Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks
Firstly a thanks to all that have shown support, much grateful to you all.
Around March this year I visited Mr Truss in his office in Canberra. Bumped into John Sharpe in the lobby, (after 3.5yrs of ziltch, he ask "so how are you?" Huh?).
With Mr Truss I kept emphasising the need for new reform. The pending Senate findings given the EVIDENCE was going to be a no brainer. I recall saying this has been an alleged criminal offence involving air safety and that has a direct hit on our travelling public. Needs a fixing.
Disappointed in his email post visit and nil contact since.
I reckon, the AFP should respond and report on all aviation incidents. I'm sure their entry credentials would be ten fold more robust than the ATSB.
Around March this year I visited Mr Truss in his office in Canberra. Bumped into John Sharpe in the lobby, (after 3.5yrs of ziltch, he ask "so how are you?" Huh?).
With Mr Truss I kept emphasising the need for new reform. The pending Senate findings given the EVIDENCE was going to be a no brainer. I recall saying this has been an alleged criminal offence involving air safety and that has a direct hit on our travelling public. Needs a fixing.
Disappointed in his email post visit and nil contact since.
I reckon, the AFP should respond and report on all aviation incidents. I'm sure their entry credentials would be ten fold more robust than the ATSB.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just read the additional comments from Senator Xenophon on the following link. Couple of quotes.
Senate Committees ? Parliament of Australia
Good to hear that the report is being downloaded.
Quite a lot of views happening around 427,000. is 450,000 maybe 500,000 achievable?
1.8 It is important to note that 'this story' never made it into the final report, or into any other arena. This email clearly indicates there was a belief inside the ATSB that CASA had 'got itself into a hole', and that the ATSB’s priority was avoiding conflict between the two agencies, rather than holding CASA to account. Indeed, the ATSB's report makes no mention of the officer's concerns, and does not even hint at the whole 'story' outlined in the email.
1.22 Ultimately, this inquiry has exposed serious and significant flaws in Australia's aviation safety systems. The general industry attitude towards both the ATSB and CASA is incredibly concerning; it is a mixture of fear, suspicion, disappointment and derision.
1.23 It is my view that CASA, under Mr McCormick, has become a regulatory bully that appears to take any action available to ensure its own shortcomings are not made public. This poses great risks to aviation safety, and the safety of the travelling public. Equally, the ATSB—which should fearlessly expose any shortcomings on the part of CASA and other organisations to improve aviation safety—has become institutionally timid and appears to lack the strength to perform its role adequately. Both agencies require a complete overhaul, and I believe it is only luck that their ineptness has not resulted in further deaths so far. There is an urgent need for an Inspector-General of Aviation Safety, entirely independent of the Minister and his department, to be a watchdog for these agencies.
1.24 In the end, this report raises many questions. But if we wish to bring about change and improve aviation safety, we will clearly need to look beyond our inept regulators and ask: who will guard the guards themselves?
1.22 Ultimately, this inquiry has exposed serious and significant flaws in Australia's aviation safety systems. The general industry attitude towards both the ATSB and CASA is incredibly concerning; it is a mixture of fear, suspicion, disappointment and derision.
1.23 It is my view that CASA, under Mr McCormick, has become a regulatory bully that appears to take any action available to ensure its own shortcomings are not made public. This poses great risks to aviation safety, and the safety of the travelling public. Equally, the ATSB—which should fearlessly expose any shortcomings on the part of CASA and other organisations to improve aviation safety—has become institutionally timid and appears to lack the strength to perform its role adequately. Both agencies require a complete overhaul, and I believe it is only luck that their ineptness has not resulted in further deaths so far. There is an urgent need for an Inspector-General of Aviation Safety, entirely independent of the Minister and his department, to be a watchdog for these agencies.
1.24 In the end, this report raises many questions. But if we wish to bring about change and improve aviation safety, we will clearly need to look beyond our inept regulators and ask: who will guard the guards themselves?
Senate Committees ? Parliament of Australia
Good to hear that the report is being downloaded.
Quite a lot of views happening around 427,000. is 450,000 maybe 500,000 achievable?
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 25th May 2013 at 11:54.
Report going international....err ICAO: "Please Explain??"
Avweb story out yesterday (today our time):
And 'wikipedia' has been updated too:
King Mrdacacrat: "Yes Minister it is all a bit embarassing..." 
May 25, 2013
Australian Senate: Norfolk Island Crash Investigation Could Lead To Criminal Probe
By Paul Bertorelli, Editorial Director
In a scathingly critical report (PDF) of Australian safety investigators and regulators, the Australian Senate last week found that an investigation into the 2009 ditching of a medical evacuation flight off Norfolk Island was so incompetently handled that it could be referred to authorities for criminal prosecution. The Senate investigation, which began last September, found that during the crash investigation, Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority failed to provide the Australian Transport Safety Board with critical documents and findings concerning the Pel-Air ditching. That information would have revealed, according to the Senate probe, that CASA knew of ongoing systemic shortcomings in Pel-Air’s operation that directly contributed to the accident. CASA’s action, says the Senate report, may have violated Australia’s Transport Safety Investigations Act. “It could be seen as a breach of the Transport Safety Act in terms of obstructing an investigation,” said Sen. David Fawcett.
The accident occurred in November 2009 when the twin-engine Westwind ditched off Norfolk Island enroute from Samoa with a critical but stable patient. The Westwind’s ultimate destination was Melbourne, with a scheduled fuel stop in Norfolk Island. The flight’s captain, Dominic James, departed with legally sufficient fuel into a forecast of good VFR. Enroute, the Norfolk Island weather tanked and after three unsuccessful approach attempts, James ditched the Westwind near the island. All six aboard survived, albeit some with injuries. The ATSB’s accident investigation, which took some 1000 days to complete, faulted the crew for not planning the flight in accordance with Australian regulation and Pel-Air operations specifications. It blamed James for not aggressively seeking updated weather reports and for failing to divert to Noumea, New Caledonia, which the Westwind initially had fuel to do.
Following the ATSB’s findings, James challenged some of the investigator’s findings but his queries were dismissed by the ATSB. The Australian Senate took up James’ case last year and its probe revealed widespread flaws in the ATSB’s investigatory work. Among numerous findings by the Senate was a report on a CASA review of Pel-Air that “unequivocally concluded…that the Pel-Air Westwind operation was at an elevated risk and warranted more frequent and intensive surveillance and intervention strategies.” Yet no mention of this report appeared in the ATSB’s findings blaming the pilot.“In other words, Pel-Air was lacking, CASA's oversight of Pel-Air was lacking, and the accident occurred in an environment of serious aviation safety deficiencies,” the Senate report said.
Although the Senate investigation stops short of saying the ATSB and CASA colluded to suppress information, it does conclude that the two agencies narrowed the accident investigation focus in a way that excluded larger safety issues. “This inquiry has shaken my confidence in the CASA and the ATSB to the core. I no longer have confidence in them. That’s why I think we need an inspector general of aviation,” Sen. Nick Xenophone told Australia’s ABC News. “This goes beyond Dominic James, which I regard and many regard as a scapegoat for the failings of CASA and the ATSB,” he added.
The Senate report makes numerous recommendations to improve the ATSB investigation process, ranging from additional training for investigators, to requiring the ATSB’s chief commissioner to have extensive aviation safety experience, to establishing an oversight board for investigations. In one of its sub-conclusion, the Senate pulled no punches in criticizing CASA. “CASA's internal reports indicate that the deficiencies identified would have had an effect on the outcome of the accident in several areas. It is inexplicable therefore that CASA should so strongly and publicly reject witnesses' evidence that they did not think surveillance was adequate, when CASA's own internal investigations indicate that CASA's oversight was inadequate,” the report said.
Australian Senate: Norfolk Island Crash Investigation Could Lead To Criminal Probe
By Paul Bertorelli, Editorial Director
In a scathingly critical report (PDF) of Australian safety investigators and regulators, the Australian Senate last week found that an investigation into the 2009 ditching of a medical evacuation flight off Norfolk Island was so incompetently handled that it could be referred to authorities for criminal prosecution. The Senate investigation, which began last September, found that during the crash investigation, Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority failed to provide the Australian Transport Safety Board with critical documents and findings concerning the Pel-Air ditching. That information would have revealed, according to the Senate probe, that CASA knew of ongoing systemic shortcomings in Pel-Air’s operation that directly contributed to the accident. CASA’s action, says the Senate report, may have violated Australia’s Transport Safety Investigations Act. “It could be seen as a breach of the Transport Safety Act in terms of obstructing an investigation,” said Sen. David Fawcett.
The accident occurred in November 2009 when the twin-engine Westwind ditched off Norfolk Island enroute from Samoa with a critical but stable patient. The Westwind’s ultimate destination was Melbourne, with a scheduled fuel stop in Norfolk Island. The flight’s captain, Dominic James, departed with legally sufficient fuel into a forecast of good VFR. Enroute, the Norfolk Island weather tanked and after three unsuccessful approach attempts, James ditched the Westwind near the island. All six aboard survived, albeit some with injuries. The ATSB’s accident investigation, which took some 1000 days to complete, faulted the crew for not planning the flight in accordance with Australian regulation and Pel-Air operations specifications. It blamed James for not aggressively seeking updated weather reports and for failing to divert to Noumea, New Caledonia, which the Westwind initially had fuel to do.
Following the ATSB’s findings, James challenged some of the investigator’s findings but his queries were dismissed by the ATSB. The Australian Senate took up James’ case last year and its probe revealed widespread flaws in the ATSB’s investigatory work. Among numerous findings by the Senate was a report on a CASA review of Pel-Air that “unequivocally concluded…that the Pel-Air Westwind operation was at an elevated risk and warranted more frequent and intensive surveillance and intervention strategies.” Yet no mention of this report appeared in the ATSB’s findings blaming the pilot.“In other words, Pel-Air was lacking, CASA's oversight of Pel-Air was lacking, and the accident occurred in an environment of serious aviation safety deficiencies,” the Senate report said.
Although the Senate investigation stops short of saying the ATSB and CASA colluded to suppress information, it does conclude that the two agencies narrowed the accident investigation focus in a way that excluded larger safety issues. “This inquiry has shaken my confidence in the CASA and the ATSB to the core. I no longer have confidence in them. That’s why I think we need an inspector general of aviation,” Sen. Nick Xenophone told Australia’s ABC News. “This goes beyond Dominic James, which I regard and many regard as a scapegoat for the failings of CASA and the ATSB,” he added.
The Senate report makes numerous recommendations to improve the ATSB investigation process, ranging from additional training for investigators, to requiring the ATSB’s chief commissioner to have extensive aviation safety experience, to establishing an oversight board for investigations. In one of its sub-conclusion, the Senate pulled no punches in criticizing CASA. “CASA's internal reports indicate that the deficiencies identified would have had an effect on the outcome of the accident in several areas. It is inexplicable therefore that CASA should so strongly and publicly reject witnesses' evidence that they did not think surveillance was adequate, when CASA's own internal investigations indicate that CASA's oversight was inadequate,” the report said.
On 23 May 2013 a report was released by the Australian Senate following an inquiry into the investigation of the ditching. This inquiry was sparked by a Four Corners documentary that aired allegations of misconduct by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The Senate's report found that the ATSB accident report was deeply flawed and unfairly blamed the pilot for the accident, and as a consequence the Senate recommended that the accident report be withdrawn and re-done.
The Senate also found evidence of collusion between the agencies, the deliberate withholding of crucial documents by CASA from the ATSB, and found that the heads of both agencies gave testimony that wasn't credible.
The findings of the Senate inquiry were also passed to the Australian Federal Police pending the possibility of charges being laid against individuals involved.
The Senate's report found that the ATSB accident report was deeply flawed and unfairly blamed the pilot for the accident, and as a consequence the Senate recommended that the accident report be withdrawn and re-done.
The Senate also found evidence of collusion between the agencies, the deliberate withholding of crucial documents by CASA from the ATSB, and found that the heads of both agencies gave testimony that wasn't credible.
The findings of the Senate inquiry were also passed to the Australian Federal Police pending the possibility of charges being laid against individuals involved.
Last edited by Sarcs; 25th May 2013 at 22:59. Reason: "IOS" forever...where's Oleo when you need him!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recommendation 10.
6.41 The committee recommends that the investigation be re-opened by the ATSB with a focus on organisational, oversight and broader systemic issues.
6.42 The committee is concerned that the ATSB report ATSB report on 'Collision with terrain - Piper PA-31P-350, VH-PGW, 6 km NW of Bankstown Airport, NSW, 15 June 2010' could demonstrate a trend where organisational and regulatory factors are not considered appropriately or in sufficient detail by the ATSB, despite post accident investigations by CASA indicating there were significant deficiencies with the operator and appearing to indicate insufficient oversight by CASA. As highlighted in Chapter 5, the committee is also concerned about ATSB attempts to predict future risk for operators. The ATSB should analyse why the accident happened but operators are best placed to assess how the lessons may affect their current and future operations.
(my bold)
6.42 The committee is concerned that the ATSB report ATSB report on 'Collision with terrain - Piper PA-31P-350, VH-PGW, 6 km NW of Bankstown Airport, NSW, 15 June 2010' could demonstrate a trend where organisational and regulatory factors are not considered appropriately or in sufficient detail by the ATSB, despite post accident investigations by CASA indicating there were significant deficiencies with the operator and appearing to indicate insufficient oversight by CASA. As highlighted in Chapter 5, the committee is also concerned about ATSB attempts to predict future risk for operators. The ATSB should analyse why the accident happened but operators are best placed to assess how the lessons may affect their current and future operations.
(my bold)
Very much like Pel Air and Barrier – Skymaster was charged by CASA with "indications of significant" etc. However, would an in depth analysis of the many allegations made reveal that the claimed 'deficiencies' were in fact beefed up and manipulated, purely to support the CASA case and had little to do with operational safety – in real terms? The abandoned evidence from two FOI related to the allegations made of Skymaster, needs only to be examined impartially to discern the clearly defined pattern. Subsequent ATSB reports are clearly slanted toward supporting the CASA stance. With Pel Air one has to wonder why then, with similar allegations laid at the feet of both operators, was the matter not as ruthlessly pursued, to placate the gods of "safety" ? Or why was the one operator able to be rehabilitated over a Christmas holiday period, issues blithely waived aside, where the other was hung, drawn and quartered over a much longer period. The true 'safety' issues in both cases have yet to be defined by the ATSB/ CASA combination tag team. Aye; It is all, indeed, passing strange.
What was done with the Skymaster "issues" later, when presented in the AAT defied logic and worse still achieved nothing toward enhancing industry knowledge, except to be afraid. Had there not been an amazing back flip, Pel Air would have ended up with a very similar result to Skymaster. The Coroner dealing with Skymaster will need to ensure that the evidence presented defines the facts and circumstances most precisely.
The final outcome of the two events, both managed by the same office is extraordinary; the diverse ways similar allegations were dealt with by the doyen of aviation safety are unbelievable, the damage to the spirit, intent and meaning of aviation law, through the manipulations and machinations of one or two men is grotesque. That the Australian ATSB should aid and abet these perversions is monstrous.
This report from the Senate does indeed open the gate and is a wonderful tool; but, if Australia is to make the massive quantum leap to probity and accountability, more work needs to be done, much more. This is not the time to sit back, we have a start but it is a long journey. Now, I wonder, can the AFP ferrets chase those wascally wabbits out of their deep burrow, without industry assistance and parliamentary oversight??
Last edited by Kharon; 25th May 2013 at 23:20. Reason: Trying to remove elephants from sense of humour - thats why.
in my opinion, the fallout from this report which highlights very considerable organisational failings of ATSB and CASA, taken with the debacle at the AMROBA meeting, Canley Vale, Lockhart, Quadrio, Barrier and a host of other matters, is that no frontline CASA or ATSB staff are going to be able to look aviators and maintainers in the eye until both CASA and ATSB management are cleaned out and a new era begins.
I theeeenk (read pray) that Margaret Stalb was recruited to AsA in time to prevent them going down the same plughole as the other Two.
What concerns me now is low CASA and ATSB staff morale in the face of a possibly hostile industry. While I am quite familiar with regulatory capture, I am concerned that the reverse - a lack of genuine trust and cooperation between regulator and the regulated will set the stage for a major miscalculation on the part of one or more parties and a resulting serious aviation accident.
At the end of the day, CASA and ATSB have a job to do. It will do no good for the GA industry if through bloody mindedness, distrust and timidity we set up for another serious accident that will then be all our faults.
We need to be thinking of "positive mental attitude" and support CASA and ATSB on the assumption that they will make necessary and beneficial, adjustments to their policies. We need to do our level best to be helpful and compliant without being a doormat.
To put that another way, we need to do our best to get along as smoothly as possible and comply as best we can with the regulatory mess and pray that CASA will do likewise. Otherwise we become part of the problem.
Of course if there is no change from the regulator and ATSB then the relationships will worsen, with lethal results for the general public. This is why I pray that PM & C are supporting Mr. Mrdak.
I theeeenk (read pray) that Margaret Stalb was recruited to AsA in time to prevent them going down the same plughole as the other Two.
What concerns me now is low CASA and ATSB staff morale in the face of a possibly hostile industry. While I am quite familiar with regulatory capture, I am concerned that the reverse - a lack of genuine trust and cooperation between regulator and the regulated will set the stage for a major miscalculation on the part of one or more parties and a resulting serious aviation accident.
At the end of the day, CASA and ATSB have a job to do. It will do no good for the GA industry if through bloody mindedness, distrust and timidity we set up for another serious accident that will then be all our faults.
We need to be thinking of "positive mental attitude" and support CASA and ATSB on the assumption that they will make necessary and beneficial, adjustments to their policies. We need to do our level best to be helpful and compliant without being a doormat.
To put that another way, we need to do our best to get along as smoothly as possible and comply as best we can with the regulatory mess and pray that CASA will do likewise. Otherwise we become part of the problem.
Of course if there is no change from the regulator and ATSB then the relationships will worsen, with lethal results for the general public. This is why I pray that PM & C are supporting Mr. Mrdak.
Last edited by Sunfish; 26th May 2013 at 00:44.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steam on.
Sunny with great respect and much affection – Bollocks. These morale deprived, poor little sausages are every bit as much of the problem as the creatures who direct them. Guilty by association; they need to be hounded down, exposed, named, shamed and charged where applicable.
There are FOI out there who couldn't start to write a check system, let alone a supporting manual, pontificating on what 'they' will or will not accept. There are people out there thrice rejected at the point of a legal gun, who are strutting about with their thinly veiled, deep seated problems, using the most despicable of tactics to subvert and manipulate the system in order to justify a 'their safety' case. There are lunatic 'philosophies' being espoused on aircraft handling, enforced by dire threat. There are specifically targeted people, isolated by innuendo and threat. There are ludicrous regulations being added to equally ridiculous policy added to punitive, expensive legal dribble, on a daily basis. There are engineers who don't truly know if using tool 24 instead of tool 25 will land them in jail. There are operators who have spent $100,000 and almost two years to get a simple aircraft onto an AOC. There are operators and pilots who have been decimated on very thin grounds, without a chance of rehabilitation or affordable recourse. etc. etc. etc. The list is very long, documented and available.
Yet PA managed to avoid it all, the blood, sweat and tears and in record time to boot; the only case in living memory of that happening. You have only seen from afar; the tip of a very large, dirty, dangerous iceberg. Positioned safely and cocooned within a warm, sheltered environment, once removed and sanitised by Parliament, you witness the Pel Air debacle. Talk to a Siewart, Butson, Hardy or Killan; get some transcripts, get some "audit" reports, examine some NCN in the raw; and judge for your self, just exactly what we are dealing with here. Reading of swimming about in the dark is nowhere near being there, naked and undefended. Exaggerated?, no – exasperated?- yes. This is no Sunday newspaper beat up, it is real, it is now and happening in a paddock somewhere near you.
I much favour an old testament approach; an eye for an eye suits my current mood. If CASA want my respect, assistance and expertise – they must earn it back, for they have most assuredly lost it. Turn the other cheek, Bollocks....
Steam off - (Ambles off into the dust, mumbling darkly whist scratching same.)
There are FOI out there who couldn't start to write a check system, let alone a supporting manual, pontificating on what 'they' will or will not accept. There are people out there thrice rejected at the point of a legal gun, who are strutting about with their thinly veiled, deep seated problems, using the most despicable of tactics to subvert and manipulate the system in order to justify a 'their safety' case. There are lunatic 'philosophies' being espoused on aircraft handling, enforced by dire threat. There are specifically targeted people, isolated by innuendo and threat. There are ludicrous regulations being added to equally ridiculous policy added to punitive, expensive legal dribble, on a daily basis. There are engineers who don't truly know if using tool 24 instead of tool 25 will land them in jail. There are operators who have spent $100,000 and almost two years to get a simple aircraft onto an AOC. There are operators and pilots who have been decimated on very thin grounds, without a chance of rehabilitation or affordable recourse. etc. etc. etc. The list is very long, documented and available.
Yet PA managed to avoid it all, the blood, sweat and tears and in record time to boot; the only case in living memory of that happening. You have only seen from afar; the tip of a very large, dirty, dangerous iceberg. Positioned safely and cocooned within a warm, sheltered environment, once removed and sanitised by Parliament, you witness the Pel Air debacle. Talk to a Siewart, Butson, Hardy or Killan; get some transcripts, get some "audit" reports, examine some NCN in the raw; and judge for your self, just exactly what we are dealing with here. Reading of swimming about in the dark is nowhere near being there, naked and undefended. Exaggerated?, no – exasperated?- yes. This is no Sunday newspaper beat up, it is real, it is now and happening in a paddock somewhere near you.
I much favour an old testament approach; an eye for an eye suits my current mood. If CASA want my respect, assistance and expertise – they must earn it back, for they have most assuredly lost it. Turn the other cheek, Bollocks....
Steam off - (Ambles off into the dust, mumbling darkly whist scratching same.)
Last edited by Kharon; 26th May 2013 at 02:49. Reason: Certified unlubricated - probably just as well, eh?
Intelligently conveyed.
But the content is circular nonsense.
CASA and the ATSB are not supposed to “adjust”, or even make, policy. They’re supposed to implement policy.
CASA and the ATSB implement the most important government policy, very effectively. That’s demonstrated by the fact that you still perceive CASA and the ATSB as the solution and, therefore, the root cause of a problem you perceive.
There is no problem requiring any adjustment of policy. CASA and the ATSB have the full support of the government.
But the content is circular nonsense.
We need to be thinking of "positive mental attitude" and support CASA and ATSB on the assumption that they will make necessary and beneficial, adjustments to their policies.
CASA and the ATSB implement the most important government policy, very effectively. That’s demonstrated by the fact that you still perceive CASA and the ATSB as the solution and, therefore, the root cause of a problem you perceive.
There is no problem requiring any adjustment of policy. CASA and the ATSB have the full support of the government.
While on the subject of CASA bullying, it would be nice to see some common sense in the Aircrew Licencing division. They don't so much think as react to cover their own arses. People are condemned because Aviation Medicine is scared of being sensible. Ask just about any DAME what they think of CASA. It,s usually all bad.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cream puff,
Are you implying it is all part of the civil aviation act and Atsb and casa are just following that direction?
Casa and Atsb could fix a lot of the issues. First job is restoring or getting credibility with individuals and industry. Getting away from the adversarial approach doesn't mean 'being too nice' and not doing the job.
Flyingfox, senator Xenophon mentioned bullying and I think that needs fixing! Even if not true to dispel the belief.
Are you implying it is all part of the civil aviation act and Atsb and casa are just following that direction?
Casa and Atsb could fix a lot of the issues. First job is restoring or getting credibility with individuals and industry. Getting away from the adversarial approach doesn't mean 'being too nice' and not doing the job.
Flyingfox, senator Xenophon mentioned bullying and I think that needs fixing! Even if not true to dispel the belief.
No.
You need to know the most important government policy.
Mr Dolan knows the most important government policy.
Mr McCormick knows the most important government policy.
Mr Mrdak knows the most important government policy.
Once you understand the most important government policy, you'll stop wasting your energy on pprune.
You need to know the most important government policy.
Mr Dolan knows the most important government policy.
Mr McCormick knows the most important government policy.
Mr Mrdak knows the most important government policy.
Once you understand the most important government policy, you'll stop wasting your energy on pprune.
Last edited by Creampuff; 26th May 2013 at 10:33.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Not Brisbane
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charon
I cautioned you a while back to get your mind out of the Goon Show scripts and stop the in jokes and sly superiority. You might recall a suggestion to study some Nietzsche...
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
I fear that with your last post you are now beyond use in this debate except to prove Nietzsche right. Perhaps read Sunfish's words tomorrow when you feel better.
I cautioned you a while back to get your mind out of the Goon Show scripts and stop the in jokes and sly superiority. You might recall a suggestion to study some Nietzsche...
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
I fear that with your last post you are now beyond use in this debate except to prove Nietzsche right. Perhaps read Sunfish's words tomorrow when you feel better.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The dept!
Mrdak has a lot to answer for in the mess. He employed both of these clowns, and sticks by them. I read the report from front to back today. It's a disgrace that our industry has reached this low.
Bring on the changes needed.
Bring on the changes needed.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cream puff, is it keeping the minister and government out of the spotlight. I'm thinking they haven't done a good job on that one.
Perhaps very fortunate that the press has more interest in afl players sex and drinking lives than aviation.
I reckon you'll be able to cut the atmosphere with a knife at senate estates.
Kharon, consider yourself cautioned. I think you'll be getting a 'show cause' next.
Perhaps very fortunate that the press has more interest in afl players sex and drinking lives than aviation.
I reckon you'll be able to cut the atmosphere with a knife at senate estates.
Kharon, consider yourself cautioned. I think you'll be getting a 'show cause' next.
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 26th May 2013 at 11:57.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QA, SFA, FAA oh it's all too much.
Seems Fort Fumble are feeling the heat? They have advertised for Manager QA Flight Ops and Manager QA Airworthiness. Of course in true Regulator style and having washed up old Pilots and Magic practitioners running the joint, they have not advertised for a Manager QA Safety Systems, even though safety systems has now become the third main disciine at the Regulator. Wankers.
It is interesting how the FAA, CAA, and a number of investigation bureau's around the globe have QA resources, but of course this hasn't been the case at Fort Fumble. Wakey wakey, seems something has awoken the lethargic beast?
It is also interesting how these roles have been rumoured to report to an overall QA Manager, of course that is the Deputy DAS brother-in-law who coincidentally is rumoured to be sitting in the sin bin for a few months! Oh dear, these HR issues just won't go away will they? I know, let's promote the naughty kids!
I also notice that in some circles there is an inkling of support for Mrdak? How bizzare. Almost perverse in my book. He is just another part of the greater problem and deserves nil Kleenex. The only tears I will be shedding is tears of laughter if all of these incompetent clowns are lined up side by side, bent over, pants down around ankles, and getting a giant Queensland size unlubricated pineapple belted up their aft compartment, sideways.
As a side point I have heard that Fort Fumble are going to request additional funding at Senate estimates. Apparently they want to increase the pot plant rejuvenation program, have larger fuel/drop tanks fitted to their comcar fleet for the next time that Capt Star Chamber runs out of fuel, and each employee of the agency will have his/her contracts amended to include the addition of a company provided chamber pot so as to enable a quick release and recycling of contaminated waste; things like regs, the SPM, special audit reports, magical disappearing NCN's, things like that.
It is interesting how the FAA, CAA, and a number of investigation bureau's around the globe have QA resources, but of course this hasn't been the case at Fort Fumble. Wakey wakey, seems something has awoken the lethargic beast?
It is also interesting how these roles have been rumoured to report to an overall QA Manager, of course that is the Deputy DAS brother-in-law who coincidentally is rumoured to be sitting in the sin bin for a few months! Oh dear, these HR issues just won't go away will they? I know, let's promote the naughty kids!
I also notice that in some circles there is an inkling of support for Mrdak? How bizzare. Almost perverse in my book. He is just another part of the greater problem and deserves nil Kleenex. The only tears I will be shedding is tears of laughter if all of these incompetent clowns are lined up side by side, bent over, pants down around ankles, and getting a giant Queensland size unlubricated pineapple belted up their aft compartment, sideways.
As a side point I have heard that Fort Fumble are going to request additional funding at Senate estimates. Apparently they want to increase the pot plant rejuvenation program, have larger fuel/drop tanks fitted to their comcar fleet for the next time that Capt Star Chamber runs out of fuel, and each employee of the agency will have his/her contracts amended to include the addition of a company provided chamber pot so as to enable a quick release and recycling of contaminated waste; things like regs, the SPM, special audit reports, magical disappearing NCN's, things like that.
Last edited by Cactusjack; 26th May 2013 at 12:46.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QA department
Interesting development. I heard a rumour they previously had one years back. They highlighted a lot of issues and as a result got the pineapple treatment. Or was that a false rumour?
Kharon:
If that is the case, where is your evidence and is it in writing with date time place and names and witnesses?
If it isn't then its just so much hot air. Furthermore, there will need to be a very long list of such actions to make any impression on anyone outside the aviation magic circle.
It is goign to be far easier to help CASA and ATSB make some changes then to try and change things by starting a civil war between industry and regulator.
If we stop being sweet and reasonable and instead go feral then there is increased potential for mistakes to be made leading to another accident, and if that happens, to borrow a few of ATSB's words from the report, we will all have egg on our faces..
In the immortal words of Jack Nicholson; "Why can't we all just get along?"
There are FOI out there who couldn't start to write a check system, let alone a supporting manual, pontificating on what 'they' will or will not accept. There are people out there thrice rejected at the point of a legal gun, who are strutting about with their thinly veiled, deep seated problems, using the most despicable of tactics to subvert and manipulate the system in order to justify a 'their safety' case. There are lunatic 'philosophies' being espoused on aircraft handling, enforced by dire threat. There are specifically targeted people, isolated by innuendo and threat. There are ludicrous regulations being added to equally ridiculous policy added to punitive, expensive legal dribble, on a daily basis. There are engineers who don't truly know if using tool 24 instead of tool 25 will land them in jail. There are operators who have spent $100,000 and almost two years to get a simple aircraft onto an AOC. There are operators and pilots who have been decimated on very thin grounds, without a chance of rehabilitation or affordable recourse. etc. etc. etc. The list is very long, documented and available.
If it isn't then its just so much hot air. Furthermore, there will need to be a very long list of such actions to make any impression on anyone outside the aviation magic circle.
It is goign to be far easier to help CASA and ATSB make some changes then to try and change things by starting a civil war between industry and regulator.
If we stop being sweet and reasonable and instead go feral then there is increased potential for mistakes to be made leading to another accident, and if that happens, to borrow a few of ATSB's words from the report, we will all have egg on our faces..
In the immortal words of Jack Nicholson; "Why can't we all just get along?"
Mars Attacks "Why Can't We All Just Get Along?" - YouTube
Last edited by Sunfish; 26th May 2013 at 21:08.