Merged: Senate Inquiry
M&M RED stacking the deck??
Kharon - The board appointment is not as yet, seen to be another "Libby-gate" but, it does go someway toward making mugs of the IOS. If, that is, we sit back and naively, without questioning the appointment process, allow the Murky Machiavellian team to hand pick, within a closed process, a bored which will not rock the boat, rattle the tea cups or ask embarrassing questions. If this is so, then Boyd is indeed isolated and rendered nugatory. We know his history, credentials and attitudes toward the reform of CASA: but what is known of the others? Not much just yet, more by the BRB AGM.
On first glance the GFA Forsyth submission seemed quite critical of the CAsA but on 2nd & 3rd reviews it would seem that there are elements that suggest collaboration and a certain 'wet lettuce' approach when compared to say the AAAA submission??
Concerns:
Four principle areas of concern exist:
1. CASA does not employ a transparent cost/benefit analysis of its risk management approach to justify the cost impacts that regulation imposes on the Australia’s aviation industry and its participants.
2. CASA’s recent resort to unilateral and unfair action against those having a track record of worthy performance by suddenly and without recourse, suspending critical delegations was not congruent with a just, cooperative and properly risk assessed working association.
3. Inconsistency and contradictions exist within CASA in relation to the meaning of rules and interpretation by those applying the rules. It evidences CASA's conflicting/competing functions and goals of safety outcomes, regulation and enforcement.
4. Applying administrative and bureaucratic requirements, which may be appropriate for a major airline, to sport aviation organisations which have a very low risk impact on the travelling public. CASA is resorting to a punitive approach in enforcing compliance to these administrative requirements.
Four principle areas of concern exist:
1. CASA does not employ a transparent cost/benefit analysis of its risk management approach to justify the cost impacts that regulation imposes on the Australia’s aviation industry and its participants.
2. CASA’s recent resort to unilateral and unfair action against those having a track record of worthy performance by suddenly and without recourse, suspending critical delegations was not congruent with a just, cooperative and properly risk assessed working association.
3. Inconsistency and contradictions exist within CASA in relation to the meaning of rules and interpretation by those applying the rules. It evidences CASA's conflicting/competing functions and goals of safety outcomes, regulation and enforcement.
4. Applying administrative and bureaucratic requirements, which may be appropriate for a major airline, to sport aviation organisations which have a very low risk impact on the travelling public. CASA is resorting to a punitive approach in enforcing compliance to these administrative requirements.
"...Thank you for your consideration and appreciation of the importance of the Gliding Federation of Australia in the sport and recreational aviation sector. I and/or our staff are available to answer any specific questions of the review panel, or provide evidence to support your research.
I am hopeful that we will be given the opportunity to review your final recommendations prior to publication so that we can respond to any perceived gaps.
Yours sincerely,
Anita Taylor President..."
I and/or our staff seems to suggest preferably "I"..
...given the opportunity to review your final recommendations prior to publication so that we can respond to any perceived gaps...
Errr...why exactly should the GFA be given any preferential treatment to any of the other 268 submitters..
Besides everyone was given the opportunity to respond after the event, so did the GFA take up this opportunity and if so can we get a copy??Oh well time will tell but I do find it quite surprising the number of GFA members that felt the need to make their own submissions, some of which were less than conciliatory of the GFA submission...
Moving on and back to the subject of the PelAir cover-up and I thought it would be a good time to reflect on a Senator X presser & speech given back in March...
:
Government soft on Pel-Air findings
20th March 2014
The Commonwealth Government has let down the travelling public by failing to fully implement the findings of a highly critical Senate inquiry into aviation safety, Independent Senator for South Australia, Nick Xenophon, said today.
The Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee’s report into aviation accident investigations (the Pel-Air Report) found serious failures on the part of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) regarding the investigation of the ditching of Pel-Air VH-NGA off Norfolk Island in 2009.
“There are very serious matters raised in this report, including how effectively aviation operators are regulated,” Nick said. “CASA and the ATSB seem more interested in protecting themselves than protecting the Australian public.”
Senator Xenophon said the Government had failed to look at the bigger picture in the report, which shows serious systemic failures in both the ATSB and CASA.
“For the most part, the Government seems to accept that the current processes and systems are enough to make sure the ATSB and CASA are working properly,” Nick said. “But the evidence in this report clearly shows that’s not happening.”
“The Government shouldn’t take assurances from the ATSB or CASA at face value.”
Senator Xenophon said he hoped the Aviation Safety Regulation Review, established by Transport Minister Warren Truss, would back up the findings of the committee. The ATSB’s investigative processes, including its report into the Pel-Air ditching, are also being reviewed by the Canadian Transport Safety Board (TSB). However, Senator Xenophon fears the TSB review could be a whitewash because of its limited terms of reference.
“I hope the committee’s report has opened the door for serious change,” Nick said. “I believe the independent review will vindicate its findings, and I hope the Government will have the courage to act on them.”
20th March 2014
The Commonwealth Government has let down the travelling public by failing to fully implement the findings of a highly critical Senate inquiry into aviation safety, Independent Senator for South Australia, Nick Xenophon, said today.
The Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee’s report into aviation accident investigations (the Pel-Air Report) found serious failures on the part of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) regarding the investigation of the ditching of Pel-Air VH-NGA off Norfolk Island in 2009.
“There are very serious matters raised in this report, including how effectively aviation operators are regulated,” Nick said. “CASA and the ATSB seem more interested in protecting themselves than protecting the Australian public.”
Senator Xenophon said the Government had failed to look at the bigger picture in the report, which shows serious systemic failures in both the ATSB and CASA.
“For the most part, the Government seems to accept that the current processes and systems are enough to make sure the ATSB and CASA are working properly,” Nick said. “But the evidence in this report clearly shows that’s not happening.”
“The Government shouldn’t take assurances from the ATSB or CASA at face value.”
Senator Xenophon said he hoped the Aviation Safety Regulation Review, established by Transport Minister Warren Truss, would back up the findings of the committee. The ATSB’s investigative processes, including its report into the Pel-Air ditching, are also being reviewed by the Canadian Transport Safety Board (TSB). However, Senator Xenophon fears the TSB review could be a whitewash because of its limited terms of reference.
“I hope the committee’s report has opened the door for serious change,” Nick said. “I believe the independent review will vindicate its findings, and I hope the Government will have the courage to act on them.”
Ziggy chick, if you go to QandA site and click on contact we can ask for panel members and questions.
Contact Us | Q&A | ABC TV
Contact Us | Q&A | ABC TV
So a natural inclusion to the QANDA panel would have to be Senator X but who else would the IOS want to question??While on Q&A...
..a reminder that it is only 2 weeks to estimates so now would be a good time to start lobbying your favourite Senators...
MTF...
Ps M&M mate while your busy apparently stacking the deck..
..how about getting one of your minions (in the interest of transparency & consistency) to publish the responses to the Forsyth report; & FFS can't you put a call through to the TSBC and ask them to get a wriggle on...
Last edited by Sarcs; 7th Oct 2014 at 01:10.
a reminder that it is only 2 weeks to estimates so now would be a good time to start lobbying your favourite Senators...
There is ample evidence of CASA incompetence Part 61 being just the latest example. The ATSB has been put into its bureaucratic place by its Commissioner and his competency has been questioned by the Senate. The independent review by the TSB has been neutered.
I don't have any answers, just concerns about what will be required to have this situation changed. I once thought that the Senate was the solution but the limits of the power of the Senate have been successfully exposed by those who know how to play the game.
Nobody in the political sphere or the public domain, outside of the aviation
industry, could care less. As long as they get their cheap flights or Qantas Club membership they don't consider that a problem exists.
Yep TB your primary school reading levels are holding you in good stead.
Take your rose coloured group think glasses off and reread the last 5 years or so of this thread and point to the time that anything has changed after an Inquiry, Estimates etc etc etc.....My original question was in response to Sarcs
Again I ask it, and you can answer it or ignore it, but for what purpose should we start lobbying? If you think progress is being made I applaud your optimism, if you think asking the question is a form of acquiescence to the way CASA operates then even accusing you of a Year 3 reading level is generous.
Take your rose coloured group think glasses off and reread the last 5 years or so of this thread and point to the time that anything has changed after an Inquiry, Estimates etc etc etc.....My original question was in response to Sarcs
a reminder that it is only 2 weeks to estimates so now would be a good time to start lobbying your favourite Senators...
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
So everyone. Give up, continued effort to pressure the regulator is futile. It upsets them.
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 7th Oct 2014 at 05:23. Reason: A failure as a marine PhD but continues to swim against the current.
Frank: the voice of Dory
continued effort to pressure the regulator is futile.
Then again I know you have the memory span of a Pacific regal blue tang so you probably think that all this estimates stuff is all brand new.
As opposed to your lobbying which to me just looks like whinging:
From what I can tell most of the commentary ranges from mild indignation to lets tear down the system. Even UITA has given up counting the number of hits on the thread. My commentary was on the purpose of lobbying a politician prior to another Estimates hearing. If you think that pages and pages of the same thing being stated is lobbying then I suggest that you and Frank start a lobbying consultancy and see how far you get.
When corruption and incompetence is positively condoned by your government, who apparently has no control over you anyway, why on earth would you give a damn about the industry you regulate?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I have to come up there -
OI ! – Knock it off; Lefty was only expressing what many in industry think: defining the sense of helplessness when much needed change seemed within strike; that now is being not only denied, but wilfully withheld. CASA are Toast, they know it, we know it. ATSB is basket case; they know it, we know it. Every fool in the market place knows it; except the flamin' minuscule responsible for it.
Truss is sitting in a 'Budda' like trance, fiddling (with the gods only know what) while Rome burns.
It was never, not ever, going to be easy to get a government to admit it was wrong, hired the wrong man and then threw great wads of money at the 'problem - to try and fix it; and lost the bet, big time (with big industry bucks; bye the bye).
Minuscule – not every one wants "government money" : we will be shortly witnessing a holocaust – and YOU Sir, pressed the button.
Sack the Murky Machiavellian crew; hire an "administrator" to clean up the unholy mess CASA is in; appoint an experienced deputy for "Airline" and an expert deputy for "GA" (bless Mike Smith, poor sod), remove the artificial, self serving barricades and be known as the man who saved Australian aviation.
It's a piece of cake – just stop buggering about with the clerical staff and start listening to those with blood, sweat and years of tears invested in the industry. Believe me, there is more wisdom in a country aero club about 'matters aeronautical' than you will find in the self serving "department" of smoke and mirrors.
Good first post Lefty – you nicely capture industry 'angst', next step resistance. Tell 'em stick 61 where the sun don't shine, take it away and only bring it back when it is acceptable and comprehensible to industry. We did, when all said and done; pay for the wretched thing.
Now then Wodger 2 – bugger off and fix it, IT IS (as are all current antics) UNACCEPTABLE.
Selah...
Truss is sitting in a 'Budda' like trance, fiddling (with the gods only know what) while Rome burns.
It was never, not ever, going to be easy to get a government to admit it was wrong, hired the wrong man and then threw great wads of money at the 'problem - to try and fix it; and lost the bet, big time (with big industry bucks; bye the bye).
Minuscule – not every one wants "government money" : we will be shortly witnessing a holocaust – and YOU Sir, pressed the button.
Sack the Murky Machiavellian crew; hire an "administrator" to clean up the unholy mess CASA is in; appoint an experienced deputy for "Airline" and an expert deputy for "GA" (bless Mike Smith, poor sod), remove the artificial, self serving barricades and be known as the man who saved Australian aviation.
It's a piece of cake – just stop buggering about with the clerical staff and start listening to those with blood, sweat and years of tears invested in the industry. Believe me, there is more wisdom in a country aero club about 'matters aeronautical' than you will find in the self serving "department" of smoke and mirrors.
Good first post Lefty – you nicely capture industry 'angst', next step resistance. Tell 'em stick 61 where the sun don't shine, take it away and only bring it back when it is acceptable and comprehensible to industry. We did, when all said and done; pay for the wretched thing.
Now then Wodger 2 – bugger off and fix it, IT IS (as are all current antics) UNACCEPTABLE.
Selah...
Last edited by Kharon; 7th Oct 2014 at 08:20. Reason: Did I shout - did I ??? Mea culpa ? - Don't think so.
Thankyou Kharon for actually taking the time to read my post. We don't always see eye to eye but a critical and unbiased assessment of a post is always a civilized way to proceed the discussion. I was among the many who thought that an inquiry by the Senate would resolve many issues facing the aviation industry. I thought that the Senate would be listened to and that at the very least any recommendations put forward by them would be acted upon. That was in 2010 (or 2009) and we are still facing the same system, no changes, no compromise by both sides of the political fence.
The various industry associations are starting to get a bit more vocal, so like Obi Wan they are our only hope. The only other vehicle for change is too unpleasant to contemplate but historically, the likely path.
The various industry associations are starting to get a bit more vocal, so like Obi Wan they are our only hope. The only other vehicle for change is too unpleasant to contemplate but historically, the likely path.
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
Make no mistake, our regulatory authority and it's political and bureaucratic minions are a cancer on the aviation industry. It appears it can't be cut out so it is terminal. Dick once said, before you can fix CAsA it has to be destroyed first. Just like cancer. So when we have a patient with a terminal illness, caused by incompetence and corruption of power, at the highest level, the best accepted medical therapy is to keep the patient positive, give hope where it's possible, and pray for a miracle. Nobody but the callous, (yes they live amongst us), would suggest to the patient, get over it, that he just accept the diagnosis, don't explore every avenue of cure, don't attempt to stop others from suffering the same fate and prepare himself for death. And God help us if the patient has to rely upon some organization that should have been looking after his interests in the first place to fight for him in his dying days. Some of these irritating individual splinters of the original compromised representative body's hold no aces that will help anybody in this game and pandering to them gives them faux credibility that eventually comes back as their ideas.
A pox on them all.
A pox on them all.
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 7th Oct 2014 at 21:17. Reason: I reserve the right to rant as I see appropriate.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I contacted QandA:
Asked for Minister Truss and various senators to be on Panel to discuss senate inquiry recommendations.
Contact Us | Q&A | ABC TV
We need many people to request the same or they won't consider it topical
Asked for Minister Truss and various senators to be on Panel to discuss senate inquiry recommendations.
Contact Us | Q&A | ABC TV
We need many people to request the same or they won't consider it topical
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mixed messages and metaphors.
I just wonder, how our minuscule is going to 'manage' the united Senate committee estimates. There is a seriously long list of 'sticky' issues for the committee to play with. The sheer diversity of topic for discussion places Truss in the centre of an almost indefensible position with a dozen or more pathways to that position. If it were a chess game – it would be check mate in three moves. The 'airports' fiasco and the subtle, but effective 'tinkering' with the rules is a major issue. Then there is the whiff of smoke surrounding the indecent speed with which the Pel-Air Humpty-Dumpty was repaired, combined with the atrocious treatment of both Casey and James. In the mix is the MoP, CASA being haunted by AFP involvement in 'several' matters of interest.
That's all before the main course is served and it's an extensive menu offered to the Senators. That's before they get down to the brass tacks issues of why their report and expert, considered recommendations, provided at some considerable expense and effort, has been treated with contempt and indifference. They may also wonder why the ASRR was treated in the same fashion, why the industry response to the ASRR have not been published; and, for $64,000 why the initial report from the Canadian 'revue' (can't call it a review) is so very different from the one being 'translated' (transmogrified) into French before eventually being 'published'. There'll be hell to pay if the original hits the streets, through 'Wikileaks'. Can you imagine the fuss, the ATSB report card (Autumn version) released with a big 'no problemo' ticket, the same day as the original (Summer version) is put out on WL. Now that is a thing I'd love to see – laugh?; Oh, you betchya socks....I digress.
Not many sleeps now and we shall see, be interesting to note how much horse trading has gone on; although I can't quite see what Truss has to trade with. He's sitting in the middle of an artillery target, lets hope Barnaby or even Abbott can see the potential collateral damage and move this fragile, exposed piece to a safe square on the chess board.
Then again – it could all fizzle and dribble away, leaving another steaming pile of elephant dung, cooling in it's wake. We shall see..
I know, but they are my metaphors; mangle them as much as me like –
Toot toot
That's all before the main course is served and it's an extensive menu offered to the Senators. That's before they get down to the brass tacks issues of why their report and expert, considered recommendations, provided at some considerable expense and effort, has been treated with contempt and indifference. They may also wonder why the ASRR was treated in the same fashion, why the industry response to the ASRR have not been published; and, for $64,000 why the initial report from the Canadian 'revue' (can't call it a review) is so very different from the one being 'translated' (transmogrified) into French before eventually being 'published'. There'll be hell to pay if the original hits the streets, through 'Wikileaks'. Can you imagine the fuss, the ATSB report card (Autumn version) released with a big 'no problemo' ticket, the same day as the original (Summer version) is put out on WL. Now that is a thing I'd love to see – laugh?; Oh, you betchya socks..
..I digress.Not many sleeps now and we shall see, be interesting to note how much horse trading has gone on; although I can't quite see what Truss has to trade with. He's sitting in the middle of an artillery target, lets hope Barnaby or even Abbott can see the potential collateral damage and move this fragile, exposed piece to a safe square on the chess board.
Then again – it could all fizzle and dribble away, leaving another steaming pile of elephant dung, cooling in it's wake. We shall see..
I know, but they are my metaphors; mangle them as much as me like –
Toot toot
Last edited by Kharon; 8th Oct 2014 at 19:45. Reason: Love the Canuck datelines - Spring, Autumn, Summer, Winter. Mush simpler than using an actual date.
I just wonder, how our minuscule is going to 'manage' the united Senate committee estimates.
The Minister and his Departmental and agency officials will continue to treat the Senate with:
contempt and indifference.
Reverend Forsyth - 'Let us pray'.
Courtesy of the AA magazine...:
Yesterday the Rev gave his eulogy to the converted, not so converted & presumably some heathens (FF iron ring)..
Although we are not yet privy to the full transcript some of the quotes & text from the AA article are worth repeating: Forsyth suggests two-year timeline to restore industry’s relationship with CASA
Interestingly enough, not long before the Rev delivered his eulogy, Steve C from the Oz put out this article on an announced Flight Safety Foundation project:
Good luck with that Mr Marshall when it comes to dealing with FF (the King of troughs, obfuscation & embuggerance of the weak) & the ATsBeaker (who was complicit in the PelAir cover-up)...
Moving on and not long before the Forsyth speech Beaker also stepped up to the podium... Here is a wrap of mi..mi..mi..Beaker's dribble where apparently, as is typical lately, he avoided all other aviation safety relevant topics except his pride & joy MH370..
: Dolan optimistic on finding MH370
OK no surprises there I guess...
However one wonders if the miniscule, M&M & co will be having 2nd thoughts on whether they have picked the right man for the job...
Especially when you have international aviation heavy weights such as Sir Tim questioning the veracity of the ATsB search assumptions & the Malaysian investigation so far...
:
{Ps It is well worth reading the Highlights from the Sir Tim interview transcript}
Hmm...me thinks there is a lot riding on the eventual outcome of the MH370 search/investigation for Beaker & CO...
MTF...
: Yesterday the Rev gave his eulogy to the converted, not so converted & presumably some heathens (FF iron ring)..
Although we are not yet privy to the full transcript some of the quotes & text from the AA article are worth repeating: Forsyth suggests two-year timeline to restore industry’s relationship with CASA
...British Airways and Easyjet freely sent the majority of their operational safety data through to their national regulator, something that would be unheard of here...
“I would never have done it in Qantas 10-12 years ago and you can be damn sure no one is going to do it in this country now,”...
...Overseas, operators share some and in some cases operators share all of that in-house data with the regulator.”
“That’s not happening in Australia. In fact, the reverse is true.”..
Forsyth said the industry’s view that the relationship with CASA was both inappropriate and unhealthy centred on the availability and use of safety data.
Technological advancements in aircraft design and production meant safety systems had evolved, making operations more reliable and eliminating the likes of fixed interval overhauls and “over-the-shoulder” inspection and quality assurance roles. As a result, regulators needed to know more than what was available from incident reports, such as information from airlines’ increasingly sophisticated data and analytical tools within their safety management systems.
However, Australian carriers were increasingly reluctant to share any more than was legally required to CASA.
“There was even some evidence that some people were actually not even reporting the mandatory data to CASA,” Forsyth said.
While airlines in some countries sent their safety data directly to the regulator, Forsyth noted Australian operators sent their information to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), where it was “de-identified” before a summary was produced for CASA. He described that process as “clearly out of step with best practice”.
“This issue revolves around trust...”
“I would never have done it in Qantas 10-12 years ago and you can be damn sure no one is going to do it in this country now,”...
...Overseas, operators share some and in some cases operators share all of that in-house data with the regulator.”
“That’s not happening in Australia. In fact, the reverse is true.”..
Forsyth said the industry’s view that the relationship with CASA was both inappropriate and unhealthy centred on the availability and use of safety data.
Technological advancements in aircraft design and production meant safety systems had evolved, making operations more reliable and eliminating the likes of fixed interval overhauls and “over-the-shoulder” inspection and quality assurance roles. As a result, regulators needed to know more than what was available from incident reports, such as information from airlines’ increasingly sophisticated data and analytical tools within their safety management systems.
However, Australian carriers were increasingly reluctant to share any more than was legally required to CASA.
“There was even some evidence that some people were actually not even reporting the mandatory data to CASA,” Forsyth said.
While airlines in some countries sent their safety data directly to the regulator, Forsyth noted Australian operators sent their information to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), where it was “de-identified” before a summary was produced for CASA. He described that process as “clearly out of step with best practice”.
“This issue revolves around trust...”
Push to share global safety data: leading role for Australia
AUSTRALIA is taking a leading role in a Flight Safety Foundation project to study ways of setting up a global system of sharing safety information.
Australian Greg Marshall, who has taken up the position of vice-president global programs at the foundation’s headquarters in the US, said the project would focus initially on the Asia-Pacific and pan-American regions.
He said it would seek to find a way of capturing the wealth of information collected across the globe by regulators, air safety investigators, airlines, other aircraft operators and navigation service providers.
“They’re collecting that information and they’re collecting it in various forms,’’ Mr Marshall said. “Some of it’s been shared and some of it’s not.
“I guess the secret is that if we can actually capture all of that data in a common form where it can be used, that would be extremely valuable to a number of organisations.’’
Mr Marshall said the foundation would initially survey what sort of information was available in the two regions, who has the data and what protections it was afforded. “We’re looking at what data is actually out there,’’ he said. “It could be from flight data monitoring, it could be flight track data, but probably more importantly the data streams that come from both the operators and the government safety reporting systems.
“We want to see what we can do with those to basically consolidate them and then eventually report them so everybody can share that information.
“That way you can see how a region is performing against certain safety measures and find where they can best focus their resources in improving areas of safety that might differ from region to region.’’ From a practical sense, Mr Marshall said the study would also look at the different systems being used by various bodies and operators, what architecture they used and whether they could talk to each other.
It would also look at whether information could be funnelled through a third-party system.
He believed Australia and New Zealand could take a lead in such a project because of the wealth of knowledge in both countries in managing and capturing data.
“And I think that organisations within Australia can certainly take a role in helping other regions in the development and implementation of a system that allows the sharing of that de-identified data for the betterment of everyone,’’ he said. Mr Marshall said de-identifying the data would be an important issue because of cases in some jurisdictions where safety has been used for judicial purposes or subpoenaed for civil cases.
While there were good systems in Australia and the US, there was still “a long way to go” in some other parts of the world.
“Once we identify where those deficiencies are, I think there’s scope … for a separate study to be done on data protection and how various jurisdictions can establish legislation to essentially protect that safety data,” he said.
“The story with submitting voluntarily is that if the data is suddenly then used in a punitive matter, it dries up the source of voluntary reporting. This is against the principles of capture and analysis for safety purposes.’’
The global data sharing study is one of several projects the FSF has under way. Others include a look at go-rounds with European air navigation organisation Eurocontrol and research firm Presage and, in the Asia-Pacific, work on upset recovery training.
“The intent there is to increase the awareness of upset recovery training and its effectiveness in unusual attitudes, loss-of-control states,’’ Mr Marshall said.
“So it’s being raised at that regional level, at least within the Asia-Pacific, and probably more broadly thereafter.”
AUSTRALIA is taking a leading role in a Flight Safety Foundation project to study ways of setting up a global system of sharing safety information.
Australian Greg Marshall, who has taken up the position of vice-president global programs at the foundation’s headquarters in the US, said the project would focus initially on the Asia-Pacific and pan-American regions.
He said it would seek to find a way of capturing the wealth of information collected across the globe by regulators, air safety investigators, airlines, other aircraft operators and navigation service providers.
“They’re collecting that information and they’re collecting it in various forms,’’ Mr Marshall said. “Some of it’s been shared and some of it’s not.
“I guess the secret is that if we can actually capture all of that data in a common form where it can be used, that would be extremely valuable to a number of organisations.’’
Mr Marshall said the foundation would initially survey what sort of information was available in the two regions, who has the data and what protections it was afforded. “We’re looking at what data is actually out there,’’ he said. “It could be from flight data monitoring, it could be flight track data, but probably more importantly the data streams that come from both the operators and the government safety reporting systems.
“We want to see what we can do with those to basically consolidate them and then eventually report them so everybody can share that information.
“That way you can see how a region is performing against certain safety measures and find where they can best focus their resources in improving areas of safety that might differ from region to region.’’ From a practical sense, Mr Marshall said the study would also look at the different systems being used by various bodies and operators, what architecture they used and whether they could talk to each other.
It would also look at whether information could be funnelled through a third-party system.
He believed Australia and New Zealand could take a lead in such a project because of the wealth of knowledge in both countries in managing and capturing data.
“And I think that organisations within Australia can certainly take a role in helping other regions in the development and implementation of a system that allows the sharing of that de-identified data for the betterment of everyone,’’ he said. Mr Marshall said de-identifying the data would be an important issue because of cases in some jurisdictions where safety has been used for judicial purposes or subpoenaed for civil cases.
While there were good systems in Australia and the US, there was still “a long way to go” in some other parts of the world.
“Once we identify where those deficiencies are, I think there’s scope … for a separate study to be done on data protection and how various jurisdictions can establish legislation to essentially protect that safety data,” he said.
“The story with submitting voluntarily is that if the data is suddenly then used in a punitive matter, it dries up the source of voluntary reporting. This is against the principles of capture and analysis for safety purposes.’’
The global data sharing study is one of several projects the FSF has under way. Others include a look at go-rounds with European air navigation organisation Eurocontrol and research firm Presage and, in the Asia-Pacific, work on upset recovery training.
“The intent there is to increase the awareness of upset recovery training and its effectiveness in unusual attitudes, loss-of-control states,’’ Mr Marshall said.
“So it’s being raised at that regional level, at least within the Asia-Pacific, and probably more broadly thereafter.”
Moving on and not long before the Forsyth speech Beaker also stepped up to the podium...
Here is a wrap of mi..mi..mi..Beaker's dribble where apparently, as is typical lately, he avoided all other aviation safety relevant topics except his pride & joy MH370..: Dolan optimistic on finding MH370 OK no surprises there I guess...
However one wonders if the miniscule, M&M & co will be having 2nd thoughts on whether they have picked the right man for the job...
Especially when you have international aviation heavy weights such as Sir Tim questioning the veracity of the ATsB search assumptions & the Malaysian investigation so far... :
Emirates chief Tim Clark reveals suspicions over true fate of missing flight MH370
TIM Clark is no MH370 conspiracy theory crackpot.
As the recently knighted Emirates president and CEO told Aviation Week in July: “Something is not right here and we need to get to the bottom of it.”
Now, seven months after the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 vanished en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, Sir Tim has cast doubt on the official version of events.
In an extraordinary interview with German magazine Der Spiegel, he challenges the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s conclusion this week that MH370 flew south over the Indian Ocean on autopilot for five hours until it ran out of fuel and fell out of the sky, forcing 239 passengers into a watery grave.
Instead, Sir Tim believes it is far more likely that “MH370 was under control, probably until the very end”, questions the veracity of the “so-called electronic satellite ‘handshake’” used by analysts to pinpoint the probable crash site and insists the mysterious cargo in the hold (removed from the manifest by Malaysian authorities) is a crucial clue to the puzzle.
That an aircraft the size of MH370 can simply disappear without a trace, “not even a seat cushion” was downright “suspicious”, he said.
The executive has vowed that he will not rest until the truth is known, declaring: “I will continue to ask questions and make a nuisance of myself, even as others would like to bury it.”
And as the head of the largest operator of the Boeing 777 in the world (Emirates has a fleet of 127), “I need to know how anybody could interdict our systems”.
Investigators have said the plane’s tracking systems were deliberately disabled by somebody with extensive aviation knowledge in order to take it off radar.
TIM Clark is no MH370 conspiracy theory crackpot.
As the recently knighted Emirates president and CEO told Aviation Week in July: “Something is not right here and we need to get to the bottom of it.”
Now, seven months after the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 vanished en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, Sir Tim has cast doubt on the official version of events.
In an extraordinary interview with German magazine Der Spiegel, he challenges the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s conclusion this week that MH370 flew south over the Indian Ocean on autopilot for five hours until it ran out of fuel and fell out of the sky, forcing 239 passengers into a watery grave.
Instead, Sir Tim believes it is far more likely that “MH370 was under control, probably until the very end”, questions the veracity of the “so-called electronic satellite ‘handshake’” used by analysts to pinpoint the probable crash site and insists the mysterious cargo in the hold (removed from the manifest by Malaysian authorities) is a crucial clue to the puzzle.
That an aircraft the size of MH370 can simply disappear without a trace, “not even a seat cushion” was downright “suspicious”, he said.
The executive has vowed that he will not rest until the truth is known, declaring: “I will continue to ask questions and make a nuisance of myself, even as others would like to bury it.”
And as the head of the largest operator of the Boeing 777 in the world (Emirates has a fleet of 127), “I need to know how anybody could interdict our systems”.
Investigators have said the plane’s tracking systems were deliberately disabled by somebody with extensive aviation knowledge in order to take it off radar.
Hmm...me thinks there is a lot riding on the eventual outcome of the MH370 search/investigation for Beaker & CO...
MTF...
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Yosemite
Age: 52
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intelligent Tim, conspiracies and Beakers
Sir Tim is an intelligent man with a high I.Q. He speaks what is on his mind, which coincidentally is what is on many peoples minds.
Perhaps he is suspecting something untoward, something the conspiracy theorists have been promulgating yet something the narrow minded dismiss instantly? I would suggest (just my opinion) the following connection in this accident is of interest, in relation to who was on the passenger manifest, some of those pax belonged to Freescale Semiconductor Ltd, primarily owned by the Blackstone Group (Lord Jacob Rothschild) and the Carlyle Group are listed as a secondary investor.....
If you research the above companies and the apparent complexity of the loss of this aircraft you can see how this 'tragedy' could be of a nature much bigger than the average punter can imagine. As for choosing the ATSB and mi mi Beaker to investigate, it is the logical choice should a high level coverup be the order of the day - the investigating authority is seperate from the Anglo American powers, therefore, in essence, remain at arms length from those doing the covering, plus Beaker is the perfect pawn as he is a complete nupty, devoid of any brain matter, easily manipulated and soft in the crotch! The perfect pawn or fallguy for such a mission.
At the end of the day mechanical failure is always possible, and the notion of pilot suicide cannot be discounted. But a higher level reason behind this occurrence can't be discounted either. No government or powerful corporation is beyond the capability of causing such an event, and anybody who thinks these people are open books and just couldn't pull this off is naive and wishful. This planet is covered from head to ass with satellite systems, seismic tracking and recording technology and other tools of the trade that we probably don't even know exists. To say that nobody, and I mean nobody saw a thing is stupidity of the highest order. Somebody knows exact what happenned, and how, when and where. Hopefully, time will tell.....
Perhaps he is suspecting something untoward, something the conspiracy theorists have been promulgating yet something the narrow minded dismiss instantly? I would suggest (just my opinion) the following connection in this accident is of interest, in relation to who was on the passenger manifest, some of those pax belonged to Freescale Semiconductor Ltd, primarily owned by the Blackstone Group (Lord Jacob Rothschild) and the Carlyle Group are listed as a secondary investor.....
If you research the above companies and the apparent complexity of the loss of this aircraft you can see how this 'tragedy' could be of a nature much bigger than the average punter can imagine. As for choosing the ATSB and mi mi Beaker to investigate, it is the logical choice should a high level coverup be the order of the day - the investigating authority is seperate from the Anglo American powers, therefore, in essence, remain at arms length from those doing the covering, plus Beaker is the perfect pawn as he is a complete nupty, devoid of any brain matter, easily manipulated and soft in the crotch! The perfect pawn or fallguy for such a mission.
At the end of the day mechanical failure is always possible, and the notion of pilot suicide cannot be discounted. But a higher level reason behind this occurrence can't be discounted either. No government or powerful corporation is beyond the capability of causing such an event, and anybody who thinks these people are open books and just couldn't pull this off is naive and wishful. This planet is covered from head to ass with satellite systems, seismic tracking and recording technology and other tools of the trade that we probably don't even know exists. To say that nobody, and I mean nobody saw a thing is stupidity of the highest order. Somebody knows exact what happenned, and how, when and where. Hopefully, time will tell.....