Merged: Aero Tropics Grounded.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmmmm.............now if one was cynical it would be possible to think something along the following lines.
1. There is to be a Senate inquiry into CASA real soon.
2. One of the sticks that will be used at that inquiry will be CASA's oversight or lack of it that was a factor in the Lockhart River crash.
3. Aero Tropics was the RPT operator (I know, another company provided the aircraft and crew) and therefore is now at fault for bringing CASA into disrepute.
4. CASA can show to the Senate how big and brave it is and what a really good job it does by removing the AOC of a player that was involved in that crash.
However, I am not that cynical.
1. There is to be a Senate inquiry into CASA real soon.
2. One of the sticks that will be used at that inquiry will be CASA's oversight or lack of it that was a factor in the Lockhart River crash.
3. Aero Tropics was the RPT operator (I know, another company provided the aircraft and crew) and therefore is now at fault for bringing CASA into disrepute.
4. CASA can show to the Senate how big and brave it is and what a really good job it does by removing the AOC of a player that was involved in that crash.
However, I am not that cynical.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Third Barstool on the left
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dobbing
Flying Spike
You're way off the mark.
My experience (1) of dobbing in the dodgy operator resulted in ...
...nothing.
...except I was then sacked for my troubles
In my case the allegations were well documented with time, place, aircraft, rego, documentary evidence, witnesses and participants all detailed. The allegations were not vexatious but real legal and safety issues (low flying, illegal instruction, illegal charter, acting as PIC in operations requiring a rating without rating, knowingly flying without valid MR etc) and are well known to other professional pilots in the area, with a number expressing concern to me in my professional capacity.
CASA couldn't make it stick and RAAus not only told him who dobbed but then gave him an instructor rating
Don't bother - you may have a duty of care but the only one who cares is you.
All dobbing does is draw the ants
You're way off the mark.
My experience (1) of dobbing in the dodgy operator resulted in ...
...nothing.
...except I was then sacked for my troubles
In my case the allegations were well documented with time, place, aircraft, rego, documentary evidence, witnesses and participants all detailed. The allegations were not vexatious but real legal and safety issues (low flying, illegal instruction, illegal charter, acting as PIC in operations requiring a rating without rating, knowingly flying without valid MR etc) and are well known to other professional pilots in the area, with a number expressing concern to me in my professional capacity.
CASA couldn't make it stick and RAAus not only told him who dobbed but then gave him an instructor rating
Don't bother - you may have a duty of care but the only one who cares is you.
All dobbing does is draw the ants
"Aero T started with the hardware, etc, from Wingz N when CASA grounded and took said company to court.
Wonder if it the phoenix will rise again?"
Wonder if it the phoenix will rise again?"
From the CASA press release, lack of a Chief Pilot and a trickey training and checking organisation may be factors?
Media release - CASA suspends Far North Queensland airline
I recieved this link in one of CASA's "safety alert" emails. Upon actually reading the media release I feel CASA ought take a serious look at the way they word these media releases - especially the last couple of paragraphs, which (only in my opinion) cause me (as a person who has no knowledge of the running of the company or anything at all to do with Aerotropics in any sense or measure) to form an opinion based upon the words of an employee of the Regulator (which must of course have been vetted by a senior manager to the person who issued the release) - therefore causing a pre-formed corporate view held upon the operation to be available to public scrutiny in text that has and have not yet been found a true and correct assessment or representation of the company and/or its management structure or ownership, or indeed tested in an Australian court of law.
Peter Gibson, This is just an observation: Parts of that media release may have caused me to form an opinion on a company that may well not prove to be true and correct. The fact that people may now talk between themselves about this CASA media release means that should your case fail in court you've opened CASA up to what may be significant damages payout for libelleous and slanderous content of that media release.
Just an observation....
Regards,
OpsN.
CASA media release - Saturday 28 June 2008
CASA suspends Far North Queensland airline
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority suspended the operations of Cairns-based airline Lip Air Pty Ltd on Friday 27 June 2008.
Lip Air – which trades as Aero Tropics – was suspended because CASA believes there were serious and imminent risks to the safety of passengers travelling on the airline.
The airline's operations were ‘grounded' immediately. CASA will now make an application to the Federal Court to extend the suspension of their air operators certificate for up to 40 days.
If the extension is granted CASA will complete investigations into safety deficiencies within Lip Air and may seek to cancel the airline's air operators certificate.
CASA began investigations into safety problems at Lip Air in September 2007. The airline and key personnel have been subject to a number of actions by CASA, taken to achieve improvements in safety performance.
However, in recent days CASA has discovered further evidence that safety standards within Lip Air have not in improved and in fact have deteriorated.
CASA has serious concerns about the capacity and commitment of Lip Air's management to manage their safety obligations. CASA believes the deficiencies are indicative of a total failure of the airline's management structure.
This has created an unacceptable risk to aviation safety.
CASA's safety concerns with Lip Air centre on the airline's pilot training and checking systems. Pilot training and checking is a critical safety system within any airline – large or small.
Media contact:
Peter Gibson
mobile 0419 296 446
Ref: MR7108
CASA suspends Far North Queensland airline
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority suspended the operations of Cairns-based airline Lip Air Pty Ltd on Friday 27 June 2008.
Lip Air – which trades as Aero Tropics – was suspended because CASA believes there were serious and imminent risks to the safety of passengers travelling on the airline.
The airline's operations were ‘grounded' immediately. CASA will now make an application to the Federal Court to extend the suspension of their air operators certificate for up to 40 days.
If the extension is granted CASA will complete investigations into safety deficiencies within Lip Air and may seek to cancel the airline's air operators certificate.
CASA began investigations into safety problems at Lip Air in September 2007. The airline and key personnel have been subject to a number of actions by CASA, taken to achieve improvements in safety performance.
However, in recent days CASA has discovered further evidence that safety standards within Lip Air have not in improved and in fact have deteriorated.
CASA has serious concerns about the capacity and commitment of Lip Air's management to manage their safety obligations. CASA believes the deficiencies are indicative of a total failure of the airline's management structure.
This has created an unacceptable risk to aviation safety.
CASA's safety concerns with Lip Air centre on the airline's pilot training and checking systems. Pilot training and checking is a critical safety system within any airline – large or small.
Media contact:
Peter Gibson
mobile 0419 296 446
Ref: MR7108
Peter Gibson, This is just an observation: Parts of that media release may have caused me to form an opinion on a company that may well not prove to be true and correct. The fact that people may now talk between themselves about this CASA media release means that should your case fail in court you've opened CASA up to what may be significant damages payout for libelleous and slanderous content of that media release.
Just an observation....
Regards,
OpsN.
I know exactly how you feel.
.
As an "insider" I know for a fact the CASA at Bankstown was given a detailed report on a number of alleged breaches by a well known Bankstown training/charter operation, with some of their actions carrying penalties of up to 2 years in jail.
The most effective deterrent is adverse publicity and legal action in accordance with the legislation. What is the purpose of having draconian powers if they don't act on proven and documented breaches?
I firmly believe that CASA are selective in their application of their powers, and any outsider trying to discover whether they have taken action will be blocked by FOI.
This operation has had a number of hull losses, and CASA stands to be crucified for their failure to act over recent allegations when they have another accident.
In my case the allegations were well documented with time, place, aircraft, rego, documentary evidence, witnesses and participants all detailed. The allegations were not vexatious but real legal and safety issues (low flying, illegal instruction, illegal charter, acting as PIC in operations requiring a rating without rating, knowingly flying without valid MR etc) and are well known to other professional pilots in the area, with a number expressing concern to me in my professional capacity
As an "insider" I know for a fact the CASA at Bankstown was given a detailed report on a number of alleged breaches by a well known Bankstown training/charter operation, with some of their actions carrying penalties of up to 2 years in jail.
The most effective deterrent is adverse publicity and legal action in accordance with the legislation. What is the purpose of having draconian powers if they don't act on proven and documented breaches?
I firmly believe that CASA are selective in their application of their powers, and any outsider trying to discover whether they have taken action will be blocked by FOI.
This operation has had a number of hull losses, and CASA stands to be crucified for their failure to act over recent allegations when they have another accident.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Spike, Bendo and Pinkusdickus,
You are not alone, what should be and what actually is when it come to blowing the whistle to CASA especially is disgraceful, as Bendo stated, have your personal operations wired tight, that is the best we can do, unfortunately it is not an ideal world.
Whilst I have never worked for A/T's, I have met RL, IMHO he seemed like a good guy, a business man trying to make money in the cut throat aviation industry, he survived the previous regime in FNQ, he would probably have a very distrustfull view of CASA as a consequence (search the CASA FNQ threads of a few years ago).
Historically speaking, CASA have not done very well in either the AAT or the open Court system, but also historically speaking (UZU for example, Hi Torres ), CASA does not need to win in Court to have the "desired" effect.
Pinkus, Hull losses ?.
Are there any FOI's from FNQ on "extended, leave without pay or stress leave" ?, that would tell an interesting story.
You are not alone, what should be and what actually is when it come to blowing the whistle to CASA especially is disgraceful, as Bendo stated, have your personal operations wired tight, that is the best we can do, unfortunately it is not an ideal world.
Whilst I have never worked for A/T's, I have met RL, IMHO he seemed like a good guy, a business man trying to make money in the cut throat aviation industry, he survived the previous regime in FNQ, he would probably have a very distrustfull view of CASA as a consequence (search the CASA FNQ threads of a few years ago).
Historically speaking, CASA have not done very well in either the AAT or the open Court system, but also historically speaking (UZU for example, Hi Torres ), CASA does not need to win in Court to have the "desired" effect.
Pinkus, Hull losses ?.
Are there any FOI's from FNQ on "extended, leave without pay or stress leave" ?, that would tell an interesting story.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 29th Jun 2008 at 03:35. Reason: more goodera spelling
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any news?
I have no interest in whether Aeros get up and running again or not. I heard they were trying to get an stay through the relevant court procedure and were hoping to be running by Monday afternoon.
I do feel a bit sorry for the pilots and other staff involved, although one would assume the demand for services is still there and the work is available to other operators. It would of course have to be done as charter rather than RPT. Looking at the Aeros online booking system, (where tickets for scheduled services are still available) there does not appear to be much difference in price between RPT and charter anyway!
I do feel a bit sorry for the pilots and other staff involved, although one would assume the demand for services is still there and the work is available to other operators. It would of course have to be done as charter rather than RPT. Looking at the Aeros online booking system, (where tickets for scheduled services are still available) there does not appear to be much difference in price between RPT and charter anyway!
Last edited by Two_dogs; 1st Jul 2008 at 08:47. Reason: Can't spell
Word is today is D Day for Troppo's.Good luck boys and girls hope it works out for you. The victims in these situations are always the hard working people at the front line whether it be pilots,maintenance guys,reservations staff,check in or aircraft loaders!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LRT
Where do you get your facts - or do you just make them up as you go along - or just prefer to regurgiate what you hear second hand>
I suggest you actually do some research before making such comments. Go to the Austlii website and look up all the AAT cases involving CASA.
This is what you'll find.
Between 1997 and 2008 there are some 87 cases reported where CASA's decisions have been challenged in the AAT. So what is the break down?
41 cases affirmed CASA's decisions (ie the AAT said it was the correct decision).
5 decsions were affirmed in part but also varied in part.
6 applications for review were dismissed.
11 CASA decisions were set aside.
8 decisions to cancel a licence were changed to suspensions.
2 decisions were sent back to CASA for consideration.
8 applications for a stay were granted.
6 applicatons for a stay were refused.
Hardly seems like CASA has not done very well in the AAT.
Historically speaking, CASA have not done very well in either the AAT or the open Court system, but also historically speaking (UZU for example, Hi Torres ), CASA does not need to win in Court to have the "desired" effect.
I suggest you actually do some research before making such comments. Go to the Austlii website and look up all the AAT cases involving CASA.
This is what you'll find.
Between 1997 and 2008 there are some 87 cases reported where CASA's decisions have been challenged in the AAT. So what is the break down?
41 cases affirmed CASA's decisions (ie the AAT said it was the correct decision).
5 decsions were affirmed in part but also varied in part.
6 applications for review were dismissed.
11 CASA decisions were set aside.
8 decisions to cancel a licence were changed to suspensions.
2 decisions were sent back to CASA for consideration.
8 applications for a stay were granted.
6 applicatons for a stay were refused.
Hardly seems like CASA has not done very well in the AAT.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clapton,
Only 87 in 11 years ?, the few that I have seen / followed from the sidelines, I have not seen the CASA recommendations accepted/up held without major changes to the actual outcome, Mainframe or Torres care to add comment ?.
Even if your statistics are thorough, 41 time out of 87 they made their case unconditionally, that is terribly low in my opinion, and disappointingly so.
Hardly seems to me that they should not be trying to do better or be more effective.
I am a big supporter of CASA, there are many fine persons within the organisation, but unfortunately litigation has not been as productive a tool as one would hope.
Bruce Byron has in the past talked about CASA and the industry working hand in hand, get on the bus or get out of aviation, there are more direct, honourable and effective means of reprimanding offenders.
Facts, ????, my opinion, why so agressive ?.
Incidently what makes you so sure of your omniscience, or is it your opinion that differs to mine ?
Only 87 in 11 years ?, the few that I have seen / followed from the sidelines, I have not seen the CASA recommendations accepted/up held without major changes to the actual outcome, Mainframe or Torres care to add comment ?.
Even if your statistics are thorough, 41 time out of 87 they made their case unconditionally, that is terribly low in my opinion, and disappointingly so.
Hardly seems like CASA has not done very well in the AAT.
I am a big supporter of CASA, there are many fine persons within the organisation, but unfortunately litigation has not been as productive a tool as one would hope.
Bruce Byron has in the past talked about CASA and the industry working hand in hand, get on the bus or get out of aviation, there are more direct, honourable and effective means of reprimanding offenders.
Facts, ????, my opinion, why so agressive ?.
Incidently what makes you so sure of your omniscience, or is it your opinion that differs to mine ?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Not Pluto
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the statistics are correct then it is absolutley dismal on CASA's side.
41 only won unconditionally, well below 50%. You would think that if CASA is going to pull somoeone's life to shreds then they would have solid evidence before acting. But hey as a few have mentioned, who cares really (when it comes to the CASA opinion), the damage is done well before it gets anywhere near the ACCC.
Out of curiosity has anyone that has kicked CASA's Ass ever turned around and sued them for what ever one could imagine. Or is that a protected area where they can just do what they like and don't have to suffer the consequences?
41 only won unconditionally, well below 50%. You would think that if CASA is going to pull somoeone's life to shreds then they would have solid evidence before acting. But hey as a few have mentioned, who cares really (when it comes to the CASA opinion), the damage is done well before it gets anywhere near the ACCC.
Out of curiosity has anyone that has kicked CASA's Ass ever turned around and sued them for what ever one could imagine. Or is that a protected area where they can just do what they like and don't have to suffer the consequences?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LRT/Pluto
No, I don't claim omniscience. But I do care about facts. You have none - but appear happy to make unsubstantiated statements pretending to be facts.
And if you and Pluto read the statistics properly you would see that 14 of the cases dealt with stay hearings - not substantive merits hearings. So CASA's success rate in substantive hearings is well above what Mr Pluto suggests. Only 11 decisions have been set aside.
As you now admit, you have only seen a few cases from the sidelines - so on what basis can you then make the sweeping generalisation about the totality of AAT cases as you did in your earlier post. By the way, what constitutes a few?
Pluto, you could sue CASA is you wanted to in order to test your theories. It certainly is not a protected area. Remember that Dick Smith changed the legislation to remove CASA's immunity (this was going to fix all of industry's problems) - so you can feel free to sue whenever you feel like it.
I suggest you and Pluto actually go and read the cases and see what the AAT has actually said in all of the cases - you may be more informed.
By the way Pluto, the ACCC has nothing to do with CASA. It's the AAT (do you know what those initials stand for?)
Facts, ????, my opinion, why so agressive ?.
Incidently what makes you so sure of your omniscience, or is it your opinion that differs to mine ?
Incidently what makes you so sure of your omniscience, or is it your opinion that differs to mine ?
And if you and Pluto read the statistics properly you would see that 14 of the cases dealt with stay hearings - not substantive merits hearings. So CASA's success rate in substantive hearings is well above what Mr Pluto suggests. Only 11 decisions have been set aside.
As you now admit, you have only seen a few cases from the sidelines - so on what basis can you then make the sweeping generalisation about the totality of AAT cases as you did in your earlier post. By the way, what constitutes a few?
Pluto, you could sue CASA is you wanted to in order to test your theories. It certainly is not a protected area. Remember that Dick Smith changed the legislation to remove CASA's immunity (this was going to fix all of industry's problems) - so you can feel free to sue whenever you feel like it.
I suggest you and Pluto actually go and read the cases and see what the AAT has actually said in all of the cases - you may be more informed.
By the way Pluto, the ACCC has nothing to do with CASA. It's the AAT (do you know what those initials stand for?)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clapton,
Four.
1) CASA wanted prison and AOC got circa $20K and removed one function on AOC,
2) CASA wanted to revoke AOC, got squat,
3) CASA wanted the removal of AOC/Approvals and Licences, got squat,
4) CASA wanted to not give new types on AOC, got squat.
Play the player or play the game, Hmmmm ?.
Wouldn't be in this situation if someone didn't reinvent the wheel on CAR 206 now would we ?.
Four.
1) CASA wanted prison and AOC got circa $20K and removed one function on AOC,
2) CASA wanted to revoke AOC, got squat,
3) CASA wanted the removal of AOC/Approvals and Licences, got squat,
4) CASA wanted to not give new types on AOC, got squat.
Play the player or play the game, Hmmmm ?.
Wouldn't be in this situation if someone didn't reinvent the wheel on CAR 206 now would we ?.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 2nd Jul 2008 at 11:43. Reason: Grammar
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Back in Oz
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is more of a question than a statement, and being non legal CASA mumbo jumbo endorsed, as a by-stander seeing the effectively police of the skies at work here, how can they do what they've done, without it being a witch hunt or show pony event?
I mean, it looks like they've got to back themselves up with a truckload of evidence, and it seems a bit shakey at the outset, to follow through with what they've done.
On a laymans level, if I drink, then drive my car, and get pulled over by the cops, they've got me. Balls and all. No questions asked. Easy. If I rob a bank, it's on camera, and witnesses identify me, then yes, I'll go in quietly. When I kill someone, my fingerprints are there, my DNA is on the body, someone sees me, CSI works its wonders and I'm busted. If I didn't know all this from the outset, obviously I've been living under a rock all my life and didn't know I could be busted for drink driving, robbery and murder. I know where the goalposts are. Thats what makes us a society.
What I don't understand is this sort of behaviour where one FOI will come in and say all is hunky dory, then the next will come and say, with a bad cop expression, fix this fix that, but really all is cool, then another, you guys should be grounded, but if you fix it by Thursday, cause Friday's my flexi day, we're sweet, then the next one is number two, and so on and so on, where are the goal posts!!??!!
Yes, we have CAR's and CAO's to upkeep and maintain, yes we have company ops and training to keep, and we do that, but if you really want to get rid of someone, for whatever reason, thats easy. No one is perfect, and companies are run by people, as is CASA.
I dunno, it just seems like such a witch hunt to me. And if they've got a 50% rate in court, imagine if you were a soliciter in the real world with that strike rate, you'd wish you did take that plumber's job back in high school.
I mean, it looks like they've got to back themselves up with a truckload of evidence, and it seems a bit shakey at the outset, to follow through with what they've done.
On a laymans level, if I drink, then drive my car, and get pulled over by the cops, they've got me. Balls and all. No questions asked. Easy. If I rob a bank, it's on camera, and witnesses identify me, then yes, I'll go in quietly. When I kill someone, my fingerprints are there, my DNA is on the body, someone sees me, CSI works its wonders and I'm busted. If I didn't know all this from the outset, obviously I've been living under a rock all my life and didn't know I could be busted for drink driving, robbery and murder. I know where the goalposts are. Thats what makes us a society.
What I don't understand is this sort of behaviour where one FOI will come in and say all is hunky dory, then the next will come and say, with a bad cop expression, fix this fix that, but really all is cool, then another, you guys should be grounded, but if you fix it by Thursday, cause Friday's my flexi day, we're sweet, then the next one is number two, and so on and so on, where are the goal posts!!??!!
Yes, we have CAR's and CAO's to upkeep and maintain, yes we have company ops and training to keep, and we do that, but if you really want to get rid of someone, for whatever reason, thats easy. No one is perfect, and companies are run by people, as is CASA.
I dunno, it just seems like such a witch hunt to me. And if they've got a 50% rate in court, imagine if you were a soliciter in the real world with that strike rate, you'd wish you did take that plumber's job back in high school.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nungry,
Good point,
With the Police if you are doing 90kmshr in an 80 zone, done.
With CASA, so much comes down the ones "interpretation" of legilsation, quite often incomplete and vague in nature, very difficult.
Good point,
With the Police if you are doing 90kmshr in an 80 zone, done.
With CASA, so much comes down the ones "interpretation" of legilsation, quite often incomplete and vague in nature, very difficult.
Moderator
Justiceseeker is currently in Canberra, has emailed the following post and asked I post on his behalf:
flying-spike:
A very reasonable suggestion, given that this is how CASA has operated previously and MOST DEFINITELY in the Lockhart River scenario. That's on the public record.
virgin-driver
Come on..you can't have your cake and eat it too. He is either dodgy or not!
left-handed rock thrower.
So have I...the day after LHR, 08 May 2005 and in the Coroner's Inquest. Denied evidence presented, was aggressive and rude and mislead CASA (questionable that they didn't know) over the types of operations he started into Bamaga and then Lockhart R. Both runs advertised in the Cairns Post at the time. Was also mixed up in some regulation-breaking dealings with a Micheal Keating and a Cairns Travel Agency. Ask other operators in Cairns what they think of him.......
flying-spike:
"Or do you suggest that CASA wait until there is an accident and then take action."
virgin-driver
"Rick will get through..I don't think he is that dodgy."
left-handed rock thrower.
"I have met R.L. IMHO he seemed like a good guy, a business man..."
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
TW
I could email Justiceseeker or phone him if I could find his number...... but knowing his profession I wonder why he is in Canberra!
Unusual place to spend ones school holiday break......so maybe there is more to all this than meets the eye.
I can also appreciate his passion in the matter!
J
I could email Justiceseeker or phone him if I could find his number...... but knowing his profession I wonder why he is in Canberra!
Unusual place to spend ones school holiday break......so maybe there is more to all this than meets the eye.
I can also appreciate his passion in the matter!
J
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charter or RPT????
Was all this to do with the commercial restrictions CASA places on chaarter operators???
All charter operators have problems with the confusion that can exist between the definition of these categories, and most of it has nothing to do with safety. Rather it is commercial regulation. i wonder if CASA is really there to regulate the commercial side of aviation. I thought they were there for regulating things that affect safety.
Whether you sell individual seats, or run scheduled flights does not make it less safe. It is a commercial issue. And I believe CASA is not authorised to regulate commercial issues.
But many times this has been used to shut down charter companies.
At the moment there is a startup "charter airline" in Alice Springs.
It seems this treatment may be selective.
All charter operators have problems with the confusion that can exist between the definition of these categories, and most of it has nothing to do with safety. Rather it is commercial regulation. i wonder if CASA is really there to regulate the commercial side of aviation. I thought they were there for regulating things that affect safety.
Whether you sell individual seats, or run scheduled flights does not make it less safe. It is a commercial issue. And I believe CASA is not authorised to regulate commercial issues.
But many times this has been used to shut down charter companies.
At the moment there is a startup "charter airline" in Alice Springs.
It seems this treatment may be selective.