Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who me? - Nah.
Cheers 4 dogs 
– I probably flubbed it (being un-lubricated and all) the point was simply it seemed passing strange that if a more proactive approach to 'errant' operators was available, why is it not used first ?, rather than the grindingly slow heartbreak we more often see.
Just for clarity I was not aiming particularly at s24, honest; never really crossed my mind. I do try hard to stay away from frenetic searches, they seem pointless, research works for me, very well. The humble BRB is basically taking the Mickey out of 'our' feeble attempts at legal work. Bar Room Barrister I be, guilty as charged; but be assured, if I did raise the 24 issue, it would not be in some vainglorious, scatter gun attempt. I'd drill a hole clear through it. A bloody big one.....
Salam aleikum.
– I probably flubbed it (being un-lubricated and all) the point was simply it seemed passing strange that if a more proactive approach to 'errant' operators was available, why is it not used first ?, rather than the grindingly slow heartbreak we more often see.Just for clarity I was not aiming particularly at s24, honest; never really crossed my mind. I do try hard to stay away from frenetic searches, they seem pointless, research works for me, very well. The humble BRB is basically taking the Mickey out of 'our' feeble attempts at legal work. Bar Room Barrister I be, guilty as charged; but be assured, if I did raise the 24 issue, it would not be in some vainglorious, scatter gun attempt. I'd drill a hole clear through it. A bloody big one.....
Salam aleikum.
Last edited by Kharon; 8th Apr 2013 at 04:39. Reason: Lurv RDO – I really do.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody got Kofi's mobile number?
Oh my Kharon, you say Gobbles has escaped once again, chainsaw in hand, atop a robust white elephant??? This won't end well.
Perhaps he is headed to the UN or the EU? If so, will he attempt to take a trophy scalp with him? Will he drag Flyingfiend along, screaming and wailing like the spineless pond spawn that he is? Or is Gobbles merely on another robust quest to clean up the problems we have down under? His passion is infectious, his methods somewhat 'unique', yes the 'mystique of aviation' has a brother - 'unique aviation', made up of a hodgepodge of passionate aviation individuals all raging against the CAsA machine and wielding their own type of chainsaws.
Back to the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) as adopted by the General Assembly as ratified by our great nation, hence I again raise the theory that those Australians who have been victimised in any manner by an Australian Government department surely have the right to appeal to the UN to seek a satisfactory hearing and/or intervention?
It is palpable that in 2013 we can be having the type of issues as is being discussed here, as in the case for example of Barrier Aviation - guilty until proven innocent. As pointed out earlier even the FAA and our CAA brothers across the Tasman 'appear' to have more fair and morally accepted processes.
The unbridled power that FF has needs to be curbed. Ultimate power in the hands of sociopaths is a recipe for, well, take a look at North Korea! (sadly I don't believe they have access to Pprune)
Come to think of it, the way this country is headed with proposed tamperings to superannuation funds, attempts to hobble the media with draconian laws etc, maybe we really do need an inspection by the UN??
Ok, thread drift has been gripped with a grappling hook and is being drawn in back in. Thread is now back on track after examining extreme measures to gain justice for victims of aviations (r)egulator.
Perhaps he is headed to the UN or the EU? If so, will he attempt to take a trophy scalp with him? Will he drag Flyingfiend along, screaming and wailing like the spineless pond spawn that he is? Or is Gobbles merely on another robust quest to clean up the problems we have down under? His passion is infectious, his methods somewhat 'unique', yes the 'mystique of aviation' has a brother - 'unique aviation', made up of a hodgepodge of passionate aviation individuals all raging against the CAsA machine and wielding their own type of chainsaws.
Back to the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) as adopted by the General Assembly as ratified by our great nation, hence I again raise the theory that those Australians who have been victimised in any manner by an Australian Government department surely have the right to appeal to the UN to seek a satisfactory hearing and/or intervention?
It is palpable that in 2013 we can be having the type of issues as is being discussed here, as in the case for example of Barrier Aviation - guilty until proven innocent. As pointed out earlier even the FAA and our CAA brothers across the Tasman 'appear' to have more fair and morally accepted processes.
The unbridled power that FF has needs to be curbed. Ultimate power in the hands of sociopaths is a recipe for, well, take a look at North Korea! (sadly I don't believe they have access to Pprune)
Come to think of it, the way this country is headed with proposed tamperings to superannuation funds, attempts to hobble the media with draconian laws etc, maybe we really do need an inspection by the UN??
Ok, thread drift has been gripped with a grappling hook and is being drawn in back in. Thread is now back on track after examining extreme measures to gain justice for victims of aviations (r)egulator.
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 8th Apr 2013 at 05:26.
Oleo don’t forget the potted plants!
Oleo (tongue in cheek) what about the rights of the potted plants, shirley their plight is worthy of attention too??
I noticed that Senator Nash’s QON is still outstanding (how unusual..not!
), maybe we can expect a severe dressing down by Fiona at the next round of Estimates on the 12/05/2013, here’s a reminder of that QON:
I will also be interested to see how the hoodoo voodoo spin doctor answers this question:
Outstanding QONs link:http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_...ndex_final.pdf
The DAS statement…“Since then we have rectified that completely”…seems to contradict the findings in the ‘Chambers Report’ amongst other conflicting evidence documented since the FAA audit.
No the next estimates hearing could be required viewing as this inquiry’s report and recommendations will be tabled by then and with the election, for ‘dumb’ and ‘dumber,’ coming up there could be some emboldened Senators vying for some political point scoring. Humble pie might be the order of the day for DOIT and its agencies??
Ok now back to the thread…where were we..oh yeah Gobbles and the Fort Fumble chainsaw massacre!!
I noticed that Senator Nash’s QON is still outstanding (how unusual..not!
), maybe we can expect a severe dressing down by Fiona at the next round of Estimates on the 12/05/2013, here’s a reminder of that QON:
QON 127, CASA 01, NASH, Plants.
Hansard, RRAT Committee, Page 74, 12/02/13.
Senator NASH: That does not surprise me. Having ascertained that it is $150,000, thank you, Chair. I would hate to think that CASA has to go through the same restrictions that we in this building do and not have plants. I am sure they do a great deal for those of us in this place who need a little bit of greenery every now and again. If you could just take on notice for me the current amount of plants that you have, the current cost of maintenance, who is maintaining them and why you are moving to get a new maintenance regime?
Hansard, RRAT Committee, Page 74, 12/02/13.
Senator NASH: That does not surprise me. Having ascertained that it is $150,000, thank you, Chair. I would hate to think that CASA has to go through the same restrictions that we in this building do and not have plants. I am sure they do a great deal for those of us in this place who need a little bit of greenery every now and again. If you could just take on notice for me the current amount of plants that you have, the current cost of maintenance, who is maintaining them and why you are moving to get a new maintenance regime?
QON 129, CASA 03, FAWCETT, FAA Audit.
Hansard, RRAT Committee, Page 77, 12/02/13.
Senator FAWCETT: I would like to refer you back to the FAA audit that was conducted a couple of years ago. My understanding is that there were a number of deficiencies found during that. Can you give us a status report of rectifications of those?
Mr J McCormick: We can take most of that on notice, if you like. What I can give you now is that the majority issue was around the fact that we did not have sufficient training, in their mind, for our inspectorate. We had already set in place a training school which is now up and running and, in particular, their concerns were over the inspectors who oversaw what is called FAR 129 foreign operators operating RPT, regular public transport, into the US. It was around the amount of training that people had done, where most of the training in the past of say six or seven years ago revolved a lot around on-the-job training and then people had their basic training either that way or through a course to start with was perhaps not as extensive as it should have been. Since then we have rectified that completely.
Senator FAWCETT: I am happy for you to take those on notice.
Hansard, RRAT Committee, Page 77, 12/02/13.
Senator FAWCETT: I would like to refer you back to the FAA audit that was conducted a couple of years ago. My understanding is that there were a number of deficiencies found during that. Can you give us a status report of rectifications of those?
Mr J McCormick: We can take most of that on notice, if you like. What I can give you now is that the majority issue was around the fact that we did not have sufficient training, in their mind, for our inspectorate. We had already set in place a training school which is now up and running and, in particular, their concerns were over the inspectors who oversaw what is called FAR 129 foreign operators operating RPT, regular public transport, into the US. It was around the amount of training that people had done, where most of the training in the past of say six or seven years ago revolved a lot around on-the-job training and then people had their basic training either that way or through a course to start with was perhaps not as extensive as it should have been. Since then we have rectified that completely.
Senator FAWCETT: I am happy for you to take those on notice.
The DAS statement…“Since then we have rectified that completely”…seems to contradict the findings in the ‘Chambers Report’ amongst other conflicting evidence documented since the FAA audit.
No the next estimates hearing could be required viewing as this inquiry’s report and recommendations will be tabled by then and with the election, for ‘dumb’ and ‘dumber,’ coming up there could be some emboldened Senators vying for some political point scoring. Humble pie might be the order of the day for DOIT and its agencies??
Ok now back to the thread…where were we..oh yeah Gobbles and the Fort Fumble chainsaw massacre!!
The accounts of those who are innocent and have been slaughtered by the ferocious Fort Fumble beast is endless. This has occurred under numerous Ministers, CEO/DAS's, Liberal and Labor governments.
The system is sick. We want the cancer removed.
The system is sick. We want the cancer removed.
There’s little point in dealing with the symptoms and not the cause.
If it is true that “innocents” have been “slaughtered” by CASA under numerous Ministers, CEO/DAS’s, Liberal and Labor governments, what does that tell you about them?
I'll chuck this essay on this thread since Tid thinks it is superflouos elsewhere:
I believe esteemed moderator Tailwheel is wrong about the minimal potential for a bad aviation accident in Australia as I will explain at the end of this essay. The masterful work by the Senate Committee on the Pel Air accident and the associated memorandum of understanding between CASA and the ATSB provides valuable pointers to what has happened and what may happen in future.
In the introduction to his masterful history of the origins of World War One "The Sleepwalkers" (2012) Christopher Clark observes that the questions of why and how an event took place are logically inseperable, but lead us in quite different directions. The question of how invites us to look closely at the sequences of interactions that produced certain outcomes. By contrast the question of why invites us to go in search of remote and categorical causes: poor training, commercial pressures, slovenly administration, laziness, etc. The why approach brings a certain analytical clarity, but it also has a distorting effect, because it creates the illusion of a steadily building causal pressure; factors piling on top of each other pushing down on the events, pilots become mere executors of forces long established and beyond their control.
Aircraft accidents happen because of a chain of events performed by rational actors who are capable of self reflection, acknowledge a range of options and form the best judgements they can on the basis of the information they had to hand. The why approach can only be made to carry any explanatory weight if they can be seen to have shaped the decisions that led to the accident.
A Bulgarian historian recently observed that "once we pose the question why, guilt becomes the focal point" and so it proved in the disgraceful saga of the Pel AIr accident, where the ATSB totally accepted the CASA line that all guilt and responsibility must fall upon the pilot and abandoned what I believe is its proper role of determining how the accident occurred.
The focus on how which is the morally correct position that the ATSB should be forced once again to take is not driven by the need to draw up a charge sheet against this or that individual but aims to identify the decisions taken and the reasoning or emotions behind them This does not mean that the question of responsibility is excluded entirely - the aim is to let the why grow out of the how and not as suggested by evidence in the case of Pel AIr the reverse where CASA drove ATSB to its preconceived conclusion that everything was the pilots fault and no further discussion is to be entered into, to the point where the aircrafts flight recorders - the best source of how the accident came about, still languish on the bottom of Norfolk Island lagoon.
The danger in allowing this situation to persist - a complaisant ATSB following the diktats of CASA and the Department Of Transport is this: The why argument - the CASA blame game implies that the causes of accidents are long term deterioration in safety systems among operators. This seems to me to be embodied in its approach to regulation - closing down operators on the basis that they pose "unacceptable risk". In other words that systemic risk is the enemy and that it is possible to map out a causal chain of why it was inevitable that an accident happened as opposed to the more useful how that the ATSB was supposed to investigate.
The danger in this is inherent in the idea that as Tailwheel believes a major aviation accident in Australia is "improbable" - accepting that there is no obvious chain of "inevitablity" associated with any accident as CASA would like us to believe. I instead incline to the belief that short term events and apparently logical short term decision making instead create the conditions where an accident self assembles very, very rapidly and the why model of accident history completely fails to explain this, moreover it provides absolutely no guidance as to what to do to prevent future chains of consequence from self assembling., only the how model of accident analysis, now spurned by the ATSB can do that.
Think of the 275 people on Emirates 407 out of Melbourne that came within an inch of disaster and then tell me again how "improbable" a major accident might be. And that little episode involved a few quick key strokes on a laptop computer. The ATSB needs to be granted its independence, if necessary from the Transport Department, otherwise we are going to have to re-learn the original reason for its independence the hard way.
...And I get a reply from 4Greens who beautifully illustrates my point:
The role of ATSB is to determine exactly how the accident happened.
Armed with that knowledge, it is then possible to determine if the act was irrational and whether the pilot was to blame.
The trouble with you 4greens, is that you need to understand that what people do in a specific situation always appears rational and the best choice to them at the time.
This is at the heart of the issue with CASA and ATSB. CASA is operating after the fact to aportion blame.. ATSB should be determining exactly how the pilot arrived at the decision to do what they did.
Dominic James was doing the best job he could do at the time based on what he knew.
The question to be answered before blame can be attributed is exactly how he formed his opinion that pressing on to Norfolk was the correct thing to do. Calling him "irresponsible" doesnt shed any light on the safety issues involved and therefore does nothing to prevent further accidents of a similar type.
I think I can now state that when the inevitable happens, it will involve a combination of events that CASA will call "improbable", "fantastic" and of course "no one could have possibly known..." least of all the regulator.
What the heck is ATSB doing about the subject of pilot fatigue for starters?
I believe esteemed moderator Tailwheel is wrong about the minimal potential for a bad aviation accident in Australia as I will explain at the end of this essay. The masterful work by the Senate Committee on the Pel Air accident and the associated memorandum of understanding between CASA and the ATSB provides valuable pointers to what has happened and what may happen in future.
In the introduction to his masterful history of the origins of World War One "The Sleepwalkers" (2012) Christopher Clark observes that the questions of why and how an event took place are logically inseperable, but lead us in quite different directions. The question of how invites us to look closely at the sequences of interactions that produced certain outcomes. By contrast the question of why invites us to go in search of remote and categorical causes: poor training, commercial pressures, slovenly administration, laziness, etc. The why approach brings a certain analytical clarity, but it also has a distorting effect, because it creates the illusion of a steadily building causal pressure; factors piling on top of each other pushing down on the events, pilots become mere executors of forces long established and beyond their control.
Aircraft accidents happen because of a chain of events performed by rational actors who are capable of self reflection, acknowledge a range of options and form the best judgements they can on the basis of the information they had to hand. The why approach can only be made to carry any explanatory weight if they can be seen to have shaped the decisions that led to the accident.
A Bulgarian historian recently observed that "once we pose the question why, guilt becomes the focal point" and so it proved in the disgraceful saga of the Pel AIr accident, where the ATSB totally accepted the CASA line that all guilt and responsibility must fall upon the pilot and abandoned what I believe is its proper role of determining how the accident occurred.
The focus on how which is the morally correct position that the ATSB should be forced once again to take is not driven by the need to draw up a charge sheet against this or that individual but aims to identify the decisions taken and the reasoning or emotions behind them This does not mean that the question of responsibility is excluded entirely - the aim is to let the why grow out of the how and not as suggested by evidence in the case of Pel AIr the reverse where CASA drove ATSB to its preconceived conclusion that everything was the pilots fault and no further discussion is to be entered into, to the point where the aircrafts flight recorders - the best source of how the accident came about, still languish on the bottom of Norfolk Island lagoon.
The danger in allowing this situation to persist - a complaisant ATSB following the diktats of CASA and the Department Of Transport is this: The why argument - the CASA blame game implies that the causes of accidents are long term deterioration in safety systems among operators. This seems to me to be embodied in its approach to regulation - closing down operators on the basis that they pose "unacceptable risk". In other words that systemic risk is the enemy and that it is possible to map out a causal chain of why it was inevitable that an accident happened as opposed to the more useful how that the ATSB was supposed to investigate.
The danger in this is inherent in the idea that as Tailwheel believes a major aviation accident in Australia is "improbable" - accepting that there is no obvious chain of "inevitablity" associated with any accident as CASA would like us to believe. I instead incline to the belief that short term events and apparently logical short term decision making instead create the conditions where an accident self assembles very, very rapidly and the why model of accident history completely fails to explain this, moreover it provides absolutely no guidance as to what to do to prevent future chains of consequence from self assembling., only the how model of accident analysis, now spurned by the ATSB can do that.
Think of the 275 people on Emirates 407 out of Melbourne that came within an inch of disaster and then tell me again how "improbable" a major accident might be. And that little episode involved a few quick key strokes on a laptop computer. The ATSB needs to be granted its independence, if necessary from the Transport Department, otherwise we are going to have to re-learn the original reason for its independence the hard way.
...And I get a reply from 4Greens who beautifully illustrates my point:
Occasionally the contribution to an accident is the result of an irrational act by a pilot.
Armed with that knowledge, it is then possible to determine if the act was irrational and whether the pilot was to blame.
The trouble with you 4greens, is that you need to understand that what people do in a specific situation always appears rational and the best choice to them at the time.
This is at the heart of the issue with CASA and ATSB. CASA is operating after the fact to aportion blame.. ATSB should be determining exactly how the pilot arrived at the decision to do what they did.
Dominic James was doing the best job he could do at the time based on what he knew.
The question to be answered before blame can be attributed is exactly how he formed his opinion that pressing on to Norfolk was the correct thing to do. Calling him "irresponsible" doesnt shed any light on the safety issues involved and therefore does nothing to prevent further accidents of a similar type.
I think I can now state that when the inevitable happens, it will involve a combination of events that CASA will call "improbable", "fantastic" and of course "no one could have possibly known..." least of all the regulator.
What the heck is ATSB doing about the subject of pilot fatigue for starters?
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the heck is ATSB doing about the subject of pilot fatigue for starters?
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...3-bf9798200df8
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...5-0cf956c7c7cd
Pel Air was very much 'who' rather than 'why'
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you build it they won't come!
Sarcs, after the FAA and ICAO audits, and subsequent panicked response by the Fort Fumblers when the penny dropped that a safety downgrade was being touted, it would be rumoured that monies were committed and a basic training department set up to mitigate the findings and make life peachey again at Hotel CASA. It would be rumoured that as soon as the FAA and ICAO went away the training structure was iced and the monies that had been set aside, rumoured to be around 800k redirected elsewhere. Commitment cancelled, the spin had been spun, turf it all in the bin as the FAA and ICAO won't be back for some time.
And of course all this manipulated by none other than the Spin Doctor himself. I mean after you have watched the same game played out for years previoisly you get to know how to place the pieces don't you?
At a later date believed to be around 2010 FF was told by Big Tonys mob that there would be no additional trough money. "You got your extra 80 mil or whatever it is boys now fcuk off and never ask for additional funding ever again, in future any extra funding will have to be created by yourselves". Hence the fantasy was born that if FF spent a couple of bob and set up a centre of training excellence like the Singaporeans have, then the money would flow in by willing patrons eager to receive state of the art aviation regulatory training! Yes the trough would always be overflowing, lots of extra Cha Ching to fund whatever it is they blow money on. A bit of a 'if you build it they will come' scenario. But sadly most of what CASA does exists within the realms of 'The Field Of Dreams' and nobody ever comes. Perhaps if they converted the Brisbane field office into a corn farm they would have better success?
Sunfish, funny you mention Bulgaria. I once had a robust short lived relationship with a Bulgarian flight attendant. She was a nice lass, tall and slim yet stronger than a WWE wrestler. She used to arm-wrestle me during 'you know, that of the evening when you are letting the ferret out for a run'!
And of course all this manipulated by none other than the Spin Doctor himself. I mean after you have watched the same game played out for years previoisly you get to know how to place the pieces don't you?
At a later date believed to be around 2010 FF was told by Big Tonys mob that there would be no additional trough money. "You got your extra 80 mil or whatever it is boys now fcuk off and never ask for additional funding ever again, in future any extra funding will have to be created by yourselves". Hence the fantasy was born that if FF spent a couple of bob and set up a centre of training excellence like the Singaporeans have, then the money would flow in by willing patrons eager to receive state of the art aviation regulatory training! Yes the trough would always be overflowing, lots of extra Cha Ching to fund whatever it is they blow money on. A bit of a 'if you build it they will come' scenario. But sadly most of what CASA does exists within the realms of 'The Field Of Dreams' and nobody ever comes. Perhaps if they converted the Brisbane field office into a corn farm they would have better success?
Sunfish, funny you mention Bulgaria. I once had a robust short lived relationship with a Bulgarian flight attendant. She was a nice lass, tall and slim yet stronger than a WWE wrestler. She used to arm-wrestle me during 'you know, that of the evening when you are letting the ferret out for a run'!
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 8th Apr 2013 at 12:16.
Past the 300k mark!!
Cheers Sunny if nothing else your very thoughtful summary post of the Senate Inquiry etc has taken this thread past the 300k mark...so cheers everyone!!
ps And Oleo thanks for the history lesson, I think between us all we have revealed a lot since...oh about the day Senator X called this current inquiry...hmm so where do we go now??
Personally I'd still love to see a copy of the Skymaster 'Special Audit Report' or maybe we should focus on that infamous FAA audit (the audit that appears to have never happened)....
ps And Oleo thanks for the history lesson, I think between us all we have revealed a lot since...oh about the day Senator X called this current inquiry...hmm so where do we go now??
Personally I'd still love to see a copy of the Skymaster 'Special Audit Report' or maybe we should focus on that infamous FAA audit (the audit that appears to have never happened)....
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sarcs,
Sunfish created this thread with the FAA audit recommendation.
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...wikileaks.html
The risk of a downgrade and the consequences are another reason why this inquiry needs to act.
Sunfish created this thread with the FAA audit recommendation.
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...wikileaks.html
The risk of a downgrade and the consequences are another reason why this inquiry needs to act.
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 8th Apr 2013 at 17:29. Reason: Elephant in room
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
300.000 views.
Well done Ppruners, barely a curse or a dustup throughout. Brava, well done...
The Bar Room Barristers came up with a serious question: will/can the lower house get involved in the Senate Inquiry into Pel Air?
The wondering about what the ICAO, FAA, CAA etc. think of it all; if at all, was interesting. There is however you spin it, a fairly large blot on the ministers copy book after all, quite embarrassing really. Then there is the messy, expensive clean up to follow. Perhaps some questions without notice in the Parliament would provide an entertaining result.
The vote was a stalemate by the by, but a jolly good time was had by all.
Later, a couple of overseas guests gave some hilarious imitations of various characters and a couple of most excellent limericks; "A dozy young pot plant called Martin" was a show stopper; then a bloke about 49 accompanied himself on an accordion while the troops practiced German folk dances to a robust rendition of "when the Skull Screams" to the tune of Rock a bye Baby, on the tree top. Someone did a Shakespeare knock off on "As you like it" (with a rabbit theme). "No Oleo, this is a family show; OK, later, if you're very good": aside – sotto voce "I wonder if he's related to Gobbles, every now and then, there's a look about him; lean and hungry like".
Sponsored by the National Misfits and Ills of Society Society. Proud to be a non profit, deluded, misguided, out of touch minority group.
The Bar Room Barristers came up with a serious question: will/can the lower house get involved in the Senate Inquiry into Pel Air?
The wondering about what the ICAO, FAA, CAA etc. think of it all; if at all, was interesting. There is however you spin it, a fairly large blot on the ministers copy book after all, quite embarrassing really. Then there is the messy, expensive clean up to follow. Perhaps some questions without notice in the Parliament would provide an entertaining result.
The vote was a stalemate by the by, but a jolly good time was had by all.
Later, a couple of overseas guests gave some hilarious imitations of various characters and a couple of most excellent limericks; "A dozy young pot plant called Martin" was a show stopper; then a bloke about 49 accompanied himself on an accordion while the troops practiced German folk dances to a robust rendition of "when the Skull Screams" to the tune of Rock a bye Baby, on the tree top. Someone did a Shakespeare knock off on "As you like it" (with a rabbit theme). "No Oleo, this is a family show; OK, later, if you're very good": aside – sotto voce "I wonder if he's related to Gobbles, every now and then, there's a look about him; lean and hungry like".
Sponsored by the National Misfits and Ills of Society Society. Proud to be a non profit, deluded, misguided, out of touch minority group.
Last edited by Kharon; 8th Apr 2013 at 18:24.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take 5.
Pprune delegation to the UN...... 
Just picture it: Sarcs with a lampshade on his head, Oleo dressed to kill in Speedo's, bowler hat and a bow tie, Minnie in that 1960 yellow vinyl mod outfit and Gobbles in his Indian Pasha's outfit (bout le' Elephant) rolling up to the UN front desk. "Vhatchoo lot vant ?" barks the guard. "Please sir, we've come about the pot plants, it's very important" they say, breathless, but in unison.
The guard picks up the phone and mumbles away for a minute, a suit peeps around the corner looking flustered, then disappears. The guard waddles back – "OK" he growls "they'll see you, but I haff instructions to shoot the pachyderm if it poops; now, follow me". There was an awkward moment when the elephant farted while squeezing through the metal detector booth; magnificent it was, like a peel of thunder it ripped through the screening area. GD smiled and smiled when two security trolls swooned away; "Champion" he whispered.
They had decided that Gobbles should do the talking and he rocked them: land rights for gay whales, outdoor exercise for indoor potted plants, the whole none yards. It all went very well until he mentioned CASA, then blank faces spoke volumes. You see the UN knew of the Gobbledock and his righteous cause; but, they where clueless as to what CASA was or what it did, Korea – piece of cake, Afghanistan –a doddle, but CASA, oh dear. Same same here really. Anyway, after the tumultuous applause died away, they all bowed (Gobbles reversed it) and departed. They only just got the elephant out of building in time; what a mess. If you think pony pooh is OTT, try the elephant version.
Just for fun - Tailwinds all.....
Just picture it: Sarcs with a lampshade on his head, Oleo dressed to kill in Speedo's, bowler hat and a bow tie, Minnie in that 1960 yellow vinyl mod outfit and Gobbles in his Indian Pasha's outfit (bout le' Elephant) rolling up to the UN front desk. "Vhatchoo lot vant ?" barks the guard. "Please sir, we've come about the pot plants, it's very important" they say, breathless, but in unison.
The guard picks up the phone and mumbles away for a minute, a suit peeps around the corner looking flustered, then disappears. The guard waddles back – "OK" he growls "they'll see you, but I haff instructions to shoot the pachyderm if it poops; now, follow me". There was an awkward moment when the elephant farted while squeezing through the metal detector booth; magnificent it was, like a peel of thunder it ripped through the screening area. GD smiled and smiled when two security trolls swooned away; "Champion" he whispered.
They had decided that Gobbles should do the talking and he rocked them: land rights for gay whales, outdoor exercise for indoor potted plants, the whole none yards. It all went very well until he mentioned CASA, then blank faces spoke volumes. You see the UN knew of the Gobbledock and his righteous cause; but, they where clueless as to what CASA was or what it did, Korea – piece of cake, Afghanistan –a doddle, but CASA, oh dear. Same same here really. Anyway, after the tumultuous applause died away, they all bowed (Gobbles reversed it) and departed. They only just got the elephant out of building in time; what a mess. If you think pony pooh is OTT, try the elephant version.
Just for fun - Tailwinds all.....
Last edited by Kharon; 8th Apr 2013 at 22:56.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As requested.
Boys, you are welcome to it, it's an interesting document but dry.
ICAO (FAA) Audit Recommendations & Response
Usual precautions - Zippyshare file – "Download Now" button only. - 5MB.
Good job boys.
P7. a.k.a. T.O.M.
ICAO (FAA) Audit Recommendations & Response
Usual precautions - Zippyshare file – "Download Now" button only. - 5MB.
Good job boys.
P7. a.k.a. T.O.M.
Last edited by PAIN_NET; 8th Apr 2013 at 23:11. Reason: 'K' stop messing about, there's work still to be done here.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RFDS, the Gobbledock and Slugger Abbott, what a mix!
Dogtreecharlie, I can't speak for the RFDS, but because the Pel Air accident involved an aeromedical operation in a twin I am assuming the RFDS could see a potential or possible impact or a flow on affect to their operation as they too fly aeromedical operations in singles and twins, hence perhaps their interest and support in the inquiry mate?
The other point I would reason on, and this is just my thoughts, but the RFDS quite likely, and rightfully, could have some value to add to the investigation by way of experience, structure and skillset of their business as they operate 24/7 within an aeromedical framework, so they have felt qualified to add suggestions and offer up recommendations on any fixes or changes to regulations etc. As we know, a frontline operation such as them would have a better understanding or does or does not work in their field, unlike the bumbling executive Twerps at FF who didn't even know some of the destinations Pel Air were flying too!
And I think this is one of the key issues becoming more relevant by the day. Fort
Fumbles team of postulating geriatrics literally have no idea, grasp or concept of what is happening in the real world. Their contact with industry is kept at a minimum and usually is centred around punitive actions. FF would never embrace, adopt or promulgate a worthy suggestion from industry as it would bruise their sensitive egos. CAsA needs an injection of new blood from top to bottom, out with the extremely old and in with the new. I have already suggested that an industry appointed group compete the reg reform process as these other buffoons are obviously out of their league and incapable of doing so, 24 years and counting is enough proof of this.
Kharon, most interesting post. Possibly a little to cryptic for some, but certainly robust and humorous for some of us ills of society.
One thing puzzles me though you mention 'the Gobbledock in Speedos'. Are you saying that Tony Abbott is in fact Gobbledock? Is this a ploy by the Libs to shame Labor, the Slugger posting under the pseudonym of Gobbledock? Surely not??
The other point I would reason on, and this is just my thoughts, but the RFDS quite likely, and rightfully, could have some value to add to the investigation by way of experience, structure and skillset of their business as they operate 24/7 within an aeromedical framework, so they have felt qualified to add suggestions and offer up recommendations on any fixes or changes to regulations etc. As we know, a frontline operation such as them would have a better understanding or does or does not work in their field, unlike the bumbling executive Twerps at FF who didn't even know some of the destinations Pel Air were flying too!
And I think this is one of the key issues becoming more relevant by the day. Fort
Fumbles team of postulating geriatrics literally have no idea, grasp or concept of what is happening in the real world. Their contact with industry is kept at a minimum and usually is centred around punitive actions. FF would never embrace, adopt or promulgate a worthy suggestion from industry as it would bruise their sensitive egos. CAsA needs an injection of new blood from top to bottom, out with the extremely old and in with the new. I have already suggested that an industry appointed group compete the reg reform process as these other buffoons are obviously out of their league and incapable of doing so, 24 years and counting is enough proof of this.
Kharon, most interesting post. Possibly a little to cryptic for some, but certainly robust and humorous for some of us ills of society.
One thing puzzles me though you mention 'the Gobbledock in Speedos'. Are you saying that Tony Abbott is in fact Gobbledock? Is this a ploy by the Libs to shame Labor, the Slugger posting under the pseudonym of Gobbledock? Surely not??
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 9th Apr 2013 at 00:03. Reason: Avoiding Biscuit and Gobbledocks white elephant guano in the middle of the room
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
casa and the future - responsibility for their actions
In this thread, we must remind ourselves of the importance of Aviation.
Steve Creedy, in his article on Friday and Steve Creedy | The Australian takes us to that.
All the GA efforts by casa to damage GA just result in a flow-on to other sectors of the industry - It is of concern that the community understands that:
Steve Creedy, in his article on Friday and Steve Creedy | The Australian takes us to that.
All the GA efforts by casa to damage GA just result in a flow-on to other sectors of the industry - It is of concern that the community understands that:
the aviation sector contributed $32 billion to gross domestic product, about 2.9 per cent of the total.
Sector urges pollies to pay more attention
POLITICIANS have been urged not to take the aviation sector for granted during the federal election campaign and to heed its key contribution to the economy.
Aviation policy was a low priority for political parties in the 2010 federal election, but industry figures hope the lengthy run-up to the September poll will see it given greater consideration.
Aviation-Aerospace Australia chief executive Jim Carden said the Australian industry faced a time of structural transformation and could not be ignored.
"Australia is at the doorstep of the fastest growing region for aviation, and we go head to head with rising ASEAN nations that are rapidly building the capability and capacity to do what was once the domain of a strong and proud Australian industry," he said.
"As we move towards the election, it behoves our national leaders to reflect on this transformational period for our industry, where we can no longer take for granted an indigenous manufacturing industry, where we effectively only produce one locally made aircraft, where our local manufacturers are having to re-locate or partner offshore, where Australian airlines are being driven by competitive forces to maintain their aircraft elsewhere, and where our prohibitively high labour and business costs are making the sector a threatened species."
He pointed to an Oxford Economics report commissioned by the Air Transport Action Group, with which the AA-A has signed a memo of co-operation about Asia-Pacific issues, outlining the economic benefits from air transport in Australia.
According to the report, based on 2009 data, the aviation sector contributed $32 billion to gross domestic product, about 2.9 per cent of the total.
This included $13.5bn directly contributed by sectors such as airlines, airports and ground services as well as an $11bn indirect contribution through the industry's supply chain. A further $7.4bn comes from employee spending.
Another $43.7m was in "catalytic" benefits through tourism, raising the industry's total contribution to $75.6m or 6.1 per cent of GDP.
The report found the industry employed 149,000 people directly, supported an additional 97,000 jobs through its supply chain and another 86,000 through employee spending. Catalytic (tourism) effects captured 495,000 jobs.
Aviation jobs were about 1.8 times more productive than the average in Australia and the sector contributed $3.2bn in tax, including income tax, annually. A further $1.7bn came from departure taxes.
The report estimated an extra $2.6bn of government revenue was raised by the industry's supply chain and $1.8bn through employee spending.
Consumer benefits ranged from visiting family and friends to high-value shipping, with shippers paying $4.1bn to carry more than 700,000 tonnes annually to, from and within Australia.
It also found the industry enabled long-term economic growth by opening up foreign markets, lowering transport costs, increasing the flexibility of labour supply, raising productivity and encouraging Australian businesses to specialise in areas that played to the economy's strengths.
- by: Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
- From: The Australian
- April 05, 2013 12:00AM
POLITICIANS have been urged not to take the aviation sector for granted during the federal election campaign and to heed its key contribution to the economy.
Aviation policy was a low priority for political parties in the 2010 federal election, but industry figures hope the lengthy run-up to the September poll will see it given greater consideration.
Aviation-Aerospace Australia chief executive Jim Carden said the Australian industry faced a time of structural transformation and could not be ignored.
"Australia is at the doorstep of the fastest growing region for aviation, and we go head to head with rising ASEAN nations that are rapidly building the capability and capacity to do what was once the domain of a strong and proud Australian industry," he said.
"As we move towards the election, it behoves our national leaders to reflect on this transformational period for our industry, where we can no longer take for granted an indigenous manufacturing industry, where we effectively only produce one locally made aircraft, where our local manufacturers are having to re-locate or partner offshore, where Australian airlines are being driven by competitive forces to maintain their aircraft elsewhere, and where our prohibitively high labour and business costs are making the sector a threatened species."
He pointed to an Oxford Economics report commissioned by the Air Transport Action Group, with which the AA-A has signed a memo of co-operation about Asia-Pacific issues, outlining the economic benefits from air transport in Australia.
According to the report, based on 2009 data, the aviation sector contributed $32 billion to gross domestic product, about 2.9 per cent of the total.
This included $13.5bn directly contributed by sectors such as airlines, airports and ground services as well as an $11bn indirect contribution through the industry's supply chain. A further $7.4bn comes from employee spending.
Another $43.7m was in "catalytic" benefits through tourism, raising the industry's total contribution to $75.6m or 6.1 per cent of GDP.
The report found the industry employed 149,000 people directly, supported an additional 97,000 jobs through its supply chain and another 86,000 through employee spending. Catalytic (tourism) effects captured 495,000 jobs.
Aviation jobs were about 1.8 times more productive than the average in Australia and the sector contributed $3.2bn in tax, including income tax, annually. A further $1.7bn came from departure taxes.
The report estimated an extra $2.6bn of government revenue was raised by the industry's supply chain and $1.8bn through employee spending.
Consumer benefits ranged from visiting family and friends to high-value shipping, with shippers paying $4.1bn to carry more than 700,000 tonnes annually to, from and within Australia.
It also found the industry enabled long-term economic growth by opening up foreign markets, lowering transport costs, increasing the flexibility of labour supply, raising productivity and encouraging Australian businesses to specialise in areas that played to the economy's strengths.
Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 9th Apr 2013 at 02:33.
ICAO! Who cares about ICAO?
Gold “K” pure gold! Although I think you’ll find the lampshade was actually an inverted pot plant borrowed from Senator Nash’s Devo memorabilia! Note: Before anyone asks it was approved and properly stamped by the RSPPP (‘Royal Society for the protection of pot plants’).
Moving right along….
DCT the RUFDUS sub20 maybe light in content but (as Oleo alludes) there is, I believe, a significant message in the submission, the final paragraph reads…“ The Royal Flying Doctor Service would welcome the opportunity to assist in the development and implementation of regulations that will improve safety in aeromedical operations while maintaining emergency and health services to the bush…”, fancy that could the Senators actually be suggesting consultation with relevant parts of the industry??
It is also worth noting that this submission was received (19/03/2013) and made publicly available at a very late stage of the inquiry. This would suggest that the Senate RRAT committee has written to the RFDS to seek their input to possibly help address the outstanding issue of aerial ambulance regulations that has been obfuscated and delayed by Fort Fumble for well over a decade!
The PAIN link ‘ICAO (FAA) Audit Recommendations and Response’, although long and ‘dry’ makes the DAS statement…“Since then we have rectified that completely”… even more risible. It doesn’t take long to work out that there was a lot more non-compliances highlighted in the FAA audit than just inadequate training of certain sectors of the FF inspectorate!
Still maybe we need to give the FF spin-doctors the benefit of the doubt as Senator Fawcett’s QON from 12/02/13 (QON 129, CASA 03) is yet to be answered…hmm you wouldn’t want to be holding your breath though!!
Gobbles in a pair of budgy smugglers now there’s a thought...
…
Nah doesn’t fit the guy never wears pants let alone slugos!! However I do see the resemblance to the Mad Monk, especially those wingnut ears.
Moving right along….
DCT the RUFDUS sub20 maybe light in content but (as Oleo alludes) there is, I believe, a significant message in the submission, the final paragraph reads…“ The Royal Flying Doctor Service would welcome the opportunity to assist in the development and implementation of regulations that will improve safety in aeromedical operations while maintaining emergency and health services to the bush…”, fancy that could the Senators actually be suggesting consultation with relevant parts of the industry??
It is also worth noting that this submission was received (19/03/2013) and made publicly available at a very late stage of the inquiry. This would suggest that the Senate RRAT committee has written to the RFDS to seek their input to possibly help address the outstanding issue of aerial ambulance regulations that has been obfuscated and delayed by Fort Fumble for well over a decade!
The PAIN link ‘ICAO (FAA) Audit Recommendations and Response’, although long and ‘dry’ makes the DAS statement…“Since then we have rectified that completely”… even more risible
. It doesn’t take long to work out that there was a lot more non-compliances highlighted in the FAA audit than just inadequate training of certain sectors of the FF inspectorate!
From RRAT committee report:
3.45 The committee asked in relation to the Federal Aviation Administration Audit conducted in late 2009 for an update on the items, which were found to be deficient.
Mr McCormack informed the committee that the major issue was that CASA did not have sufficient training in place for the inspectorate. In response to the audit, Mr McCormack explained that a training school in Brisbane has been setup, where all inspectors undergo training to supplement their on-the-job training.
Mr McCormack informed the committee that the major issue was that CASA did not have sufficient training in place for the inspectorate. In response to the audit, Mr McCormack explained that a training school in Brisbane has been setup, where all inspectors undergo training to supplement their on-the-job training.
Still maybe we need to give the FF spin-doctors the benefit of the doubt as Senator Fawcett’s QON from 12/02/13 (QON 129, CASA 03) is yet to be answered…hmm you wouldn’t want to be holding your breath though!!
Gobbles in a pair of budgy smugglers now there’s a thought...
…
Nah doesn’t fit the guy never wears pants let alone slugos!! However I do see the resemblance to the Mad Monk, especially those wingnut ears.
Last edited by Sarcs; 9th Apr 2013 at 04:07.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sarcs, you solved a mystery!! I thought something had been missing of late - pictures!! The naughty Gobbledock always posted pictures!
Gotta miss that rascal. Montreal must be his new location, taking it to Transport Canada perhaps??
Gotta miss that rascal. Montreal must be his new location, taking it to Transport Canada perhaps??
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dog tree – Agree with both Sarcs and Oleo, as they have mentioned an invitation for the RFDS to actually have a say in Aero Medical rule making would be first rate; they may, just possibly have an inkling of how to best set about the task. I bet the RDFS operating fuel policy reflects a sensible, down to earth system for alternates; I just can't imagine the RFDS boys and girls launching with some half baked notion of being 'legal' according to the current AWK rules; not their style at all. While they are at it, would they please explain to CASA & ATSB about the Med1 and Med 2 protocol, there was a suggestion somewhere that James should have declared Med 1 for a patient transfer gig, I forget just who said it, but it was bollocks; from the agnostic, pot plant hating side of the room.
Sarcs – further to your information, it was Oleo in the Speedo's, he had a full Brazilian wax job, just for the UN event – awesome, he said it hurt like hell. Do you know he has a tattoo ?, yup a 3D picture of –, better I tell you later, in the pub. Gobbles always goes formal to the UN, in his Indian Pasha's outfit\.....
Sarcs – further to your information, it was Oleo in the Speedo's, he had a full Brazilian wax job, just for the UN event – awesome, he said it hurt like hell. Do you know he has a tattoo ?, yup a 3D picture of –, better I tell you later, in the pub. Gobbles always goes formal to the UN, in his Indian Pasha's outfit\.....
The ICAO Audit Report available at the link in post #1456 is astonishing.
If that is the report to which Mr McCormick was referring when he said the major issue was that CASA did not have sufficient training in place for the inspectorate, I wonder whether he’s actually read all 98 pages.
I’ve merely skimmed the report, but a few of the Findings struck me as particularly ironic, in the context of the Pel Air accident.
Audit Finding OPS/03:
Audit Finding OPS/11:
Audit Finding AIG/01:
If that is the report to which Mr McCormick was referring when he said the major issue was that CASA did not have sufficient training in place for the inspectorate, I wonder whether he’s actually read all 98 pages.
I’ve merely skimmed the report, but a few of the Findings struck me as particularly ironic, in the context of the Pel Air accident.
Audit Finding OPS/03:
The Australian regulations do not require air operators certificate (AOC) holders and applicants to ensure that, in the event that an aeroplane becomes involved in an accident or incident, all related flight recorder records and associated flight recorders are preserved to the extent possible and are retained in safe custody pending their disposition as determined in accordance with ICAO Annex 13. …
Australia agrees with this finding.
This issue is being addressed in the development of CASR Part 91. …
Develop and promulgate CASR Part 91. … By 31 December 2009. …
Australia agrees with this finding.
This issue is being addressed in the development of CASR Part 91. …
Develop and promulgate CASR Part 91. … By 31 December 2009. …
There are no regulations in Australia that require air operators to implement a safety management system acceptable to the State or to clearly define the direct accountability for safety on the part of senior management. …
Australia agrees with the finding. CASA is currently taking steps to introduce a requirement for AOC holders to implement Safety Management Systems in accordance with ICAO timeframes. …
CASA will amend Civil Aviation Order Section 82 to incorporate requirements for AOC holders to implement Safety Management Systems. … By 31 December 2008
CASA will incorporate operator requirements into regulations currently under development (CASR Part 119). … By 31 December 2009. …
Australia agrees with the finding. CASA is currently taking steps to introduce a requirement for AOC holders to implement Safety Management Systems in accordance with ICAO timeframes. …
CASA will amend Civil Aviation Order Section 82 to incorporate requirements for AOC holders to implement Safety Management Systems. … By 31 December 2008
CASA will incorporate operator requirements into regulations currently under development (CASR Part 119). … By 31 December 2009. …
Funding for aviation accident investigations …
Under the ATSB guidelines, occurrences that may fit the ICAO Annex 13’s definition of an aircraft accident or incident may not be investigated. Although the ATSB submits a notification of these occurrences to ICAO in accordance with ICAO Annex 13 provisions, the ATSB does not submit a preliminary report and/or an accident data report identifying contributing safety factors or probable cause. …
Under the ATSB guidelines, occurrences that may fit the ICAO Annex 13’s definition of an aircraft accident or incident may not be investigated. Although the ATSB submits a notification of these occurrences to ICAO in accordance with ICAO Annex 13 provisions, the ATSB does not submit a preliminary report and/or an accident data report identifying contributing safety factors or probable cause. …
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA smelt the CASA Pooh. Lets probe deeper.
Halfmanhalfelephant, you raised a very good post from an old Sunfish thread. I would encourage all those who aren't aware of Australia's close call at being downgraded to a Category 2 please read the cables.
We should really consider the FAA's concerns in light of current events. The FAA considered this action back in 2009. But have improvements been made, really? Well since that time period;
• The outcome of the Pel Air accident has been released. As a result damning evidence against the ability of CAsA to surveil effectively or regulate efficiently have become even more apparent.
• The ATsBeaker has taken a downward spiral over 4 years to the point that it is a laughing stock nationally. Even the Senators compared the Australian ATsBeaker to third world nations equivalent bodies.
• The CAsA board has had a further 4 years of embedding itself and what has it achieved? Nothing nothing and nothing. The Regulator is worse than it has ever been. The Board is a useless vehicle that simply exists to protect its Dear Leader in Government.
• Australia has had a prolonged senate inquiry into aviation safety based in part upon industry concerns to which some have been proven beyond doubt.
A downgrade is serious stuff. It means the guilty country does not comply with ICAO standards. It is ironic that CAsA can be seen in that light, and its an indictment upon those at the helm of the Regulator, several who have been at CAsA a decade or two in senior roles. Considering Cat 2 countries include Ukraine, Philippines, Bangladesh and Ghana I am appalled at our current system and its state. This also reflects woefully on Teflon Tony and his ability to minister our aviation. I am seriously thinking that the FAA and ICAO return and undertake a LOSA style in-depth audit.
The issues we have run deeper than many would suspect. It's just a shame that the Senators don't have the power to enact special powers to immediately correct the present issues.
The potential downgrade accompanying the damning Australian audit report must surely open the eyes of the non believers or critics of those of us who have repeatedly trying to raise the red flag. Keep in mind almost 4 years has past and we are not in a better position.
Hmmm, Ghana, Ukraine hey? Even Israel made it back to Cat 1 last year!
Skull, Doc Voodoo, 'He who won't speak in the Senate', Beaker, Board members, Teflon Tony and other assorted individuals - shame shame shame.
We should really consider the FAA's concerns in light of current events. The FAA considered this action back in 2009. But have improvements been made, really? Well since that time period;
• The outcome of the Pel Air accident has been released. As a result damning evidence against the ability of CAsA to surveil effectively or regulate efficiently have become even more apparent.
• The ATsBeaker has taken a downward spiral over 4 years to the point that it is a laughing stock nationally. Even the Senators compared the Australian ATsBeaker to third world nations equivalent bodies.
• The CAsA board has had a further 4 years of embedding itself and what has it achieved? Nothing nothing and nothing. The Regulator is worse than it has ever been. The Board is a useless vehicle that simply exists to protect its Dear Leader in Government.
• Australia has had a prolonged senate inquiry into aviation safety based in part upon industry concerns to which some have been proven beyond doubt.
A downgrade is serious stuff. It means the guilty country does not comply with ICAO standards. It is ironic that CAsA can be seen in that light, and its an indictment upon those at the helm of the Regulator, several who have been at CAsA a decade or two in senior roles. Considering Cat 2 countries include Ukraine, Philippines, Bangladesh and Ghana I am appalled at our current system and its state. This also reflects woefully on Teflon Tony and his ability to minister our aviation. I am seriously thinking that the FAA and ICAO return and undertake a LOSA style in-depth audit.
The issues we have run deeper than many would suspect. It's just a shame that the Senators don't have the power to enact special powers to immediately correct the present issues.
The potential downgrade accompanying the damning Australian audit report must surely open the eyes of the non believers or critics of those of us who have repeatedly trying to raise the red flag. Keep in mind almost 4 years has past and we are not in a better position.
Hmmm, Ghana, Ukraine hey? Even Israel made it back to Cat 1 last year!
Skull, Doc Voodoo, 'He who won't speak in the Senate', Beaker, Board members, Teflon Tony and other assorted individuals - shame shame shame.
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 9th Apr 2013 at 05:54.