Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Merged: Senate Inquiry

Old 22nd Sep 2013, 04:38
  #1521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,663
Originally Posted by Sandilands
related to the near hit
Topend 3, he must read Prune and almost got it right. It should be near-hit.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2013, 04:44
  #1522 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,663
Originally Posted by Sandilands Quote
The wording of the ATSB notification also supports the interpretation that the RA was, for whatever reason, only responded to by one of the jets involved in the incident. Without prejudice to anyone involved, there are other possible reasons as to why that may have been the case than TCAS equipment issues.
No, it's quite conceivable that only one TCAS alert was issued; the boxes talk to each other to determine the best course of action. Just because one says "climb!" the other one may not necessarily say "descend!", especially in this case where the clearance to climb by the lower aircraft appeared to have been reversed promptly by ATC. A330s, I imagine, don't immediately leap into a gut-busting, 20° nose-up lurch when the new altitude is selected.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 13:00
  #1523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Back to the thread!

Albo is on Q&A next week! Who is going to ask the obvious question regarding the Senate Report he ignored? I suggest a bombardment of email questions from Ppruners and hopefully one of the IOS can be there in person.
Jinglie is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 16:38
  #1524 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 48
Posts: 547
Jinglie

Back to the thread!
Albo is on Q&A next week! Who is going to ask the obvious question regarding the Senate Report he ignored? I suggest a bombardment of email questions from Ppruners and hopefully one of the IOS can be there in person.
I always thought Albo was more concerned with the political rather than safety risk. Perhaps the political risk may bite him if someone can get the question in. But, has the new government done anything yet.
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 20:35
  #1525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Lights, camera, bullsh#t

Jinglie, anybody in the audience who even dare to just think about asking the creator of great white elephants a question relating to his obsfucation over aviation matters automatically gets classified as an IOS.
Nonetheless it would be great to see Phelan, Sandilands or Gobbledock grilling Albo.

Halfmanhalftelevisionshow, perhaps somebody will ask The Minister for Mascot who is it that; a) styles his hair, and b) who his dentist is?

WARNING: Any IOS who attend Q&A and are sitting in the front 5 rows please ensure you bring a raincoat, as the lickspittle and pooh will be flowing more faster and furiously than a politician at a taxpayer trough!
004wercras is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 22:44
  #1526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
I'm constantly getting messages asking what the thread is about and what all the code means
I'm over half way through a glossary of terms and come to the sudden realization that any explanation would put both myself and PPRuNe in danger of retribution from the players mentioned in code.

It's now binned!

However, all readers of this thread can always do what I did and read from the beginning to get a full understanding.

I've seen this sort of thing before here on PPRuNe where somebody clicks onto the last page and has a moan about not being able to pick up the thread. May I be so bold to suggest those of such persuasion do please go to the first page to at least get some idea what it's all about, (that's if the title isn't enough), and with a short read you should be "full bottle" on all the nomenclature.

Happy reading.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2013, 00:10
  #1527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Frank quote: "Happy reading"

Frank:
May I be so bold to suggest those of such persuasion do please go to the first page to at least get some idea what it's all about, (that's if the title isn't enough), and with a short read you should be "full bottle" on all the nomenclature.
Sound advice Frank....and perhaps to have a fully rounded and informative understanding of the subject matter the avid readers amongst us may wish to refer to the previous (closed) thread from about page 20 (see here):

Previous Senate Inquiry thread from page 20

Maybe not a best seller but still hours and hours of absorbing reading in that lot and can guarantee you will be adequately informed!
Sarcs is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2013, 00:24
  #1528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 734
Smile

My previous request stands. Post in a manner which everyone understands, or expect the post to be moderated
Tidbinbilla is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2013, 01:33
  #1529 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
My previous request stands. Post in a manner which everyone understands, or expect the post to be moderated
Without disrespect intended, for obvious reasons, this seems to be the problem - some 'rules, expectations and demands' apply to some threads and particular posters yet not to others threads? The inconsistencies on this website are becoming more and more evident, along with bias and nepotism.
How does one quantify 'post in a way that everyone understands'? That's like expecting all students in the same class to equally understand the taught theories of quantum physics exactly the same way? Not all will get it!

The senate inquiry process itself is not understood by all. I have been flying for many many years. I can assure you that some of my acquaintances who still fly for mainline carries (as I once did) do not understand the complexities and farcical nature of the regulator in a way that a pilot in perhaps GA or private business would understand. Is that a crime? Is that a non compliance with PPRuNe rules?

I understand the term political correctness and won't put up an argument, but to
place a caveat on terminology, phrases or a little sideways banter is a joke.

Last edited by 004wercras; 24th Sep 2013 at 01:35.
004wercras is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2013, 02:18
  #1530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
A lesson in tautology or hypocrisy - 2001

This is just way too funny! A snippet below (my bolding) from almost 14 years ago in which the Minister for White Elephants discusses the inaction of the Liberals over Sydney airport, its capacity, the need for another airport, CAsA and safety! Yet what did Albo and his beloved Labor achieve in 6 years (2007 – 2013)?? GROUNDHOG DAY! And this bloke wants to be the new opposition leader?
'2001 An Aviation Odyssey'

Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (no. 2) 2000: Second Reading
7 February 2001


Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (7.23 p.m.)I am pleased to support the amendments moved by the shadow minister to the Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000, which is concerned with CASA and safety in the operation of airports in Australia. Of course, we all know that the situation of CASA and air safety is a mess under this government. Its own appointments have said that it is a mess. Those people who have been put on the board are well-known government supporters such as Dick Smith have indeed been very critical of the operation of these organisations.

Tonight I particularly want to take the opportunity to express my concern, on behalf of my constituents in Grayndler, about air safety and the operation of Kingsford Smith airport. The Kingsford Smith airport is an airport which has reached its time limit. It is full. Anyone who flies in and out of Sydney airport knows about the time delays, which occur because, frankly, the number of movements is at breaking point. Indeed, I moved a private member’s bill, seconded by the member for Watson, in this House to ensure that there was a cap of 80 movements per hour at Sydney airport. That also resulted in guarantees of slots for regional airlines from New South Wales into Kingsford Smith airport. That was not a technical issue; that was an issue in part about safety. We believe that, when aircraft are flying over the most densely populated area of Australia, that is, the inner suburbs of Sydney, 80 movements are about all that Sydney airport can take. Yet, what we have seen in the past year are numerous breaches of the capacity interestingly enough, not while the Olympics were on at Sydney airport. I say that to dismiss any potential criticism made by, for example, the Daily Telegraph journalist Piers Akerman who suggested that it was all Olympics related. Indeed, there were more aircraft movements in and out of Sydney airport over the December-January holiday period than there were during the Sydney Olympics. And that says a lot about the pressure which is being placed on Sydney airport.

My concern, as a member of the Sydney Airport Community Forum, is that when we have questioned those people concerned with aviation safety it is apparent that what those bodies do when they look at safety concerns is to take into account the safety of the people in the aircraft; they take no account whatsoever of the safety of people on the ground. God forbid any accident with an aircraft coming down, but if one does come down, and they do, from time to time, better it come down where there are no people than in an area which is the most densely populated in Australia. That is why we have seen the real plan come out with regard to Kingsford Smith airport. No matter how much people might prevaricate over the issue of a second Sydney airport and the need for it and governments of both persuasions have prevaricated for decades about doing what needs to be done, the reality is that Sydney airport is now at its limit. It is now breaching the cap of 80 movements. Pressure has now been placed on the curfew also, which has been breached at Sydney airport. That is why the government’s absurd decision, which says, `No, we won’t build a second airport for Sydney, but we will reserve the land around Badgerys Creek because we know we will have to do something down the track and, in the meantime, we will stop regional airlines flying in and out of Sydney airport and move them to Bankstown,’ is the worst possible option.

When confronted by this, the National Party representatives in regional New South Wales, including the leader, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, said, `No. We won’t force them to move out of Sydney airport to Bankstown.’ No, of course they won’t, they will just price them out. That is what will occur. That is what was in the briefing given by Bankstown Airport Limited to country federal MPs, state MPs and mayors in January of this year. In spite of the fact there were a number of National Party representatives at that meeting, not one of them brought to the attention of their constituents the fact that they were about to be treated as second-class citizens and discriminated against and moved to Bankstown. The Bankstown airport option is bad for regional New South Wales because it treats them as second-class citizens. It is bad for the people around Sydney airport because it means that jet movements will increase as the propeller and regional flights are moved out. It is bad for the people around Bankstown, including those people in south-western Sydney, who will suffer from aircraft noise.

Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (no. 2) 2000: Second Reading « anthonyalbanese.com.au

Perhaps the IOS and Q&A panel can ask Herr Albo what he actually achieved while he was mincing around the halls of parliament and why he thinks he should be the new leader?
004wercras is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2013, 22:02
  #1531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
CAsA Briefing Sep 2013 folly

Link below;

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - September 2013

Under the topic of social media there was no mention about CAsA's following on PPRuNe?

As usual, no mention of some of the bigger ticket items such as regulatory reform and the senate inquiry.
004wercras is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2013, 23:46
  #1532 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
I know how to fly, but I don't "Tweet". At least I don't think so.

Obviously a flaw in my training and something that should be included in The Regulatory Review Process.

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 25th Sep 2013 at 23:52. Reason: brevity being the soul of wit.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2013, 01:53
  #1533 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,136
Lets wait.....!

004. After 6 years we will probably be able to read a like spiel put out by the next DOIT dolt.

Better things to do in life than waste time tweeting CAsA or logging into their Ar$eBook. (sh*te spoken here)

Is this 'social' media thing going to be mandatory with a manual, log book endo and an exam?? Weirder things have happened out of FF before.

After all (Non) Aviation house is the leading exponent in "make work" and "what shall we do this week " brigade.
aroa is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2013, 04:20
  #1534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Borromean rings

Aroa, perhaps Fort Fumble will introduce a new reg for AOC and COA holders that says;
'An operator must have a system in place which captures CAsA's most up to date media postings. Acceptable means of compliance includes the use of electronic systems including Twatter, Facetake or Poohtube. Failure to comply with this regulation will incur a 50 point penalty and a NCN'. (I imagine some sneaky operators will try to use PPRuNe, 4 Corners, Q&A, Willyleaks, Crikey or Pro Aviation as a means to ascertain true accurate reports, however this is considered a non acceptable means of compliance).

CAsA, ASA and ATSBeaker are really much like Borromean rings. Linked, but yet they aren't!
And all three put out glossy statements and have tarted up their websites but alas, it is all a distraction. Just another coat of glitter on top of the turd.

P.S
I also hear that the very questionable sentinel I.T program, which was introduced by a friend of one of the GWM Don's, is a complete and dismal failure! Slow, clunky, and full of more holes than what is in Professor Reasons block of Swiss cheese! The amount of time spent trying to accurately use the system has resulted in several months of work backlog including audits and surveillance tasks. No risk in that is there?

Last edited by 004wercras; 26th Sep 2013 at 04:28.
004wercras is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2013, 23:46
  #1535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Out standing QON 93 CAsA 03 29/05/2013

004:
I also hear that the very questionable sentinel I.T program, which was introduced by a friend of one of the GWM Don's, is a complete and dismal failure! Slow, clunky, and full of more holes than what is in Professor Reasons block of Swiss cheese! The amount of time spent trying to accurately use the system has resulted in several months of work backlog including audits and surveillance tasks. No risk in that is there?
Hmm very interesting rumour 004! So this was the system instigated on mate's rates.."I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine fellow trough dweller!"...that had drawn the interest of one Senator Fawcett at the last Senate Estimates and still has an outstanding QON (no surprises there!!) some 4 months later:
Senator FAWCETT:I will swap to yoursurveillance manual. You are obviously aware we have been taking an increased interestin surveillance activities. As part of my background reading for that, inlooking at your surveillance manual, in the introduction section it talks aboutSky Sentinel, the approved IT surveillance management tool. I have done someresearch over Google to try and find out who provided that to CASA and theredoes not appear to be a commercial provider. Can you tell the committee wherethat system has come from?

Mr McCormick: Yes. That system was developed in-house by one of our inspectors in Perth and at the time it wasbased around the issues of Perth and operators. By putting in information and background on operators it allows us to have a risk-rating on organisations, giving us more insight into organisations that are higher risk than would perhaps be seen by a manual search, given the large number of certificates that people hold. It is one of the first systems rolled out in the world. There may be others. We have trialled it for many months, if not a year, in Perth. We have now refined that. We own the IP to it and now every inspector has on their desk an IT based system which gives them indications of what the risk-ratings are of the various organisations that they are overseeing. Coupled with that, of course, we have moved into the certificate management team approach which was to put together our safety systems inspectors, our airworthiness inspectors and our flying operations inspectors in teams so that they could better use that data.

Senator FAWCETT:You said that you own theIP. I take it that was developed by CASA staff in CASA time?

Mr McCormick: In fact, I think it was developed in the person's own time, but on the IP issues there are other systems that are similar in the world and we took legal advice on the IP issues.

Senator FAWCETT:Was that person recognised or rewarded in some way for their contribution?

Mr McCormick: They were the employee of the month, from memory.

Senator FAWCETT:So no other recognition or award given to them? No payment?

Mr McCormick: We did have to buy the IP off them. That is correct.

Senator FAWCETT:How much did that cost?

Mr McCormick: If I can confirm that, it was somewhere between $25,000 and $37,000.

Senator FAWCETT:I am assuming that you have then rolled that out across the organisation. Do you have a quality assurance IT department that looked at that? What was their advice about a home-grown system across the whole department?

Mr McCormick: What we had to do with the system was to address that very issue. We had to take the IP from the person and the system and then, in the parlance, cut it into professional code so that it is supportable by modern systems and of course to take out some of theprogramming issues which may have been loops or things to put it on a professional basis. So the system we use now has been done by our professional IT department and we do have QA. We are, in fact, at this stage rolling out quality assurance across all our flight operations to ensure we have standardisation. That is being done by a very senior CASA manager who has previously been the regional manager for southern region.

Senator FAWCETT:Were there any concerns expressed by your IT department about that approach?

& further on in Hansard

Senator FAWCETT:Mr McCormick, when the decision was first taken to proceed with this, what was the expected expenditure that would be required from CASA to roll out this system?

Mr McCormick: When we originally looked at getting to a risk based IT system we were looking at projects which we had had running for some time which were addressing this very issue. They had previously had budgets of varying amounts, so the actual purchase of this software and this system was not undertaken until we had an idea of the costs involved.

Senator FAWCETT:My question was: when it was first approved what was the capital expenditure that was approved for the project?

Mr McCormick: The capital expenditure was a very small amount of money. It was a case of how much it was going to cost. It was costing somewhere at a maximum of $37,000 to purchase it. It is not a large amount of cost in total, even capital or op-ex to roll that out in the organisation.

Senator FAWCETT:So since that initial decision have there been cost overruns where subsequent allocations of funding have been required to enable the implementation to occur?

Mr McCormick: I am not too sure that we can break it down that way. I will ask my chief financial officer. We do not have that breakdown, I am sorry.

Senator FAWCETT:Can you tell me the final overall cost of the system as of this budget?

Mr McCormick: For the CASA IT tool SkySentinel business and technical implementation, development implementation and the new CASA surveillance manuals from March 2011 to June 2013, the total cost was $2,419,157, but we do not have the breakdown of the Sky Sentinel out of that at this stage.

SenatorFAWCETT:Can you come back to the committee today, if you can, or tomorrow with that figure? I would be interested to know how much that was.
And now the rumour is that this surveillance IT tool is a clusterf*#k and has potentially circumvented several slices of swiss cheese on the safety risk matrix...hmm how potentially embarrassing for the FF GWM contingent and (as Gobbles once said) TICK..TOCK!

ps While contemplating the Sky Sentinel rumour the Jeff Boyd article on Pro Aviation is worth a read:

A Bridge Too Far

Last edited by Sarcs; 27th Sep 2013 at 01:00.
Sarcs is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2013, 01:29
  #1536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Return of The Matrix?

Sarcs, an interesting tale indeed! Why would it take CAsA more than 4 months to still not respond to a relatively simple question from Sen Fawcett in relation to an even more basic task of purchasing some I.T??
I think the Senator is having the pi#s taken out of him by these clowns who see fit not to show an ounce of accountability to anybody. But seeing that CAsA are taking so long to respond, perhaps Sen Fawcett can build upon his request and request additional information, evidence and answers to these points;

• Was this I.T system risk assessed prior to purchase and implementation?
• Has the system been reassessed post implementation to ensure it delivers the required outcomes and assurances it is meant to do?
• The CAsA Inspector who sold them the system, who is he and what is his relationship, background or history with the person(s) who signed off on the purchase?
• For the Inspector to sell this system for a tidy sum of $37k to CAsA, how was he paid? Does he have an ABN, a separately registered business? And if so, does this business he is involved in in any way provide services to industry, which could be construed as a conflict of interest considering he works for the Regulator? Has he declared his business to CAsA? After all they do make you sign paperwork in which you must declare business interests in areas that could raise the question of conflict of interests?
• It would be rumoured that the SkySentinel system has been raised before, even on PPRuNe, and CAsA immediately tried to have the comments removed. Why?
• If Fort Fumble were chasing a new I.T system of sorts, why wasn't a tender initiated? Or do you only have to tender up to a certain amount?

Of interest are Mr McComicks answers to the Senators questions in which he deflects to all and sundry such as explaining what Sentinel does, he dribbles on about its use etc etc, but he doesn't like to directly answer the good Senators question does he

It's funny, a Sentinel is a robotic device from the Matrix. A number of CAsA's people could be described as robotic.
But even better, a Sentinel is a small wooden steamboat associated with the Puget Sound Mosquito Fleet! Now I could be mistaken, but I believe the latest addition to Styx Houseboat enterprises is in fact a Sentinel......spooky.

Last edited by 004wercras; 27th Sep 2013 at 01:33.
004wercras is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2013, 11:05
  #1537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,331
And it would seem there are those who deny CAsA is corrupt.
Incompetent for sure, but corrupt?
Oh for sure.
Where are our watchdogs????????? Politicians????? anyone!!??????
thorn bird is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2013, 12:31
  #1538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 48
Posts: 547
The senate report appears to be becoming shelf ware collecting dust or am I mistaken?
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2013, 13:27
  #1539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Reg action

Next time your AOC or licence gets hassled by CASA, use the words of Albo, "if you haven't noticed we're in caretaker mode". What's good for the goose.... !
Jinglie is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2013, 23:16
  #1540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
The senate report appears to be becoming shelf ware collecting dust or am I
mistaken?
I think you are right on the money! Not only is it sitting on the shelf gathering dust in the National Archives but there won't be the companion volume of the required government response. Someone with more knowledge of the process could confirm but I don't think the new government is obliged to respond to a Senate report that was conducted during the tenure of the previous government.
Lookleft is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.