CASA response to the ATSB report on Lockhart River

[gaunty]

Whilst not directly related to the RPT issues here, in the US the "brokering" of charter flights thru sometimes up to three or four parties away from the actual operator of the flight is very much on foot and the subject of new regulations and very much increased regulatory oversight.

The principle though remains the same "is the person or entity from whom you are buying your air transport services the person or entity who holds the actual Certificate and in direct control of the flight you have bought.

It is a growing problem in OZ charter with some "apparently" large and impressive multi aircraft organisations "booking" large amounts of work and often taking large fees, being no more substantial than a well designed website and having as much "control" over the conduct of the flight as Mickey Mouse.

[Bob Murphie]

It's about the name of the Airline on the ticket, not any subcontract deal with Air Antarctica or whoever may be providing aircraft, meals, burgers fries and crew. Otherwise why have public liability insurance? Why have terms and conditions written on the back of the ticket? Why have an office when a PO box would do? and why have an AOC at all?

The airline's name is incorrect from my knowledge of events.

[Air Ace]

Sky News: "The manager responsible for setting those standards was relieved of his position and has since left CASA during the investigation……”

What Bob Murphie is trying to say is that the aircraft carried Aerotropics titles and the passengers purchased Aerotropics tickets on a scheduled air service which was advertised on Aerotropics web site.

The aircraft was registered to Transair and obviously operated on Transair AOC.

[Bob Murphie]

Thank you, now is anyone game enough to search the relevant websites to see if there is a political connection?

Who "owned" (controlled), the route?

[Air Ace]

The Bamaga to Cairns RPT service is identified as an RPT service on AOC N536421-29 issued to Lip-Air Pty Ltd (ABN 068 117 537, ARN 536421) trading as Aero-Tropics.

I have no idea whether the Bamaga to Cairns service was identified as an RPT service on Transair's AOC.

[KRUSTY 34]

Don't know how they do (did) things in the Brisbane office of CASA, but our FOI is a real Rotweiler, as he should be.

No matter how much we bitch and moan about surveilance, the fact remains that the responsibility for the innocent lives that we carry are well,.... everybody's responsibility, and certainly not least of all the regulator.

I said it on this forum when the interim report was released, why didn't Brisbane office shut these clowns down years ago? It's not like the evidence wasn't there. Some of the responses were puzzleing to say the least. Some armchair laywers suggested all sorts of nonsense as to why CASA was unable to act...! B.S.

Well duck for cover boys, because If there is any justice in this world, a huge shake-up is coming.

Mind you I saw this 14 years ago, It involved a name change and a sacrificial head on a platter. With a bit of luck we may see some more substance this time around.

[forgetabowdit]

I agree 100% with the sentiment that the public should know what they are REALLY buying.
Who is REALLY operating between Gove and Darwin when you book through the qf website, or between Brisbane and POM when you book Airlines PNG, or between Cairns and Singapore when you think you're flying Jetstar. Then there is the other issue of foreign cabin crew caring for unaware pax on long haul sectors for qf also...
Outsourcing has and will continue to occur as airlines try to rationalise costs.
I have no answers, but the public should know WHAT they are buying, especially if people spend money based on assumed safety or levels of service.
Forgetabowdit
BTW, in 1990, I bought a Holden Nova, only to find it had a toyota engine in it. When it blew up, who should have fixed it... I wanted a Holden after all.

[GORN ROUND]

Quote Bloogs: "Yes I do. I am not suggesting that the FAF be removed, I am suggesting that the waypoint depicting it be removed."

Bloggs,

I don't think you do Bloggs. Tell us here on PPRUNE what you think the FAF is for Bloggs.

BUT.

There will be some other qualified BLOGGS that will want something else.

You are just a pilot Bloggs. ie disposable taxi driver.

Let the experts keep you safe by following their instructions.

The RNAV(GNSS) approach methodology works, for those that are trained and maintain currency.

Its just the way that pilots interpret the plate, way outside the bounds of reality or the training that they have received, that causes the fare paying public to get incinerated.

"Oh my gosh, lets dive through that hole and get in and be the hero by busting the stupid procedure."

"I think I can, I think I can."

"That blonde in Row 3 will thank me for getting in on time and buy me a drink...she might even invite me back to her place."

"I think I can, I think I can."

LISTEN to your instructors, read and UNDERSTAND the GPS operations manual, do not deviate from the recommended procedures and you will not hit the hill 1000ft, 500ft or 250ft below the altitude you are supposed to be at.

If you are not rated to conduct RNAV approaches, don't do them.

If you think they are not safe enough to get you home to your kids, then don't do them.

If you don't get into the airport because you won't fly an RNAV approach and you spend the bosses money going to a divert, then tell your boss that you don't like having a FAF waypoint and won't do these approaches.

Have fun driving a taxi when the boss tells you not to bother turning up on Monday.

We all have to start out as a Bloggs so just be a good Bloggs and follow the instructions and you might grow up to be the pilot of a real aircraft one day.

[Ejector Pump]

IMO the branding issue is just a bit of a side issue.

In this case aerotropics was purely a piston engine operation, whereas Transair was predominately a turbine operation.

Therefore, Transair had the experience and checks and balances in place for a turbine > 57000kg operation already in place, whereas Aeroptropics would/did not have.

As to knowing who you really are flying with, well that’s fine and beaut but the reality is that when you buy a ticket for travel on any airline you should expect the same level of safety on brand X as brand Y as brand Z.

In other words it really shouldn’t matter who provides the service as the Regulator should have ensured the premise of equal safety.

[Diatryma]

Bob Murphie, Gaunty and others,

Thanks for the clarification regarding the "branding issue" I couldn't understand Bob's concerns so subtlety put initially. The roles of Transair and Aerotropics seemed (seem) clear enough to me from the report.

Anyway, I agree with Jet and Ejector and others that this is all a bit of a diversion. So what if passengers thought they were on an aircraft operated by Aerotropics when it was actually Transair? How many of them would not have boarded the flight had they known? I'm sure some of you Ppruners might have had second thoughts. But the average Jo Blow flying on RPT services around Australia would not have a clue. (With all due respect)

They rely on CASA to ensure the flight is safe - regardless of who operates it or from whom they purchased their ticket. Don't they?

Di

[Diatryma]

Lockhart River crash pilot may still be flying

From correspondents in Papua New Guinea
April 04, 2007 04:44pm

AUSTRALIA'S aviation safety watchdog will give Papua New Guinea its damning report into the fatal Transair plane crash because it fears the former airline's principal is now flying in PNG.
Fifteen people died when a TransAir-operated Fairchild Metroliner plane, en route from Cairns to Bamaga, crashed into a mountain near Lockhart River in far north Queensland in May 2005.
Earlier this year, it was revealed Transair principal Les Wright was living in PNG, and possibly still working as a pilot.
Today, Australian Transport Safety Bureau executive director Kym Bills confirmed PNG's Air Safety Investigation Bureau (ASIB) would be given the report.
"We will make sure PNG has a copy of this report," Mr Bills said.
The first stage of another investigation, a coronial inquiry, is due to begin in Brisbane tomorrow.
Barry Auwi, chief of the ASIB was unavailable for comment today.


From News.com. Slightly misleading headline - but interesting article anyway.

Di

[J430]

Di

I have no idea of exactly what Bob is talking about, but I think he is suggesting there is some underhanded connection with the route flown and by whom it was flown.....some political link perhaps.

Just an observation from afar, but it would certainly be interesting reading if somone has some facts and is prepared to share them.

J

[Casper]

Lockhart River crash pilot may still be flying
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I thought that the PIC of the Lockhart River crash perished with all the others. Is this just another example of the poor standard of journalism?

[Dogimed]

Erm, did I read correctly that this approach was approved even though it triggered the GPWS action even if flown correctly?

Dog

[gaunty]

Ejector Pump

In other words it really shouldn’t matter who provides the service .....

Quite so, but not the point. If you take that argument to its logical conclusion then we don't need more than one universal AOC upon which everyone can operate.

CASA can only set a minimum acceptable standard.

GORN ROUND

You should be careful whom you patronise around here. I note you are a new PRRuNer altho it is possible you have another more "experienced" nic. Either way the beauty of this forum is that your argument rises and falls on the quality of its presentation and how it is argues. So far IMHO you are not doing too well.

Not sure where you are coming from but we have had a very lengthy discussion here on the subject of FAF, GPS and Manufacturers interpretation.

You will find it in the search function.

[Diatryma]

GORN ROUND,

Looking at your last post and your age - are you dyslexic?

Di

[GORN ROUND]

Don't throw stones at me boys.

I'll have to run off and tell my mum.

[Capn Bloggs]

Gorn,

Tell us here on PPRUNE what you think the FAF is for Bloggs.

It doesn't matter two hoots what I think the FAF is for. Again, my (and other professional pilots) beef is with the GPS NPA waypoint that depicts the FAF.

[Ejector Pump]

Gaunty,
I am not saying the fare paying public should not know who they are flying with; what I am saying is that I believe that a standard set by CASA should ensure that a crash such as this shouldn’t happen, regardless of who the actual operator of the aircraft is.
Cross charter, code share, etc are a fact of life and a CASA accredited AOC should be sufficient justification to consider the airline safe. If not the AOC should be removed and that can only be achieved by constant diligence by the authority.
As to” brokering”, this crash doesn’t really relate to “brokering” in the real sense BUT even if it did I can’t see that it should have any bearing. Brokers are only dealing with aviation companies that CASA has authorised to operate and thus are deemed to be of a suitable standard.
As to “one universal AOC” as being the logical conclusion, I have to disagree; each operator still exists as an individual identity no matter how they are contracted.
I note your term “minimum acceptable standard” but that term should not be seen as being just above “just above dangerous,” as I am assured that the two standards are quite some distance apart.

[Capn Bloggs]

DA,
Foxtrot has been widely discussed at length here on Prune but in a nutshell, it unnecessarily complicates what should be, as an evolution of the NDB then VOR NPA and utilising the latest technology, very very simple. In my experience, it is not. This view is not held universally, obviously, and there are some quite vociferous defenders of it.

However, in my (and as I have said quite a few others) opinion, Foxtrot makes the approach more complicated because you never know, at a glance, where you are WRT the runway. You only know where you are WRT to the next waypoint. Right at the gravy stroke, probably going thru the MSA for the first time, gear going down, flap going out, scans & checklists to be done, radio calls to be made, perhaps altitude restrictions on the way down, we have a waypoint/distance reference change. Looking at the graph that was presented on the CASA website, it would not surprise me that the Metro crew thought they were past Foxtrot when in fact they weren't. Why on earth would a crew with a bunch of pax on board conduct such a "scary" approach? There are probably lots of factors involved, and IMO the unnecessary complexity of the approach itself was one of those factors.

I reject the assertion that GPS NPAs are easier than say a VOR/DME. Why? Because on a VOR/DME you have a distance reference from the top of descent/start of the approach all the way to the runway plus or minus a bit. this makes life so much easier. If it wasn't for the fact that most of our VORs are slightly offset and GPS NPAs leave you on the centreline at the MDA, I'd be doing VORs in preference.

Situational Awareness is not enhanced having the FAF as a waypoint. When all is going swimmingly, all will easily cope with a GPS NPA. Unfortunately, that is not always the case, and it is then that the "system" needs to be a simple as possible.

Perhaps in the very early days Foxtrot was needed by the technology (an argument I do not accept and never will). That is now not the case and it should be removed, providing us with only one distance reference TO THE THRESHOLD on the extended centreline from the MSA. If you don't have a VDI, then the chart would provide a simple, profile from the MSA all the way down to the MDA.

I have no doubt that those guys were brought undone in part by the complexity of the GPS NPA they were flying.

PS: I started reading the ATSB report after making the above comments.