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

Merged: Senate Inquiry

Old 31st Jul 2014, 11:32
  #2121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ziggy, ignore the trolls. Every so often No Hoper (and other aliases) and Lookleft (and other aliases) come out of the sewer to stir up some trouble yada yada. One is a pilot and the other an engineer and they work together in industry and on pprune. Anyway, they sook and moan until someone comes along and puts them back on the teat then all is a fine for a little while.
Ziggy, remember you don't owe anybody anything. You don't have to answer any silly questions or probings from anyone, and should you wish to decline answering a couple of Tosser's questions it doesn't make you anything less. Keep your chin up and concentrate on you and your families well being.
004wercras is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2014, 14:27
  #2122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No hope for a bite...

...stop fishing NoHo.

For you to know so much of the happenings in the cabin, yet claiming that myself and others fabricated aligning re-accounts even though we were questioned separately, means nothing to you.
For as I have said along with many others, the evidence is written, that the report was an "aberration". That means basically, false.
So please guide me to the rationale of your thinking that your insight warrants the pilot being treated as he is? Just because who is employed and who isn't.
From what I gather, he was following protocol and much more misadventures occurred along the journey. Yet we survived.
What strikes me is the ignorance to see what all can see, oh so clearly, possibly including yourself. Maybe you're obligated to not agree with the majority.
Please challenge the evidence, which there is an abundance of, then deliver your verdict with plausible, evidence that is factually based to substantiate your previous, rather ridiculous conclusion.
Something you might like to know, saves you the trouble of searching for this one.
CP of P/A @ the time of the ditching and during the "spech audit" which found some pretty serious stuff (I have the FOIs, all of them). Wait for it....
The same CP is now an investigator for our regs. What, huh. Thought that would highlight the simple question of...WTF?

Is this safe practice? This cause is Aviation for goodness sakes. Lives depend on the changes so desperately needed. Zip has been learned from NGA. We wonder why? Not hard to figure out.

Honestly,
Ziggy
Ziggychick is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2014, 21:04
  #2123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And, it's all their own work.

Kids, the thing with trolls is as long as you keep feeding them, they'll keep eating. The troll team (tt) is having a feast which will become a banquet if someone gets banned or the thread shutdown. The insignificant efforts made to discredit and decry are too little, too late and bring tt no credit. Good to see the clumsy, transparent, craven tactics failed to get a proper bite. It's a measure of true desperation that there is even a need to engage with Ziggy. The abortive attempt to use her plight, or manipulate her words as a tool is contemptible.

The damage done to CASA and by extension the ATSB was not because of anything the IOS did, noted or commented on through Pprune. No, that was a work all of their own making. The Senate inquiry revealed that CASA and ATSB had much to be ashamed of in the management of the Pel Air accident, this prompted the Truss sponsored Forsyth report; all of which lead us to the Senate supported MoP.

Remember, there is no public statement from the FO available to discuss; the matter was not publicly discussed by the Senate inquiry. It would be both unwise and unfair to comment on hearsay, either for or against the FO, so don't be tempted to join in. The deafening silence on the matter speaks volumes to those who know how to track wabbits; that lesson will keep for another day. From an operational safety perspective, there's no doubt it would have been good to have an impartial appraisal of the crew actions, certainly there are valuable lessons to be learnt from the situation which should be passed on to the wider community. Particularly as a ditching event is relatively rare, even rarer for there to be surviving crew. A great learning opportunity squandered, even if it was a complete shambles, the lessons should be there for the benefit of future crews.

For example, the 'drama' with the last line of defence life jackets (vests), lanyards, inflation tubes, the problems trying to use them, lights and whistles. This alone correctly analysed would (IMO) have provided valuable insight to operators relying on the equipment to protect passengers and crew in any future ditching (gods forbid). An impartial analysis of the fatigue levels would also be handy as would so many other items excluded by the CASA inspired, Wodger managed, ATSB produced aberration. I am not certain which is the greater tragedy; the passengers struggling to live normal lives or industry struggling to get some positive benefit from the event.

It is noteworthy that none of this was mentioned to the RAeS crowd, instead we had a bland 'borrowed' plaintive little effort; designed to flatter a discrepancy in the small audience. It's a great shame that these safety enhancing analysis are not available for discussion. I expect the bonhomie afterwards meant more than the quality of work proffered, such is life on the slippery pole.

However, back on topic the plus side, perhaps (maybe) is the 'flight category' impasse may now be sorted out. The CASA NPRM 1304 is a very good discussion (top marks), and some of the 2004 responses, supporting the CASA proposal present very attractive alternates to the existing system; have a read.

Selah.
Kharon is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2014, 21:56
  #2124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,079
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As frequent readers of pprune will note, No Hoper and I often disagree. But on this occasion I agree with the point he (and LL) is making.

I've said on numerous occasions that my view is the ATSB's report was a sick joke and the regulator's treatment of DJ compared to the operator was a travesty. But rhetorical fist waving and head-butting on this forum achieves nothing.

I've posted on numerous occasions the only glimmer of hope I perceive for substantive change. I recommend, again, that everyone concentrate their energies on that, and merely use this forum and as an 'FYI' tool, rather than an arena for pointless wastes of energy.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2014, 23:12
  #2125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Lets hope the facts emerge at some stage.

A good start would be to conduct a new investigation - this time with representation from a credible international body such as NTSB. This investigation should start with the retrieval of the recorders. If the French can get them from AF447 at a depth of 13,000 feet, its odd that the ATSB is so concerned about the dangers of retrieving them from NGA from a depth of 100 feet.

You do have to laugh a little about timing. In November - December 2009 CASA was hosting the FAA, who were in Australia deliberating whether to downgrade Australia to tier 2 status. Right in the middle of this, we have NGA ditching followed a few weeks later by the CASA special audit into Pelair. A special audit which found multiple longstanding systemic deficiencies, and thereby raised questions about CASAs oversight. What luck for this to happen with all this international expertise at hand.

I wonder what the FAA thought of the special audit. You imagine they had a bit of a chat over beers - most of us enjoy talking shop over a beer at the end of the day. Perhaps the FAA and CASA agreed there was nothing much to it and not worth passing across to the ATSB.

CASAs action to ground Pelair following this crash seem odd set against the ATSBs subsequent report. Why ground a company for several months because of single pilot? Why not just pull the pilots licence? Did CASA over-react at the time? Or was CASA right to ground the company, and then gradually permit it to resume operations over the following months? If CASA was right to do this, how do ATSB and CASA now maintain it was a pilot problem?

Not sure about Dom being pushed out by water pressure. Water tends to rush into rather than out of a sinking vessel. In fairness however, the hull integrity was breached, the cabin was filling with water, and the door was jammed. It was night, pro viz due to fog, and there was a moderate see. Having opened an emergency exit, water would have poured in. This was not a big jet with a large exit floating on water. It was a very small jet with a crowded cabin and a small hatch, and it was sinking fast. Even if Dom could have maintained position at the exit in the face of this water, he would have been obstructing the path for the others. Hard to see he could really do much more than open the hatch, get out, and hope others followed. Dom made his share of mistakes that night, but I suspect he has been judged a bit harshly in this case.

Incredible that there seems to be legal loophole making it difficult for survivors to successfully sue. Presumably the sharks are looking for other targets.
slats11 is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2014, 23:29
  #2126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Iraq
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the regulator's treatment of DJ compared to the operator was a travesty.
Agreed, and the two premises are not mutually exclusive. But I suspect you are aware of that, Creampuff.
I suspect the Regulator nailed Dom because he would not admit to his stuffup, but tried to spread the blame, Pel Air seemed to be proactive, albeit after the event so was treated differently.

Slatts, PelAir grounded theyselves, then negotiated a voluntary agreement with the Regulator

Last edited by No Hoper; 31st Jul 2014 at 23:56. Reason: Spillliing and stopping Wabbits teasing elephants with poney poo
No Hoper is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2014, 23:58
  #2127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A few things.

Well said Slats.

004, thanks for the care shown with the warning of trolls. My chin is up this morning and I will not be lured by trolls Five years, I've learnt.

My previous post: To clarify: the reference of CP that is now with the Regs, is ChPilot. I was not referring to the FO.

Dear NoHo,
In response to your query of what I have achieved and learned. Well, more than you know.
No more responses to you from me. It is pointless.
Honestly, Ziggy

Dear CP,
Please note that NoHo and a few others play a different kind of game on here, but this seems to be justified.
I have recognised the point you're agreeing with re: the FYI tool use of the forum. So far, the fist waving ect includes NoHos post but without the scaffolding supporting it. In particular NoHo stating in post #2141 edit "Foofle Dust - particles emitted when one flatulates"
So deciphered quite simply according to NoHo it seems, please correct me if I'm wrong. That The 3 MoP delivered by the Senators, has been blown out their behinds? The 3 MoPs and AFP inv. to fizzle to poo dust.
Oh dear... These are your thoughts too?
Your glimmer of perceived hope is dragging. I don't view a community of people with genuine concerns uniting as wasted energy. I see reason in many posts.

Again...this is for Aviation Safety, please remember this.

Stay true,
Ziggy
Ziggychick is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 00:15
  #2128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Iraq
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ziggychick, peace on you and yours.
From historical evidence, I have no confidence in the senate achieving anything, Creampuff has said many times the way to get your issues onto the Governments agenda, so won't reiterate his excellent advice.

The Ex Chief Pilot of Pel Air is now an FOI, that is a So What not a WTF.

Those with a different view point arrived at from the same data set are not trolls.

I have not taken part in fist waving or vitriol, others on here do that, as they believe this is a private thread and their view is the only view.

Your steadfastness and bravery in keeping your patient alive in a terrible situation, was yours alone, Dom had no part in it, other than putting you in that situation.
No Hoper is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 00:28
  #2129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,733
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The insurgency within.

Hmm..somewhat ironic how a lot of the antagonistic vitriol displayed over the last page and a bit could quite possibly have been sorted if the CVR/FDR had of been appropriately recovered...
Kharon:
However, back on topic the plus side, perhaps (maybe) is the 'flight category' impasse may now be sorted out. The CASA NPRM 1304 is a very good discussion (top marks), and some of the 2004 responses, supporting the CASA proposal present very attractive alternates to the existing system; have a read.
Agree read it, IMO it is one of the better documents to come out of FF in a very long time. Sure there will be operators that will have reservations about some parts of the FF preferred option...

"3.3.3 Option 3: Reclassification of Medical Transport flights as Air Transport operations
Helicopter and Aeroplane medical transport operations would be moved into the air transport classification and authorised by an AOC issued in accordance with Part 119 of CASR. Medical transport operations would be subject to the requirements of the applicable air transport regulation (i.e. Parts 121, 133 or 135 of CASR) and any overarching regulations from Part 91 of CASR, as applicable."

...especially amongst the
smaller operators who have not yet implemented, or have the necessary resources to implement, a lot of the additional requirements of the preferred option:




The potential disadvantages of the proposed policy change include:
  • Some operators may need to upgrade their organisational systems to meet the criteria of Part 119 of CASR.
  • Some industry providers who conduct ‘ambulance functions’ as a secondary function may decide to move out of this sector.
  • Some operators who do not presently have carrier’s liability insurance cover will be financially disadvantaged by the requirement to gain this for their future operations.
  • Some potential for increased operational costs (over those incurred for aerial work requirements) may arise due to the specifications of Part 119 of CASR and operational Part equipment requirements12. For example:
- additional training and checking
- requirement for an AT level of aircraft equipment fit criteria.
From what I know of MT operators, most of what the FF PO contains have already been put in place by responsible operators that intend to enhance their business by adopting best safety practice etc. Besides which most aeromedical tenders automatically require these additional compliance and relief considerations as conditions of the contract.

The other surprising thing about the NPRM is it is contained within less than fifty pages, is not wrapped up in legalese and is written in plain, readily understandable english...

From the writing of the NPRM there are also strong indications that Boyd (& the NPRM crew..) have already consulted with certain heavy hitters in the MT sector (refer to, committee requested, late Submission 20)....



...which would be very much in keeping with Recommendation 12:
Recommendation 12
6.55 The committee recommends that CASA, in consultation with an Emergency Medical Services industry representative group (eg. Royal Flying Doctor Service, air ambulance operators, rotary wing rescue providers) consider the merit, form and standards of a new category of operations for Emergency Medical Services. The minister should require CASA to approve the industry plan unless there is a clear safety case not to. Scope for industry to assist as part of an audit team should also be investigated where standardisation is an issue. This should be completed within 12 months and the outcome reported publicly.
However the problem is that until such time as the current Iron Ring regime is exterminated, good well founded initiatives like NPRM 1304 will remain as thought bubbles only, or (if eventually actioned) will be so wrapped up in legal weasel words that it will be impractical & unaffordable for most MT Operators to comply...

Here is part of the current IRR policy for the classification of operations- (CEO-PN001-2004, 2009 version borrowed from MQ AAI tabled docs as there is no FF version currently available..):





Although in principle this IRR policy could indeed embrace the NPRM 1304 initiative, there is way too much wriggle room for the IR to obfuscate the matter in the interest of their ultimate master lurking in the shadows...

Ironically if the NPRM and the relevant CARs were to find their way to legislation, there should be no requirement for such executive policies...

MTF..
Sarcs is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 01:08
  #2130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,079
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I’m actually on your side, Ziggy. My point is that my saying that on this forum does not help address the substantive issues.

No Hoper. My guess is that the fundamental systemic failures of CASA and PelAir, that were exposed by the pilot being the last line of defence, were very embarrassing to CASA and PelAir. My guess is that the most expedient way to deal with that inconvenient problem was to muddy-up and down-play the fundamental systemic failures in CASA and PelAir, and shift the focus of blame to the pilot. Burn a practically defenceless individual to save exposure and embarrassment of the powerful and politically-connected: Politics 101.

The question whether aerial ambulance operations should be authorised by a charter AOC and therefore covered by the compulsory carrier’s liability insurance scheme has been bumping around in CASA for decades. Another fundamental failure of the regulatory reform program, but it only burns a few practically defenceless individuals so the government and CASA couldn’t care less.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 01:30
  #2131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Iraq
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Burn a practically defenceless individual to save exposure and embarrassment of the powerful and politically-connected: Politics 101.
This is very close to a conspiracy theory, Creampuff and as such I am loathe to subscribe to it.

Having been involved in AeroMed(Helicopter) operations I can see the new CASR bringing extra costs and change, and locking out of smaller operators from this field. Commensurate increase of costs passed onto the client.
No Hoper is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 01:39
  #2132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Coming from someone with multiple personality splits but forced to attend group therapy sessions alone, the concept of a conspiracy theory is interesting.


May I be so bold as to post a link which will lead one to ask who were the Board of Directors- which will perhaps give an insight to any political links. It is also worth noting the moving text which allays any fears about safety. Do these accreditation entities hold any duty of care to people who rely upon the status and insurance obligations of operators of aeromedical operations? I note they advertise contractual relations with Ambulance Victoria for aeromedical services.


QUOTE: "Pel-Air has full Safety and Airworthiness certification from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. Pel-Air has also been audited by HART Aviation for mining companies and currently holds Basic Aviation Risk Standard (BARS) 'Gold' registration status. We are also a Defence Recognised Supplier and hold ISO 9001:2008 certification" QUOTE.


http://www.pelair.com.au/

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 1st Aug 2014 at 01:56. Reason: Looking for tin foil hat.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 01:57
  #2133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,079
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is very close to a conspiracy theory, Creampuff and as such I am loathe to subscribe to it.
I’m comforted by the fact that the majority of the Senate Committee subscribe to the same theory, which isn’t a conspiracy theory. But I see you’ve learned Politics 102: Discredit by innuendo. Well done.

As to the standards to be applied to aerial ambulance operations, it’s simply one example of the broader classifications of operations quagmire that CASA is not, and never will be, competent to fix.

Classification of operations is, unavoidably, a balance between risk, cost and availability of service. Classification of operations is therefore a quintessentially political decision. CASA is not competent to decide where that balance is to be set, and governments don’t want to take the responsibility. That’s why the regulatory quagmire has continued to be a stinking mess for decades.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 03:29
  #2134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
People in Victoria may like to know such accreditation appears worthless in regard to aerial medevac insurance for accident victims. If CAsA are not up to regulate properly and competently, then I'm sure The Guardian or The Age would do their usual take on journalistic excellence to safeguard the population if it gave them a shot at an NLP Transport Minister.


Third party insurance should be a given for all pax, not a point of legal debate depending on the political or financial merit of The now apparent Nominal Defendant/ and whether he/she is subject to the first or second accident of the day when claiming compensation. Is he covered for the car crash, but not the plane crash? Hang on... did he already had that head injury!


The Minister for Finance should be forced to pay an Act of Grace payment to those who continue to suffer from both hurt and without compensation from the ditching and recoup that from the CAsA trough or bonuses to report writers. There is prima faci evidence of at least a perceived miscarriage of justice. "The "buck" stops somewhere.


"safe skies for everybody" ?


If they were safe, we wouldn't need insurance. (for what that's worth).

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 1st Aug 2014 at 03:31. Reason: I feel a new thread coming on.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 12:48
  #2135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,678
Received 42 Likes on 27 Posts
IN Fairyland...

Alas, in Cantberra, Dept of Transport and Infrastructure and CAsA the "buck" actually stops nowhere. It just gets passed on

Its ring a ring a rosie...and it all falls down because no-one is responsible and no one is accountable.
And no minister has the teeth. balls or interest in righting the wrongs.

Street posters in Sydney. More, more! Go you good things.!!!

Empty skies are safe skies.
aroa is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 21:36
  #2136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: THE BLUEBIRD CAFE
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
. . . ... now "the lot of you" sounds too inclusive

shame is such a big concept . . . .. .

you could have concluded your excellent

checklist of crucial criteria with the type of quote or

homily you often have so ready to hand . .

like a quote from Bruce Dawe's "After you Gary Cooper" . .

(a poem that speaks of the gun-slinger mentality memorably...

that's why it escapes me for the moment . . . cannot

even 'clear leather')


. . . something pointed . . . something like a caution

. . . something like telling off the bird who will crap in his own nest

Last edited by Fantome; 1st Aug 2014 at 23:01.
Fantome is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 21:57
  #2137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,079
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One of the many, many flaws in your post #2169, No Hoper, is that there are patent errors in the transcript of the radio transmissions. What other errors aren't patently obvious? The CVR might help to answer that. But ATSB, and others, don't want to find out, because the answers could be very inconvenient.

You assume the statements in the report to be fact. They are not fact. They are merely and mostly a cherry-picked, paraphrased, mish-mash of mostly second and third-hand hearsay - and known mistakes in transcription and transmissions - supporting the foregone conclusion. One of the patently obvious safety issues that isn't analysed is that of the performance of the life vests.

It's a sick joke.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 22:45
  #2138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,244
Received 188 Likes on 84 Posts
I would have to dispute the claim that matters have progressed. Certainly lots has happened as listed in Kharon's post but what progress has been made? The illusion of progress is certainly occurring. I'm sure Kharon would have that quote to hand by the Greek General from 400BC observing that the more things changed the less progress was occurring. The fact that Dolan has been given another 2 years at the ATSB is proof that serious progress is not being contemplated.

Lots of choices for open sensible discussion.
Lets hope so.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2014, 23:30
  #2139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LL "Lets hope so.
Indeed Lefty, indeed; there's as good an example right above this post – progress v lack of. Good points. It's all down to Truss and that will depend on what his minders advise. One thing is for sure though, if we carry on like a bunch of school kids – the dreaded "CLICK" will occur and the opposition will have won. This site may only be a small thorn in the arse of the elephant but it's all the IOS have. Now brother Creampuff was purpose built for debate, your own comments often abrasive, pointed and argumentative – but non the less welcome within the spirit and intent of (dare I say it) robust debate between professionals, it is to be expected.

I have no quarrel with another having a point of view and expressing it at strongly as possible; but, the gutter tactics of bullies, cowards and trolls serve no purpose; and can only illicit one response. Play the man – Red card; play the ball – a Try (sometimes – gods and referee willing, weather permitting).

Toot toot.
Kharon is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2014, 05:07
  #2140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wings clipped, stuck in sticky web.

Dear Pp's,

I am grateful for so much support, still after nearly half a decade.
Engaging each times with the matter has it's costs to my health.
I am very strong and want to pursue the wrong doings with passion for the safety, protection and fairness for others that may be unfortunate enough to be seized in a sticky web, such as I am.
I need to take a break. So insulting. I have to fight for justice and fairness. It is too difficult to fathom when no protection, no law, the report etc. My own beloved Australia. My leaders doing this for protection measurements. Pure cruelty. No safety learning outcome. Ignorant.

I will continue to battle, but I can not allow this to blanket me every day at this point in time.

I will continue to watch, if, there is any progress.

Need to recharge, physically and psychologically. Then I'll be back to chat to great people. Thank you Pp.

Safe skies,
Stay true,
Ziggy
Ziggychick is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.