New Australian Aviation watchdog?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: concert hall
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Australian Aviation watchdog?
Is this another goverment qango or is Tony Albanese intent on turning a new leaf?. This just in from ABC.
The Federal Government has released a report into Australia's aviation safety regulators which recommends setting up a new body to approve all investigation reports.
The review of the relationship between the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority was prompted by the inquest into the Lockhart River plane crash in Queensland, which killed 15 people in 2005.
The report recommends establishing a new Australian Transport Safety Commission with three part-time Commissioners, who will not all be drawn from the aviation industry.
It also offers suggestions for improving cooperation and information sharing between the agencies.
The Government is seeking public comment by the end of next month.
The Federal Government has released a report into Australia's aviation safety regulators which recommends setting up a new body to approve all investigation reports.
The review of the relationship between the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority was prompted by the inquest into the Lockhart River plane crash in Queensland, which killed 15 people in 2005.
The report recommends establishing a new Australian Transport Safety Commission with three part-time Commissioners, who will not all be drawn from the aviation industry.
It also offers suggestions for improving cooperation and information sharing between the agencies.
The Government is seeking public comment by the end of next month.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: uranus
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know, why not get a private pilot who doesnt work within the REAL aviation industry to come in and sort it out.
That way we can all benefit from the fruitlessness of their labour with things such as, for example, getting to fly our jets into a CTAF R and make INTELLAGENT radio calls at 3 and 1 mile whilst ensuring that everyone is discouraged from responding to our broadcasts.
CASA is an irrelevant regulator, nothing more than QF's B$&CH. The wealth of experience, willingness to guide and provide information is all but gone. I consider that the state of Australia's aviation safety record rests squarely on the shoulders of many of the FOI's and Maintenance inspectors that Department then CAA, and finally CASA were fortunate to attract over the years.
Why the big deal over Lockhart River? Does it really require 3 levels of commission to sort it out. Chances are if you descend below the altitude on the plate at the wrong time it wont work out so well.
If CASA really want to make a relevant and timely mark and protect the travelling public here are some things they could look into (that is of course if they have anyone left who knows anything about aircraft)
Firstly, the training course provided by Alteon for Jetstar and Virgin Blue. What a Joke. How on earth did that get approved, seemingly by the CASA work experience KID!
I also like the new Jetstar Lite. Why does there need to be 1770 KG of potential projectiles in the Cabin. Stupid stuff, particularly as there are 2 overhead lockers for every 3 rows of pax. Each bin is certified for 36 Kg's, two obviously will carry 72 kg's. But is serving 9 pax, potentially 90kgs.
Additionally, not only have the pax got heavier but now their bags have as well but there has been no change to the standard pax weights used by the company which includes only a 4kg carry on allowance.
ll stop now I'm getting boring
That way we can all benefit from the fruitlessness of their labour with things such as, for example, getting to fly our jets into a CTAF R and make INTELLAGENT radio calls at 3 and 1 mile whilst ensuring that everyone is discouraged from responding to our broadcasts.
CASA is an irrelevant regulator, nothing more than QF's B$&CH. The wealth of experience, willingness to guide and provide information is all but gone. I consider that the state of Australia's aviation safety record rests squarely on the shoulders of many of the FOI's and Maintenance inspectors that Department then CAA, and finally CASA were fortunate to attract over the years.
Why the big deal over Lockhart River? Does it really require 3 levels of commission to sort it out. Chances are if you descend below the altitude on the plate at the wrong time it wont work out so well.
If CASA really want to make a relevant and timely mark and protect the travelling public here are some things they could look into (that is of course if they have anyone left who knows anything about aircraft)
Firstly, the training course provided by Alteon for Jetstar and Virgin Blue. What a Joke. How on earth did that get approved, seemingly by the CASA work experience KID!
I also like the new Jetstar Lite. Why does there need to be 1770 KG of potential projectiles in the Cabin. Stupid stuff, particularly as there are 2 overhead lockers for every 3 rows of pax. Each bin is certified for 36 Kg's, two obviously will carry 72 kg's. But is serving 9 pax, potentially 90kgs.
Additionally, not only have the pax got heavier but now their bags have as well but there has been no change to the standard pax weights used by the company which includes only a 4kg carry on allowance.
ll stop now I'm getting boring
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Bob
A PPL with no REAL aviation life.......agrees with your concerns in your last paragraphs (and the others).
So being a REAL aviator, would you just do something about it, go to Canberra, CASA and anyone else who may chage things and get it fixed coz from time to time I also am a fare paying PAX.
Thanks Bob.
J
A PPL with no REAL aviation life.......agrees with your concerns in your last paragraphs (and the others).
So being a REAL aviator, would you just do something about it, go to Canberra, CASA and anyone else who may chage things and get it fixed coz from time to time I also am a fare paying PAX.
Thanks Bob.
J
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone got a link to the report?
But this is Pprune, so I won't let the facts get in the way of a good chance to postulate and point fingers prematurely.
I would have thought the way to go about fixing problems was first to ensure the problems were properly identified? At first glance, it looks like the goal of this new body is ensure that no crash reports are released in a form which could be damaging to:
a) the future of the aviation minister, and;
b) the goals and aspirations of the political party to which he/she is affiliated.
Another layer between the politicians and the duty to the department they are supposed to represent? Another group to take the blame so that the least amount of crap winds up on the minister's desk?
CASA's just a shell of what it should be. The ANO's and ANR's are a shambles. The legislative aspect of CASA is almost non-existent. The executive aspect has a couple of figureheads supposedly in charge of leading an under-resourced rabble without the benefit of tangible goals and with no effective vision extending past the next federal election. The unspoken and over-riding goal is to avoid being in the spotlight at the next federal inquiry.
For the past 15 years, both CASA and Airservices have become so focussed on reducing costs, that the managers have lost sight of the forest. Parliamentary meddling and executive affirmation (backstabbing?) in kneejerk response to critical press releases from soapbox orators has torpedoed many worthy projects and all but nixed enthusiasm for nurturing long-term projects.
If Albanese really wants to shape up the aviation industry in this country, he'll throw his support and funding behind effective legislative and executive departments, whether they be integrated or separate, and their goals, actions and determinations. Torres has stated it succinctly. Creating another department is just muddying the waters. It's another step in filling the aviation administration 'industry' with even more executives to circle and protect the minister and forgetting the need to service the Australian public and aviation industry. Trying to sort out the layers of duties and responsibilites during the future federal inquiry is going to take years.
But this is Pprune, so I won't let the facts get in the way of a good chance to postulate and point fingers prematurely.
I would have thought the way to go about fixing problems was first to ensure the problems were properly identified? At first glance, it looks like the goal of this new body is ensure that no crash reports are released in a form which could be damaging to:
a) the future of the aviation minister, and;
b) the goals and aspirations of the political party to which he/she is affiliated.
Another layer between the politicians and the duty to the department they are supposed to represent? Another group to take the blame so that the least amount of crap winds up on the minister's desk?
CASA's just a shell of what it should be. The ANO's and ANR's are a shambles. The legislative aspect of CASA is almost non-existent. The executive aspect has a couple of figureheads supposedly in charge of leading an under-resourced rabble without the benefit of tangible goals and with no effective vision extending past the next federal election. The unspoken and over-riding goal is to avoid being in the spotlight at the next federal inquiry.
For the past 15 years, both CASA and Airservices have become so focussed on reducing costs, that the managers have lost sight of the forest. Parliamentary meddling and executive affirmation (backstabbing?) in kneejerk response to critical press releases from soapbox orators has torpedoed many worthy projects and all but nixed enthusiasm for nurturing long-term projects.
If Albanese really wants to shape up the aviation industry in this country, he'll throw his support and funding behind effective legislative and executive departments, whether they be integrated or separate, and their goals, actions and determinations. Torres has stated it succinctly. Creating another department is just muddying the waters. It's another step in filling the aviation administration 'industry' with even more executives to circle and protect the minister and forgetting the need to service the Australian public and aviation industry. Trying to sort out the layers of duties and responsibilites during the future federal inquiry is going to take years.
Last edited by Lodown; 24th Mar 2008 at 16:55.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Office
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: OZ
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It takes more than just an errant pilot or a faulty plane to kill people, it takes a whole industry includung the boffins at the top!
That's just great yet another body of so called experts to manage the 'farm'. People will continue to die in planes, that's a fact of life like all forms of transport and all the boffins & departments in the world will never stop that.
It's taken the Lockhart River accident sadly to once again give them reason to be seen to be doing something worthwhlie.
I've never worked in an industry that works on the principal of 'once the horse has bolted' !
"It also offers suggestions for improving cooperation and information sharing between the agencies"..........This statement says it all!!! Talk about the left hand no knowing what the right hand is doing & we are talking about peoples lives here! Are we not all meant to be on the same side here?
Rant over, for now
F
That's just great yet another body of so called experts to manage the 'farm'. People will continue to die in planes, that's a fact of life like all forms of transport and all the boffins & departments in the world will never stop that.
It's taken the Lockhart River accident sadly to once again give them reason to be seen to be doing something worthwhlie.
I've never worked in an industry that works on the principal of 'once the horse has bolted' !
"It also offers suggestions for improving cooperation and information sharing between the agencies"..........This statement says it all!!! Talk about the left hand no knowing what the right hand is doing & we are talking about peoples lives here! Are we not all meant to be on the same side here?
Rant over, for now
F
