here).
However;
I think (insert least favourite person here) is (insert appropriate favourite term of dissension here), because
It will save us a lot of editing and you from being added to our "persons of interest" list
We have in the last several days taken admnistrative action against a largish number of persons for serial posts containing little but personal harrasment, including one that may yet attract a legal response from the person directly named.
Our advice to that person would be to "save your money" he/she/they have already by their own behaviour here demonstrated their worth.
As a reminder and for the time being we will in a separate thread be posting a copy of the "Ten Thingies" should you need to reset your posting rule defaults.
Last edited by Woomera; 23rd Sep 2004 at 06:50.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: WX at our destination is 32 deg with some bkn cld, but we'll try to have them fixed before we arrive
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA failed to comply with procedures required by law (specifically, that AA's consultation process was "so seriously inadequate and deficient as not to constitute consultation";
One only has to look at the Senate Estimates Committee transcript reviewing the implementation.
It seems that Dick wants to have his cake and eat it too.
I love this...
Make sure you wear your best Terry Towelling hat! 
A great pity that professional pilots and ATCOs could not turn up to show support for AsA. That is of course because they are all busy moving Australians safely around the country and doing it efficiently (mostly) and professionally.
Dick Smith may finally be getting enough rope.
"AOPA suggests that you dress so that you are identified as a pilot"
A great pity that professional pilots and ATCOs could not turn up to show support for AsA. That is of course because they are all busy moving Australians safely around the country and doing it efficiently (mostly) and professionally.
Dick Smith may finally be getting enough rope.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, Mr. Karrank.
Thanks Karrank for your amusing post.
In this trying time in which all of AsA is galvanised against the common enemy (Dick), you bring humour.
Thank you.
In this trying time in which all of AsA is galvanised against the common enemy (Dick), you bring humour.
Thank you.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm no lawyer, but from my reading of the proceedings Dick is doing his best to stop the rollback until Anderson has come through the election. Once Anderson has his feet on solid ground again, a ministerial decision can be made, or encouraged, that benefits Dick and he will drop any further court action.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: WX at our destination is 32 deg with some bkn cld, but we'll try to have them fixed before we arrive
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lodown
I'm not sure that is correct.
If that was the case then Dick is taking an expensive punt on Howard winning the election - Howard is by no means home and hosed.
I think Dick is more interested in beating the 25 Nov date. The election just happens to intervene.
YCKT
I think that the issue Dick has is that ASA did not consider some reports obtained by CASA in arriving at its decision to wind back NAS.
I'm not sure that is correct.
If that was the case then Dick is taking an expensive punt on Howard winning the election - Howard is by no means home and hosed.
I think Dick is more interested in beating the 25 Nov date. The election just happens to intervene.
YCKT
I think that the issue Dick has is that ASA did not consider some reports obtained by CASA in arriving at its decision to wind back NAS.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: effenq
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK
I presume then that a Ministerial Directive to install RADAR before upgrading any airspace to C was simply intended to make it too expensive to do???
Silly politics indeed!!!
So what happens if the Liberals are not reelected, does an Anderson directive bind an ALP Minister????
Interesting.
I presume then that a Ministerial Directive to install RADAR before upgrading any airspace to C was simply intended to make it too expensive to do???
Silly politics indeed!!!
So what happens if the Liberals are not reelected, does an Anderson directive bind an ALP Minister????
Interesting.
In relation to my court case, I explain as follows.
I am interested in improving aviation safety in Australia. My family and relatives fly regularly by airline in Australia. I want them (and other Australians) to benefit from world’s best practice in airspace design.
If safety dollars are misallocated anywhere, safety is reduced – this is obvious. An airspace regulator which claims that Class C airspace is required above 4,500’ over Albury (where there are 2.5% of the collision pairs) but believes that Class G airspace is satisfactory below 4,500’ at Ayers Rock (where there are 97.5% of the collision pairs and up to 19 jet movements per day) clearly shows that safety resources are being misallocated and it has lost the plot.
My vision for aviation reform is to follow expert advice using scientific data so that the ICAO categories are allocated commensurate with risk.
My vision for NAS is that I believe it is probably the best system in the world, which objectively allocates resources commensurate with risk. The US NAS uses a scientific formula to move from Class G airspace to Class A. There are no anomalies in the system. As a higher risk situation becomes apparent, a higher category of airspace is allocated.
The US NAS also protects air traffic controllers and pilots as it makes it quite clear where responsibility lies. I support this as an important part of any airspace design that is to be used by professional aviators.
In supporting NAS I am completely open. I put my own name behind everything I say, I expose myself to media criticism, and publish my phone numbers so people can phone me to discuss the issues.
Now let’s look at my opponents who support the wind back (LLAMP by stealth). They are all either cowards, or do not have a belief in their conviction. Look at the people who post on PPRuNe who are pushing for the wind back. Not one will put their name to their “beliefs”. Any objective reader would surmise that there is a hidden agenda here – it’s against change.
People who support NAS (such as myself, Ron Bertram, Aminta Hennessy, Bill Pike, Bill Hamilton, Kevin Gale, Boyd Munro and others) put their names to their beliefs. People who support the wind back such as DirtyPierre, Four Seven Eleven and Voices of Reason hide under pseudonyms. Whilst they maintain that Class C airspace without radar is necessary above Albury (because that is what we once had) they make no comment about the fact that we have high capacity jets operating in Class G airspace in the terminal area at Avalon, Ayers Rock and Broome – something which is not approved for safety reasons in other leading aviation countries.
For the wind back (LLAMP by stealth) crowd to win, they will need to get a strong leader who believes in his or her convictions and does not hide behind anonymity. Surely that is commonsense.
I am interested in improving aviation safety in Australia. My family and relatives fly regularly by airline in Australia. I want them (and other Australians) to benefit from world’s best practice in airspace design.
If safety dollars are misallocated anywhere, safety is reduced – this is obvious. An airspace regulator which claims that Class C airspace is required above 4,500’ over Albury (where there are 2.5% of the collision pairs) but believes that Class G airspace is satisfactory below 4,500’ at Ayers Rock (where there are 97.5% of the collision pairs and up to 19 jet movements per day) clearly shows that safety resources are being misallocated and it has lost the plot.
My vision for aviation reform is to follow expert advice using scientific data so that the ICAO categories are allocated commensurate with risk.
My vision for NAS is that I believe it is probably the best system in the world, which objectively allocates resources commensurate with risk. The US NAS uses a scientific formula to move from Class G airspace to Class A. There are no anomalies in the system. As a higher risk situation becomes apparent, a higher category of airspace is allocated.
The US NAS also protects air traffic controllers and pilots as it makes it quite clear where responsibility lies. I support this as an important part of any airspace design that is to be used by professional aviators.
In supporting NAS I am completely open. I put my own name behind everything I say, I expose myself to media criticism, and publish my phone numbers so people can phone me to discuss the issues.
Now let’s look at my opponents who support the wind back (LLAMP by stealth). They are all either cowards, or do not have a belief in their conviction. Look at the people who post on PPRuNe who are pushing for the wind back. Not one will put their name to their “beliefs”. Any objective reader would surmise that there is a hidden agenda here – it’s against change.
People who support NAS (such as myself, Ron Bertram, Aminta Hennessy, Bill Pike, Bill Hamilton, Kevin Gale, Boyd Munro and others) put their names to their beliefs. People who support the wind back such as DirtyPierre, Four Seven Eleven and Voices of Reason hide under pseudonyms. Whilst they maintain that Class C airspace without radar is necessary above Albury (because that is what we once had) they make no comment about the fact that we have high capacity jets operating in Class G airspace in the terminal area at Avalon, Ayers Rock and Broome – something which is not approved for safety reasons in other leading aviation countries.
For the wind back (LLAMP by stealth) crowd to win, they will need to get a strong leader who believes in his or her convictions and does not hide behind anonymity. Surely that is commonsense.
Dick,
Your comment regarding the anonymity of those who post on this forum amazes me.
I quote verbatim from your website:
http://www.dicksmithflyer.com.au/Con...?ContentID=156
Care to explain?
AS
Your comment regarding the anonymity of those who post on this forum amazes me.
I quote verbatim from your website:
http://www.dicksmithflyer.com.au/Con...?ContentID=156
6/10/00 PPRuNe - hiding behind false names
Hiding behind false names
From time to time faxes are sent to me regarding a particular issue which appears on www.PPRuNe.com. I am also sent, from time to time, lists of the false names with their real name decodes – including the names of their employers. I’m not sure what I am supposed to do with this information, however I would like to make the following comment.
The fact that most aviators on PPRruNe (Professional Pilot Rumour Network) have to use a false name is an indictment of what is happening in Australian aviation. It is almost as if we live in Iraq or Yugoslavia where it is risky for a person to openly identify their views if they differ from that of authority or the Government.
It has been claimed that most of the PPRuNe contributors use false names because they are cowards. I don’t agree. These pilots have my sympathy as I understand their careers could be jeopardised if they identified themselves. I do not wish to know their true identities and I’m not sure that it’s constructive to distribute lists of who they are.
The way to solve the problem is to develop an aviation environment where people can openly tell the truth about what they believe using their own names.
I am fortunate as I can openly express my genuine beliefs and do not have to use a false name. Ever since I became financially independent and self-employed I have been able to say what I believe openly and with a full acceptance of the required accountability and consequences.
I realise that some of the PPRuNe contributors use false names and contribute false information that is sometimes the opposite to their real beliefs. Whilst they might believe that taking the mickey out of some professional pilots is good clean fun, I disagree.
I don’t read PPRuNe. Firstly because I don’t have the patience to spend time on the internet. Secondly I would never know if contributors were telling the truth and stating their real beliefs when they are not game enough to identify themselves.
I realise that some of the contributors are probably genuine and would truly like to be open and truthful. The current aviation environment precludes this. For example, anyone who works for the ATSB, CASA or the airlines and openly criticised one of these organisations on PPRuNe would have a very limited career path.
Having said the above, if readers of this web site want to ask questions about a particular issue raised on PPRuNe, send a fax with the full information to Nicki in my office (on 02 9486 3482) and I will come up with a constructive answer.
I assure you that I will do everything possible to work towards a future where professional pilots in Australia no longer have to hide behind false names to state their honest beliefs. After all, that is what our fathers and forefathers fought for.
Entry last amended 6/10/00.
Hiding behind false names
From time to time faxes are sent to me regarding a particular issue which appears on www.PPRuNe.com. I am also sent, from time to time, lists of the false names with their real name decodes – including the names of their employers. I’m not sure what I am supposed to do with this information, however I would like to make the following comment.
The fact that most aviators on PPRruNe (Professional Pilot Rumour Network) have to use a false name is an indictment of what is happening in Australian aviation. It is almost as if we live in Iraq or Yugoslavia where it is risky for a person to openly identify their views if they differ from that of authority or the Government.
It has been claimed that most of the PPRuNe contributors use false names because they are cowards. I don’t agree. These pilots have my sympathy as I understand their careers could be jeopardised if they identified themselves. I do not wish to know their true identities and I’m not sure that it’s constructive to distribute lists of who they are.
The way to solve the problem is to develop an aviation environment where people can openly tell the truth about what they believe using their own names.
I am fortunate as I can openly express my genuine beliefs and do not have to use a false name. Ever since I became financially independent and self-employed I have been able to say what I believe openly and with a full acceptance of the required accountability and consequences.
I realise that some of the PPRuNe contributors use false names and contribute false information that is sometimes the opposite to their real beliefs. Whilst they might believe that taking the mickey out of some professional pilots is good clean fun, I disagree.
I don’t read PPRuNe. Firstly because I don’t have the patience to spend time on the internet. Secondly I would never know if contributors were telling the truth and stating their real beliefs when they are not game enough to identify themselves.
I realise that some of the contributors are probably genuine and would truly like to be open and truthful. The current aviation environment precludes this. For example, anyone who works for the ATSB, CASA or the airlines and openly criticised one of these organisations on PPRuNe would have a very limited career path.
Having said the above, if readers of this web site want to ask questions about a particular issue raised on PPRuNe, send a fax with the full information to Nicki in my office (on 02 9486 3482) and I will come up with a constructive answer.
I assure you that I will do everything possible to work towards a future where professional pilots in Australia no longer have to hide behind false names to state their honest beliefs. After all, that is what our fathers and forefathers fought for.
Entry last amended 6/10/00.
AS
Last edited by Atlas Shrugged; 24th Sep 2004 at 01:15.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the windback was already schedule to happen and doesn't neet 'to win'.
Anonymous 'names' aren't making the decisions - they are just offering comment - thats what always happened on PPrune, long before you brought infamy to it Dick, and started quoting it in letters to your mate Missing in Action Anderson, ASA board members, the media, and started sledging ATSB, AirServices, QANTAS, Virgin, CivilAir members and anyone who dare not shake their rattle in time with yours.
The decision has already been made. You didn't like it so your first course of action (before it was even made) was to direct Anderson to take what little regulatory responsibilities remained with ASA and give them to a new Airspace Directorate. Strangely enough to be headed by either Mike Smith or Kevin Gale if you believe the ru part of PPrune. Wouldn't that be a 'coincidence'!
When you take anyone who doesn't agree with you to court, or run to the minister crying like the top fell of your icecream is it really any wonder that individuals debating with you here prefer to keep their identity to themselves? They can't afford the personal debating trump card of Dick Smith - a trip to the courtroom.
Anyway, why bother coming on here to convince us. Most contributors here already know you are a fraud. Why not direct your attention back to your glib oneliners for the chickens of the media and the gullible public. Perhaps you can form some obscure nexus between NAS (which is yet to be rolled back) and another tragic accident that occurred during it's operation? Get some more grieving family members: Channel 10 love that sort of stuff. Oh, and why not another broadcast to the nation not to fly QANTAS: that might really test your courtoom resources. The way you work the media and public are your supporter base, not anyone who has anything to do with making aviation happen.
Finally the conclusions you draw in your last post are fanciful:
I can only assume you cant even lie straight in bed writing that one.
[Oh dear, another media organisation fallen foul of the Dicktator. People just can't seem to see things your way can they Dick? - Hmm, where has that Crikey Link gone now?]
Anonymous 'names' aren't making the decisions - they are just offering comment - thats what always happened on PPrune, long before you brought infamy to it Dick, and started quoting it in letters to your mate Missing in Action Anderson, ASA board members, the media, and started sledging ATSB, AirServices, QANTAS, Virgin, CivilAir members and anyone who dare not shake their rattle in time with yours.
The decision has already been made. You didn't like it so your first course of action (before it was even made) was to direct Anderson to take what little regulatory responsibilities remained with ASA and give them to a new Airspace Directorate. Strangely enough to be headed by either Mike Smith or Kevin Gale if you believe the ru part of PPrune. Wouldn't that be a 'coincidence'!
When you take anyone who doesn't agree with you to court, or run to the minister crying like the top fell of your icecream is it really any wonder that individuals debating with you here prefer to keep their identity to themselves? They can't afford the personal debating trump card of Dick Smith - a trip to the courtroom.
Anyway, why bother coming on here to convince us. Most contributors here already know you are a fraud. Why not direct your attention back to your glib oneliners for the chickens of the media and the gullible public. Perhaps you can form some obscure nexus between NAS (which is yet to be rolled back) and another tragic accident that occurred during it's operation? Get some more grieving family members: Channel 10 love that sort of stuff. Oh, and why not another broadcast to the nation not to fly QANTAS: that might really test your courtoom resources. The way you work the media and public are your supporter base, not anyone who has anything to do with making aviation happen.
Finally the conclusions you draw in your last post are fanciful:
My vision for aviation reform is to follow expert advice using scientific data so that the ICAO categories are allocated commensurate with risk
[Oh dear, another media organisation fallen foul of the Dicktator. People just can't seem to see things your way can they Dick? - Hmm, where has that Crikey Link gone now?]
Last edited by Uncommon Sense; 24th Sep 2004 at 01:47.
Hmm, where has that Crikey Link gone now?
Off the record tips and gossip: [email protected]
On the record contributions: [email protected]
Publishable letters for yoursay: [email protected]
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Belthorpe, but the actual link to the story has dissappeared somewhere?
An interesting link from Crikey - not a huge donation, but interesting nonetheless:
D Smith, Mona Vale Road
TERRY HILLS NSW 2000
Appears on the following returns as providing funds to:
Name Address National Party of Australia - N.S.W.
- NSW GPO Box 4558
SYDNEY GPO PRIVATE BOXES NSW 2001
Value $1,500.00
An interesting link from Crikey - not a huge donation, but interesting nonetheless:
D Smith, Mona Vale Road
TERRY HILLS NSW 2000
Appears on the following returns as providing funds to:
Name Address National Party of Australia - N.S.W.
- NSW GPO Box 4558
SYDNEY GPO PRIVATE BOXES NSW 2001
Value $1,500.00
Last edited by Uncommon Sense; 24th Sep 2004 at 04:24.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick, that's great that you've given us more of an insight into why you're doing this, wasting yours and taxpayers money.
Can I suggest another idea, just let it go. Let fate take its part, and let nas be wound back, let air services get on with their job, let pilots continue to fly safely, commercial passengers be delivered safely and life continue as it was.
And one more thing, how could have possibly gone that far re Benalla - of course the family of the victims are looking for answers, and you're giving them something to hold onto, but you and i know that the inquest into their deaths is stil underway, and the reason for the crash is still being determined.
Stop using them for political gain - it's crass and UNAUSTRALIAN.
Can I suggest another idea, just let it go. Let fate take its part, and let nas be wound back, let air services get on with their job, let pilots continue to fly safely, commercial passengers be delivered safely and life continue as it was.
And one more thing, how could have possibly gone that far re Benalla - of course the family of the victims are looking for answers, and you're giving them something to hold onto, but you and i know that the inquest into their deaths is stil underway, and the reason for the crash is still being determined.
Stop using them for political gain - it's crass and UNAUSTRALIAN.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
I don't hide behind my psuedonym, I merely post under it. It is a bit of fun, and at the same time I can comment on this forum about issues I feel strongly about.
Dick, we've actually met. A number of times at the old Sydney FSC, at a dinner at the Melbourne Hilton when you were the boss of CAA, and at Brisbane Centre.
All my friends and collegues know my pseudonym. It wouldn't be hard to find out who I really am, so I'm not really hiding behind it. Take a look at my profile and do some detective work.
Does it really matter if I post under my real name or not?
Does it change the fact that I have an opinion and can voice that opinion using facts to support it?
Then why make this an issue?
That's not entirely correct. Once again a half truth from the bespecticled spin doctor.
All these posters have said that parts of NAS have serious flaws. Using arguments based on facts, these posters have made suggestions to what should be done to improve the airspace.
READ MY LIPS (WORDS)!!!! 90% of NAS will remain untouched by the changes to be initiated on Nov. 27. THERE IS NO WINDBACK!
Sorry, I'll go hoarse shouting like this. But it isn't a windback, but a fiddling to make NAS SAFER!
It's not us and them, Dick. Aviation is a team game for all the players, and we didn't elect you captain.
Now go away.
I don't hide behind my psuedonym, I merely post under it. It is a bit of fun, and at the same time I can comment on this forum about issues I feel strongly about.
Dick, we've actually met. A number of times at the old Sydney FSC, at a dinner at the Melbourne Hilton when you were the boss of CAA, and at Brisbane Centre.
All my friends and collegues know my pseudonym. It wouldn't be hard to find out who I really am, so I'm not really hiding behind it. Take a look at my profile and do some detective work.
Does it really matter if I post under my real name or not?
Does it change the fact that I have an opinion and can voice that opinion using facts to support it?
I do not wish to know their true identities
People who support the wind back such as DirtyPierre, Four Seven Eleven and Voices of Reason hide under pseudonyms.
All these posters have said that parts of NAS have serious flaws. Using arguments based on facts, these posters have made suggestions to what should be done to improve the airspace.
READ MY LIPS (WORDS)!!!! 90% of NAS will remain untouched by the changes to be initiated on Nov. 27. THERE IS NO WINDBACK!
Sorry, I'll go hoarse shouting like this. But it isn't a windback, but a fiddling to make NAS SAFER!
It's not us and them, Dick. Aviation is a team game for all the players, and we didn't elect you captain.
Now go away.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People even call me mine at work. It is getting to the point where many refer to me soley as this (well in reverse as well) oh and also some rude words but I can understand that.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick, you claim nobody will answer you in relation to AYE. I'm sure they must have, but just in case...... (I wouldn't want an innocent reader to get the wrong impression from something YOU say
).
AYE was/is an EXPERIMENT forced upon aviation in oz by people who believe in EXACTLY THE SAME PHILOSOPHY AS YOU. User pays, cost shifting by using CAGROs etc etc. It is exactly what you continually rant that YOU WANT. The "free and easy" approach to airspace management.
Ironic, really, that you are now saying 'it's a bad thing'.
I laughed. How does that sit with your "criminally negligent" statement? You liar.
).AYE was/is an EXPERIMENT forced upon aviation in oz by people who believe in EXACTLY THE SAME PHILOSOPHY AS YOU. User pays, cost shifting by using CAGROs etc etc. It is exactly what you continually rant that YOU WANT. The "free and easy" approach to airspace management.
Ironic, really, that you are now saying 'it's a bad thing'.
The US NAS also protects air traffic controllers and pilots as it makes it quite clear where responsibility lies