Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011

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

Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011

Old 4th Apr 2013, 02:30
  #1401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,383
Wonder if there will be red faces all round if the Kiwi,s manage to retrieve
A whole aircraft from 60 meters under water & we couldn't even recover a box.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2013, 05:10
  #1402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,205
The worlds best....

True.... CASA is the envy of the world.

Why? Because..people from places like Hong Kong see that never in the field of bureaucratic endeavour have so many had such a whoopee time snorting in the Big Trough along with taxpayer funded trips, paid "stress" leave, bonuses (ffs!) and all the free goodies. So..hop in and get some too.

As for the well being of the industry ?.. Que? .no comprende!!

The Skull has screamed his skull empty to become just another ill of society, delusional, spouting unwarranted demagogary and I'd use a few other terms from his famous Senate spray, but I cant remember it all.

And the rest of the world also says ..How the fcuk have they got away with it for so long, while ruining an industry in the process.?

Its all to do with "safety" mate.
Anything can be done in the name of "safety"
..snowjob politicians, waste taxpayers money, be unaccountable, deny liability for anything, screw people over ( Hi JQ !) destroy busineses and commit a few criminal acts in the process, whatever....its all GOOD. And SAFE !!!

GA...what the fcuk was that ?
aroa is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2013, 05:20
  #1403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
“It's just a jump to the left…”

Well we’re a long way off “bingo” to meet that 0655UTC dinner date at the houseboat (I hear wabbit stew is on the menu)…so let’s go for a short trip on Lefty’s timewarp machine…

The following is a reference from the last inquiry that is interesting, again in context of this inquiry, it refers to the former FF Manager of Human Factors Mr Ben Cook (you know the one who pulled the pin in mid 2010 and went onto greener pastures back inside the ADF).

Here’s a quote from answer to CAsA QON 1 18/03/2010…“ The “scientific” review undertaken by Mr Cook of the Darwin rosters was not included in the audit report itself due to uncertainty about the validity of the methods utilized. Many of the recommendations made by Mr Cook and submitted to the audit team for consideration were based on opinion, with some not supported by facts and objective evidence…”

Here’s CAsA QON 1 and QON 6 where Senator X questions why FF seem to have totally disregarded their very own Manager Human Factors expert opinion and analysis as reported in the Human Factors section of the ‘Special Fatigue Audit: Jetstar’ (see link below).
Inquiry into Pilot Training & Airline Safety
Public Hearing –Friday, 18 March 2010
CANBERRA
Questions Taken on Notice – CASA/ATSB

1. HANSARD, RA&T 60

Senator XENOPHON—I think the report was quite careful in saying that no evidence had been provided to date. In other words, there was no positive evidence of, for instance, an appropriate strategic assessment of fatigue risk. It also refers to a scientific review of Darwin based flight crew rosters which indicated that there were predicted levels of fatigue risk that required further review by Jetstar, and that, in the absence of sufficient proactive fatigue risk assessment practice by Jetstar, there may be unacceptable fatigue risks that are not being identified and managed. Has that been attended to since that time?

Mr Hood—I would like to take that on notice, if I can. I will go back and review Jetstar’s
response to our audit recommendations.

6. HANSARD, RA&T 72, 73

Senator XENOPHON—Chair, I just wanted to put this on notice. Going back to the Jetstar fatigue audit and the letter that went to Mr Buchanan, the CEO of Jetstar, on notice, can you provide details of the 12 recommendations and the other comments that were made? Which of those were put in the report to Mr Buchanan? And insofar as some of the matters were not raised with Mr Buchanan, could you indicate why CASA decided not to raise those matters with Jetstar?

Mr McCormick—My understanding is that you mean from the Ben Cook input to the final report?

Senator XENOPHON—Yes.

Mr McCormick—How many were bundled into the main report? Which ones were not? And why were they not?

Senator XENOPHON—Sure, that is fine.

Mr McCormick—Yes, that is no problem.
You can read the full answers in the link below and also observe a classic DAS/GWM rule 101 (“if in doubt always attack the man”), which was originally plucked from the ‘Hitchhiker’s Guide to Mastering Sociopath behaviour’!

No wonder BC pulled the pin , it would be quite demoralising to have two of your Fatigue Audit Reports totally sh#t canned in less than 6 months and both times it was all because they didn’t suit the DAS/GWM hidden agenda.

I have also included a link for the politically sanitised version of the FF Special Fatigue Audit: Jetstar’ as tabled at the last inquiry for your comparison.

“Ok punch into the Box the co-ordinates for ‘Houseboat on the river Styx’ set the FGCS connect the A/P and away we go...”

https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...6-aeb45b5fd32b

https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...1-89a655859ce1

https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...b-465f65a925f7

Last edited by Sarcs; 4th Apr 2013 at 05:30. Reason: "And then a step to the right...."
Sarcs is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2013, 12:11
  #1404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 55
Posts: 560
'Put your hands on Skulls hips'......

Connect the dots...

Sarcs, what is interesting about your last robust post is some of the 'players' in this.
- When that inquiry was taking place and Mr Hood was taking QON's about fatigue at JQ and safety risks, the JQ Safety Manager had only been working for Mr Hood as a Safety Systems Specialist (SSS) about 12 months earlier at CASA, all part of the same team, very close, all good mates.
- Gets better. Another one of their 'group', also a SSS, resigned around the same time. He ends up coming back to CASA as a 'consultant' (in Mr Hoods group where he worked 12 months earlier) and he participates in a CASA audit of none other than JQ! Yes he gets to audit his former fellow CASA mate who is now at JQ in a senior role!
All of this took place within an approximately 12 month period!

As for Ben Cook, well like Aherne, he was classed as low on the food chain so naturally The Skull and the GWM were happy to sacrifice him at the drop of a hat. Mr Cook unfortunately displayed skill, professionalism and always delivered an open and honest assessment, something the hierarchy in FF don't appreciate
or foster.

Indeed there are many moves that have been played on the Snakes and Ladder board during the wee hours of the night around the halls of FF.
Has the Senate dug deep enough yet?

"Aviation, what aviation?"

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 4th Apr 2013 at 12:18.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2013, 17:09
  #1405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
This is what FAA have done in regard to revolving doors.

New rule to improve FAA ‘safety culture’

New rule to improve FAA ‘safety culture’
By Dan Namowitz
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
0
The FAA has enacted a conflict-of-interest rule prohibiting air carriers and some general aviation operators from employing as representatives aviation safety inspectors with oversight roles over their operations for two years after the inspectors leave the agency.
The rule, proposed in 2009, was the FAA’s response to concerns about “an overly close relationship” that had developed between Southwest Airlines and inspectors overseeing airline operations, the FAA said in a news release Aug. 19.
“The flying public can rest assured that our aviation safety inspectors will remain focused on protecting the flying public without any conflicts of interest,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.
Effective Oct. 21, operators affected by the rule will be prohibited from employing or contracting with former FAA employees who directly served in or oversaw inspection of the employer’s operations. The restrictions apply to operations under parts 121, 125, 133, 135, 137, 141, 142, 145, 147, and subpart K of part 91. General aviation operators providing on-demand charters under Part 135, flight training under Part 141, or participating in fractional ownership or its management under subpart K of Part 91 would be included. Other Part 91 operators would be excluded.
FAA Administrator or Randy Babbitt said that the rule would “improve our safety culture here at the FAA and throughout the aviation industry.”
In 2008 the FAA proposed a $10.2 million civil penalty against Southwest for operating 46 airplanes on approximately 60,000 flights without inspecting fuselages for fatigue cracks in accordance with an airworthiness directive, according to the final rule published Aug. 20.
A report by the Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General report “concluded that the FAA Certificate Management Office (CMO) overseeing the airline that failed to perform the required inspections had developed an overly collaborative relationship with the airline.” The report recommended that the FAA issue “post-employment guidance” prohibiting carriers from hiring former inspectors who had overseen the carrier’s operations.
The FAA said aviation safety could be compromised if a former inspector were able to exert “undue influence on current FAA employees with whom he or she had established close working relationships” during his or her time at the agency.
In an effort to quantify the rule’s potential workforce impact, the FAA studied the fiscal year from Oct. 1, 2008, to Sept. 30, 2009, and estimated that of 163 inspectors who left the agency during the period, 125 would have been affected by the rule.
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
0
August 23, 2011
Getting close to 300,000 views now! pretty impressive.

Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 4th Apr 2013 at 17:50.
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2013, 19:29
  #1406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Adding insult to injury.

Sarcs # 1405 –"No wonder BC pulled the pin, it would be quite demoralising to have two of your Fatigue Audit Reports totally sh#t canned in less than 6 months and both times it was all - etc."
It just goes to show how essentially good natured folk like Cook and Aherne are; they suffer deliberate injury, only to be insulted by CAIR 09/03 and the Chambers thing being offered up as the 'glorious way forward' and the answer to a Pagan's prayer. That would vex me, it truly would.

While awaiting the arrival of Sarcs in the TWM, I was comparing the Barrier maintenance issues (RCA) with the Pel Air maintenance audit – fascinating stuff. Same sort of issues, different result of course; but the parallels are striking. At the end of the Pel-Air report is a curiously intriguing paragraph: "CASA recommends that Pel-Air Aviation Pty Ltd review and update." etc. Last sentence reads:-"CASA will address the maintenance control deficiencies further as part of a separate airworthiness audit report." I wonder where that can be?. This is followed by another series of RCA issued by one M. Horsley, once again signed by Chambers. I wonder why this Chambers fellah signs so many RCA?, must be a perfectly sensible explanation, but it's passing strange that most of the other guys on the 'audit/investigation' team seem to have managed to sign their own. All a total waste of course, deprived of AAT prey by the back flip, I expect they just had to bury it all, out of harms way. Of course - OH&S, now why didn't I think of that.

Well, Minnie Bannister has grabbed the Gin bottle and the guests are arriving; best get ashore and help park the Tardisa. (Dr. He Hoo has the Tardis).....

Last edited by Kharon; 4th Apr 2013 at 19:39.
Kharon is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2013, 21:43
  #1407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 74
As requested.

N.B. The Zippyshare document text has not, to the best of our knowledge been changed, simply copied and pasted then converted to an individual PDF for convenience. The original is buried in the Senate submissions, also available through the CASA website (search FOI – [item 5] disclosure log – Pel Air) we recommend the 'bona fide' CASA submission be compared with the on file working copy before relying implicitly on the information provided.

PA Maintenance Audit.

Please only use the "Download Now" button in the top right corner to avoid advertisements; PAIN_Net do not track downloads.

P4 a.k.a. the Ferret.
PAIN_NET is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 01:33
  #1408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
"Well secluded, I'm beginning to see all???..."

Oleo's top post said:
- When that inquiry was taking place and Mr Hood was taking QON's about fatigue at JQ and safety risks, the JQ Safety Manager had only been working for Mr Hood as a Safety Systems Specialist (SSS) about 12 months earlier at CASA, all part of the same team, very close, all good mates.
- Gets better. Another one of their 'group', also a SSS, resigned around the same time. He ends up coming back to CASA as a 'consultant' (in Mr Hoods group where he worked 12 months earlier) and he participates in a CASA audit of none other than JQ! Yes he gets to audit his former fellow CASA mate who is now at JQ in a senior role!
All of this took place within an approximately 12 month period!
Hmm kind of gives a lot of credence to Aherne’s supp submission that deals with ‘prejudice and outcome bias’, see here:
1. Introduction.
I thank the committee for allowing me to make a supplementary submission to the Inquiry. The Inquiry has to this point necessarily had to consider technical matters contained in the many submissions it has received. This submission however, will focus on the issues of prejudice and outcome bias which along with allegations of collusion have tainted the ATSB investigation. On a separate matter, I have attached an Appendix which criticques the more confounding of the answers provided by the ATSB in response to questions on notice.
Link to that submission:https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...6-7c95160557d9

It was also obvious Oleo that the Senators at that inquiry were being fed information along the lines of which you suggest.
They asked several questions in regards to FF ‘conflict of interest’, here’s an example:
5. HANSARD, RA&T 7273

Senator O’BRIEN—There are plenty of examples of contractual requirements that limit movement benefiting from an employment arrangement with one company to another company—taking advantage of the knowledge given by one company and then using it for another. Is there no means for CASA to introduce some sort of system which would penalise the taking of such an advantage? I guess you cannot prevent it because you cannot stop someone from leaving when they resign, but is there no way that contractually you can limit where they can go?

Mr McCormick—Generally speaking, we have discussed this internally, particularly after the last rather high‐profile departure we had. My understanding is concomitant with government policy—that we do not have very many tools available to us. Dr Aleck may wish to add a couple of points on this because it is a topical issue.

Dr Aleck—We have been very closely reviewing these things for the very reasons you have raised. Such a provision in a contract is possible. It is legal. Obviously, it can only prospective; we cannot insert it into an existing contract. The information—which I think the Attorney General’s Department has published, but I will take that on notice to confirm it—is that those provisions are notoriously difficult to enforce. Whilst they are legally available, as a practical matter there is great difficulty in enforcing them.
But then that line of inquiry unfortunately got lost in the Tiger AOC suspension and as we know the rest is history.

Coming back to the Pel-Air situation, we should not forget that they too had a mover and shaker adept at greasing the wheels of government process and a former Minister for Transport to boot! Perhaps another thread (down the track) could look into what would appear to be some perfect examples of ‘conflict of interest’ within a government agency,….hmm definitely ‘food for thought’?

But for now let’s step back on Lefty’s TWM…

PAIN’s extracted piece from the Pel-Air SAR is indeed fascinating. I can’t believe that what the report revealed as some pretty ordinary systemic deficiencies within the maintenance org and the defect reporting regime only amounted to one ASR and one RCA…WTF?

So doing some trolling (as you do) on google I came across a rather relevant headline from the SMH, August 20 1986….Pilots pressed not to log plane defects, Pel-Air inquest told”. The Sydney Morning Herald - Google News Archive Search
Now given the findings as stated in the ‘Maintenance Control and Defect Reporting’ section of the Pel-Air SAR and if history had been a little different and (God forbid!) everyone had perished on VH-NGA would this headline have looked so out of place during the Coronial Inquest that would have inevitably been called? Or indeed, if history wasn’t changed but instead we swapped the word “inquest” for “inquiry” would this be a relevant headline today?

Oh well off doing a Kelpie!

Last edited by Sarcs; 5th Apr 2013 at 01:44. Reason: "With a bit of a voodoo flip...You're into the skull slip.."
Sarcs is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 02:06
  #1409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 55
Posts: 560
Chains in a link

Sarcs, great studious work. That is definitely 'just a jump to the left'.
Out of interest last night for several hours I re-read the Lockhart ATSBeaker final report as I am still uncomfortable with the Pel Air final report, and I wanted to see whether I was imagining things because I see some linear causes in Pel Air, Lockhart and Canley Vale etc.
I won't post it all here but in the Lockhart Final report the following sections are worth ones reading, then compare those regulatory findings to Pel Air and see if CASA has even remotely improved.
As follows;
• 2.8 Organisational influences, CASA
• 3.2.4 Contributing factors relating to CASA processes
• 3.3.4 Other factors relating to regulatory requirements and guidance
• 3.3.5 Other factors relating to CASA processes
• 4.2.2 CASA response to 'guidance for evaluating management systems'
• 4.2.3 CASA response to 'Risk assessments for changes in operations'

Maybe it's just me, maybe I am blinded by pot plants, but I see the same issues appearing over and over on the behalf of the big 'R' regulator. Similar deficiencies, similar contributing factors, all followed by similar spin and deflection from a robustly non accountable Fort Fumble. The smell of pony pooh wafts through the air.

And Sarcs, the FAA have done what Twerp 1 and Twerp 3 seem to have found to be somewhat difficult - placing an embargo of 2 years upon an employee who leaves their regulator and goes to work in industry again.

'Moral compass, what moral compass?'
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 03:45
  #1410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Reporting, not recording.

Sarcs # 1408 –"I can’t believe that what the report revealed as some pretty ordinary systemic deficiencies within the maintenance org and the defect reporting regime only amounted to one ASR and one RCA. etc."
There are some pretty obfuscations within the maintenance audit report, subtle touches. Like: the use of 'reporting' when discussing the failure to comply with a CAR 50 legal obligation to endorse the MR. Using the word 'reporting' throughout a CAR 50 discussion could be seen as 'naughty', it may mislead an innocent bystander into thinking, well it's not too serious then....Clever stuff eh?.

CAR 51 uses 'report' in relation to major defects and damage. CAR 50 is a whole different animal and does not require 'reporting' at all, at all. The reg requires the PIC, operator or flight crew member to endorse the MR (or approved alternate) when they become aware of a defect or damage; in flight or on the ground. Not to do so is a breach.

So it's all into the TWM and back to 1986 and all that. Gold Sarcs.,.,. pure, undiluted solid gold. Have a Tim Tam mate. Wuzzat y' say, 27 years ?; - ain't nothing, just a drop in an ocean of time down in Sleepy Hollow.

Last edited by Kharon; 5th Apr 2013 at 03:52. Reason: Bars open boys; Oleo, you'll have to leave the troll outdoors.
Kharon is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 04:59
  #1411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,384
So Pel Air got a rap over the knuckles with a feather for not recording stuff on an MR while Barrier Airlines was executed for the same crime? I fail to understand
Sunfish is online now  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 08:25
  #1412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Gotta love FNQ
Posts: 86
Sunfish; as always it would have been the response that determines the outcome. Did Pel-Air (Rex) make big changes and throw money at fixing the problem or did they fight city hall?
JetA_OK is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 08:33
  #1413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
Sunfish, that is the million dollar question isn't it.

There has been lots of talk about small 'r' regulation under previous director. Barrier definitely saw big 'R' regulator.

Jeta ok, valid point. If a company is working to fix issues then that is valid. But, there have been cases when the relationship has been so adversarial the operator claimed they couldn't workout a solution. Take a look at comments made by Barrier.

Are they consistent or not in their treatment? It is a big question, no doubt we'd be accused of tautology and being ills of society for raising such concerns.

Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 5th Apr 2013 at 11:26. Reason: Response to jetaok response
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 10:31
  #1414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Victoria
Posts: 80
This is the why!

[QUOTE][/The thoroughly modern bureaucrat
General
I am the very model of a thoroughly modern bureaucrat, I have all the information to see where you measure at,
I have the regulations to let me rule and regulate,
I am the very model of a thoroughly modern potentate.
From statutes to ordinances, in order quite methodical, I weave my red tape, with a zeal quite mechanical,
I understand the policies, the ones quite ineffectual, I’m a very modern bureaucrat, and I oversee you all.

All
He’s a very modern bureaucrat, and he oversees us all. He’s a very modern bureaucrat, and he oversees us all. He’s a very modern bureaucrat, and he oversees us all.

General
I’m good at mission statements and strategic plans as well, I know about operational plans and who not to tell,
In short, I’m good at keeping things just where they’re at, I’m the very model of a thoroughly modern bureaucrat.

All
In short, he’s good at keeping things just where they’re at, He is the very model of a thoroughly modern bureaucrat.

General
I like the RDOs, the pension benefits and all the other perks, I like the opportunity I have to drive you all berserk,
And I like the feeling of knowing just where you’re at,
I’m the very modern pirate, the one called the bureaucrat.

All
And he likes the feeling of knowing just where you’re at, He’s the very modern pirate, the one called the bureaucrat.

With apologies to Gilbert and SullivanQUOTE]
Stan van de Wiel is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 11:51
  #1415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 55
Posts: 560
Careful Stan, a post like that will have the Trolls and CASAsexuals crawling out of the woodwork and accusing you of drinking!!
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2013, 00:49
  #1416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 96
If we're going down the Gilbert and Sullivan path I would have thought A Policeman's Lot is not a Happy One would be more appropriate for CASA! Or Sir J in HMS Pinafore and "Now I am the Ruler of the Queen's Navee" Come on you lot start paraphrasing!

Last edited by Lookleft; 6th Apr 2013 at 00:50. Reason: I always preferred G&S to Rocky Horror
Lookleft is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2013, 01:36
  #1417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
'Beyond Reason' and the FF blackhole!

Oleo said:
I won't post it all here but in the Lockhart Final report the following sections are worth ones reading, then compare those regulatory findings to Pel Air and see if CASA has even remotely improved.
Besides the obvious comparison between the old pre-Beaker days when the bureau metaphorically kicked arse and held no prisoners, that is a very good question Oleo. Given the aviation safety watchdog has effectively been muzzled since Lockhart and with all the shenanigans revealed thus far in this inquiry I’d say that if anything CAsA has gotten worse are more out of control and a ‘law unto themselves’.

To add to Oleo’s quoted sections of the Lockhart Final Report it is also worth taking a look at appendix H from the following link:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3148359/aair200501977_appendices.pdf
It is also worth looking at this FOI released document that shows more than anything the ‘ad hoc’ approach to surveillance of Transair that CAsA took at the time. What is also amazing is the amount of changes/additions to the Transair AOC that appear to be seamlessly rubber stamped:
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/lib100096/ef-121779.pdf
Note: The Flight Ops section of form 069 that dealt with the port and route check approval for Lockhart River is mysteriously missing…go figure??

All of which when put alongside the Pel-Air SAR, the Pel-Air FRMS SAR and even the infamous ‘Chambers Report’ would all seem to indicate that not much has changed within bowels of FF and in comparison to the Lockhart stain.

However Oleo I think the bigger ugliness that the Pel-Air inquiry is unearthing is the complete double standards, inconsistency, apparent shonky backroom deals, etc..etc that FF applies to individual operators and pilots. The examples of this in recent years are plentiful…Hempel, Airtex, Hardy’s, JQ, etc.

However probably the perfect place to do a comparison is with the currently active Barrier permanent suspension case and also the Skymaster (Canleyvale) case, which (if you remember) included a BK FF ‘Special Audit’….hmm sure would be interesting to get a copy of that SAR??

Both of these cases deal with FF regional offices that have particularly checkered histories and seem to be where FF hide their miscreants and odd bods with sociopathic tendencies (i.e. potential GWM recruits)….hmm perfect really for our purposes!

Doing a Kelpie….wondering where I can get a copy of that SAR???
Sarcs is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2013, 02:26
  #1418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 55
Posts: 560
BASI, CAA, CASA, ATSB, POOH.....oh the humanity!

Sarcs, SAR's are usually kept out of reach, deep within the bowels of TRIM, and robustly locked away. Unless you have access to the CASA pony pooh TRIM system, or someone internal to FF leaks these reports to PAIN, or the Senators ask for copies of said reports, they will remain an integral part of the 'mystique of aviation', mysterious, hidden, guarded by Herr Skulls Rottweilers and not to be shown publicly.

With regards to the Lockhart investigation report, one of the ATSbeakers last decent reports before the Beaker took charge and 'Beakerised' the place, it raised the weaknesses and deficiencies along with causal factors in the accident that inadvertently link to CASA. If you use the James Reason method of analysis the Regulator itself is a defence. So if we do some 'Swiss cheesing' we soon see that although the Regulator is not the primary cause of Lockhart, most certainly a lack of proper surveillance and auditing, acceptance of Transair piss poor procedures, non use of risk assessments by Transair and CASA, changes allowed within the Operators AOC which reflected an absolutely all time low level of adequate procedures and safety, plus an 'entry control' curve that set the safety bar so low that the entire debacle is almost criminal!

However, this thread isn't about Lockhart, so I will pull back from the drift, however there appear to be palpable systemic issues withing Fort Fumble that stretch back over eons then forward to this very day. If they can't complete regulatory reform within an embarrassing quarter of a centrury how can we expect or believe these other inherent problems to simply 'no longer exist, all is now well, move on folks nothing to see here'??
I know the current inquiry had its birth c/o declining industry safety standards, morphed into the Pel Air inquiry and so it goes, but the can of worms is spilling out more worms than the Senate can keep up with and there is much much more that lays beneath the surface waiting to see daylight.

Anyway, off to the River Styx, the houseboat party is starting. All are invited, Kharon has decorated the deck in party lights and pot plants, Minnie and Gobbles are no longer under house ban (after throwing pot plants and pooh at
Flyingfiend). There will 80's music, a Rocky Horror dress code', 'Behind The Green Door' will be playing on the giant TV screen, Halfmanhalfreaper will be there singing the Blue Oyster Cult classic 'Don't Fear The Reaper', Sarcs will be doing a Shakespearean reading of the CASA SPM and The Screaming Skull will be trussed up as a piñata - hit him with a stick or kick him with a jackboot and win a prize!!
C'mon down kids.

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 6th Apr 2013 at 11:07. Reason: Sharpening the stick, putting on the boots, trussing up the angry man!
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2013, 03:59
  #1419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Grim pictures and happy moments.

MOIE# 1409 –"I re-read the Lockhart ATSBeaker final report as I am still uncomfortable with the Pel Air final report - etc."
That, whilst a very scary and accurate take, troubles me: but it is not the one that troubles me most. The history of change because of the Lockhart event is clear – many were made, all of which protect, foster and promote the department and minister. There have been few (if any) positive, proactive changes made to methodology for industry which do not, on a selective basis involve carnage, job loss and punitive administrative actions.

The pattern I see emerging under the current regime really scares me. The trend robustly appears as one of ruthless administrative penalties to individuals and the utter destruction of selected companies, at any cost, by any method; while skating at high speed along the extreme edges of credibility and the limits of law. One man makes the decision, the rest play along or toddle off. The track record is publicly available, the lengths gone to in some cases are truly remarkable. Then, we have Pel Air; they are clearly in the big gun-sight – ducks all lined up (nice and tidy like). Then brakes on – all change, tickets please; Wodger reverses the gun and shoots himself in the arse. Why ???? (or, better yet, how?? – maybe it was the the smoke and mirrors).

PM: Oleo, Stan was legless. We found a camel taxi which was prepared to take him home, sent Gobbles along to keep an eye; GD told him it was a magic carpet ride ('cos wuz furry and moved funny). Last seen heading roughly Southeast, bottle in one hand, cigar in t'other singing his version of the pirates song (full volume) which seemed entirely appropriate, but none the less truly remarkable, considering the state he was in.


Last edited by Kharon; 6th Apr 2013 at 04:20. Reason: Whoa - new page, I must not spill coffee. I must......
Kharon is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2013, 05:59
  #1420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South West Pacific
Posts: 27
Code:
Wonder if there will be red faces all round if the Kiwi,s manage to retrieve A whole aircraft from 60 meters under water & we couldn't even recover a box.
Police say divers off the Waikato coast have recovered a body from the crashed plane of 2degrees boss Eric Hertz.

Waikato Police operations manager Inspector John Kelly said today that Navy divers completed five dives on the site and managed to recover one body from the wreckage around midday.
ghw78 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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