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

Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review

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

Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review

Old 11th Feb 2014, 22:51
  #321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
you've got to lance the boil before you can squeeze the puss out.

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 11th Feb 2014 at 22:54. Reason: Glyphosate anybody?
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2014, 23:48
  #322 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Hats off to the AAAA. Australia would be better off outsourcing aviation safety regulation to them!

Just one more gem in its submission that I can't resist highlighting:
AAAA expressed strong concerns to ATSB management with previous attempts during investigations to attempt to mould evidence to fit a theory, rather than objectively analysing and presenting the evidence available.
Seems to be a pattern of ATSB behaviour!
Creampuff is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 01:07
  #323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 108
so is there any sign of avmed getting its act together?
It appears not...

Also in the AAAA submission:

One area in particular that struggles with continuous improvement is CASA’s aviation medicine branch. Examples are plentiful of questionable rulings on pilot medicals that fly in the face of genuine expert opinion (for example in cardiology) and result in the trashing of careers for no safety purpose.


The ability of the branch to hide behind the façade of medical qualifications is well known in industry and under current systems, is an almost unassailable position that has drifted far from actual safety issues, or the leading non-CASA advice on medical issues.
brissypilot is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 03:53
  #324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 66
Posts: 286
Time to revolt??

Excellent submission by AAAA, perfectly worded, straight to the point, factual and truthful. This is just one example of what group consensus about CASA is. Surely it is not possible for such an overwhelming percentage of the IOS to be categorically wrong? The fact is that the Australian aviation industry has voted, the results are in, and it is a big ‘VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE’ in CASA and its legacy of Minister puppets. The facts speak for themelves. The industry has had a gutful. And similar feelings are expressed towards the once respectable ATSB. I cannot speak for others but this spiralling mess is getting worse by the week, the Department has lost control (never had any really) of its wayward hybrid abomination.
I think that group submissions, much like what has been submitted to this weak handed Wet Lettuce Review group and previous senate inquiries needs to be submitted directly to:
· ICAO
· United Nations
· Top end Legal firm

The regulatory reform program needs to be halted immediately. It is now officially The Regulatory Deform Program. It has failed. The money is gone, class it in the same category as the pink batts scheme or the BER – It failed, the money is gone, no results are to be gained, end of it. It is time to kick back off where Byron was headed before the Iron Ring castrated him and many likeminded before him. The lunatics in charge of the asylum have also lost all control. They contradict each other, bully industry and in some instances do it with malice, contempt for law and ethics, with impunity and in a way that would indicate some have severe psychological and sociopathic issues.

The countless millions spent on junkets, rorts, legal pursuits of the innocent, the reg reform mess, abuse of power, unjustified salaries, ‘field excursions’, hypothetical discussions and almost everything else they do has to be stopped. As the AAAA has stated, what is good for the goose is good for the gander! Where is CASA’s SMS? Where is CASA’s change management process? Why doesn’t CASA adequately review its own risks? Where is CASA’s accountability? Why do CASA keep stuffing up, redacting, changing and repairing mistakes? Where is CASA’s just culture? Where is CASA’s ‘robust’ SSP, why is it flawed, a mess, created and implemented by an admin Johnny (should be Juliette as it is a ‘she’) who has taken off to VA? Absolute hypocrites. Enough is enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 04:09
  #325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
That's easy for you to say. Thank God you don't stutter.


I've been advocating public disobedience for years. After all, they started it.

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 12th Feb 2014 at 04:12. Reason: dyslexia.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 04:56
  #326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
More solid gold from the AAAA submission:
The most recent incarnation of the pathology of CASA’s relationship with industry was when CASA attempted to blame industry for the deferment of the start date for CASR Part 61 – Pilot Licencing.

In fact, it was clearly CASA that had failed to produce the essential Manual of Standards in time, CASA that had failed to map out a coherent transitional plan for existing pilots, CASA who had no advisory material in place to support implementation, CASA that was unable to provide adequate training to its own staff on the operation of Part 61 so that industry could in turn be educated, and CASA who did not have the approval system in place for the supporting CASR Part 141/142 training organisations.

Unjustifiably trying to scapegoat the ‘regulated’ for the failures of the ‘regulator’ is a novel approach to building good relationships, especially after industry has contributed – at its own cost – thousands of hours of support, experience and advice through the various Standard Consultative Committee and working groups. AAAA alone has been involved in more than eight CASA working groups and committees since 1999 and many of the issues identified back then remain current today because CASA appears to be incapable of positive, progressive outcomes.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 05:31
  #327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Phil gets my vote for WLR GA adviser!

Maybe if Aerial Ag Phil was to replace the other, Department picked, Phil () as the GA expert adviser to the WLR we may end up with a well-tended lettuce & pineapple crop for ’14 , we could certainly expect Pete the pot plant to get some respect…
Again I question the legitimacy of the other Phil’s mob…especially after reading this disturbing bit of the AAAA submission..:
AAAA was aghast when the CEO of CASA unilaterally cut sponsorship support of a number of Associations and then linked that action to criticism of CASA by those Associations. AAAA has no problem with CASA spending its sponsorship dollar where it thinks it will get the best return – after all, most of the ‘dollars’ come from industry.

While the size of support AAAA received was immaterial ($9,000 per annum to support the National Convention – for which CASA received considerable commercial sponsorship benefits) the principle of trying to intimidate Associations by manipulating funding was simply disgusting.

To draw a direct line between CASA patronage and intimidation of free speech not only flows against public service guidelines or good practice, it is an unethical approach to managing the relationship between CASA and representative industry bodies that have previously worked genuinely with CASA over many years to deliver regulatory change and safety promotion.

The main reason many Associations have purposefully withdrawn from any contact with the senior management of CASA is because it is a completely unfruitful and hostile environment. AAAA certainly feels that the resources of members are more usefully applied in areas other than trying to maintain a clearly failed relationship with the current senior management of CASA
That passage beggars belief , sort of like what you would expect to hear coming out of a dictatorial or socialist bureaucratic regime….FFS!

VOTE 1 for Aerial Ag Phil (not the other Phil..)

Creamy I'll raise your two clapping hands with a thumbs up for the AAAA submission..
Sarcs is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 08:29
  #328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
I have to say that even cynical ol’ me is starting to believe the government is going to have little choice but to take real action in response to all this.

There appear to be too many people with too much credibility using too much blunt language. A wet lettuce response is unlikely to be tolerated by lots of people who have to date been prepared to tolerate lots.

My main point of disagreement with the gist of AAAA’s proposal is that I don’t believe the (reinstated) Board makes much of a difference, whether or not it’s stacked with people with ‘industry experience’.

The fundamental constraint that ‘outsiders’ overlook is that the CASA Board can’t make or unmake decisions to e.g. refuse, suspend or revoke an AOC. The CASA Board can’t direct a delegate to make or not make a regulatory decision.

A CASA Board could have prevented some of the output of the regulatory reform Frankenstein that successive governments have allowed CASA to create. But a properly qualified and experienced CEO and executive team could have prevented the same outcome without the benefit of a Board’s guidance.

Whatever the reasons, the regulatory reform Frankenstein exists, and the review panel, at least, can’t ignore the mayhem left in the monster’s wake.

Interesting times.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 14:38
  #329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,935
Folks,

Over the last 15+ years, nobody has worked harder to be reasonable with CASA in dealing with CASA, to the degree that AAAA Phil and several I could name have crossed swords, believing him to have taken too soft an approach ---- AAAA were buggered around for 10 years over Part 137 --- the level of "regulation" of aerial application here, compared to, say, NZ or US, borders on the ridiculous, just look up the page counts for the Part 137 for each of the named countries.

That the AAAA submission is as it is, just shows just how the most reasonable and reasoning person will finally just give up, as the reasonableness is only interpreted by the "CASA Culture" as weakness.

Well done AAAA, a pity the AOPA submission didn't have a bit of backbone, but that would have have imperiled CASA funding of some AOPA activities.

Long gone are the days when a central AOPA policy was "pay your own way, have your own say".

by close of business 25 February 2014.
Hardly serious consultation, is it, it's token consultation. Barely two weeks to comment on something that is core to one of the few areas of light aviation not bordering on comatose.

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 19:11
  #330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
According to Stephen Fry Vogans are the most bureaucratic people in the universe.

halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2014, 20:24
  #331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Devil While on ‘A’..back down to earth!

Not quite the headline statement of the AAAA (Aerial Ag Phil) submission, nonetheless of substantial quality and still singing from the same hymn sheet, is the submission from ALGA (Australian Local Government Association). This submission also strongly backs up the AAA (who is also in alliance with the AAAA through TAAAF) submission:

ALGA ASRR submission

5 Conclusion

The overwhelming majority of Australian airports are owned and operated by local councils for the regional and remote communities that they serve. For many regional communities, access to air services is essential for their social and economic wellbeing. These air services provide access to major cities and other major regional centres facilitating out-bound and in-bound tourism, personal and business travel, personal and business freight and importantly access to social and community services that are less readily available in regions, such as education and health services.

Australia’s agricultural production is also considerably enhanced by aerial agricultural services like crop dusting and mustering operated from regional and remote airports. Further, some regional airports also provide pilot training facilities which assists with sustaining the aviation industry. In addition, other regional and remote airports provide a valuable service in enabling fire-fighting to be undertaken in areas where road transport is not possible or is too slow.

The economic contribution of Australia’s regional and remote airports is significant, estimated (in 2011) at $329m with $216m in gross operating surplus (GOS) and $113m in wage payments accumulated from the activity generated from regional and remote airports, although this is conservative estimate of this sectors contribution, for reasons explained earlier in this submission.

However regional and remote airports face considerable challenges in maintaining, let alone growing, the service they provide to their local communities. Maintaining and developing the capacity of these airports is expensive. This situation is compounded by the fact that the costs of regulation at these airports are disproportionately greater than for capital city airports – often by a factor of three.

Therefore, there is a serious need to review and address safety, security, environmental controls, as well as development planning and control regulations which may not be fit for purpose. ALGA looks forward to working with the Commonwealth to address unnecessarily complex and inconsistent regulatory requirements which are not sufficiently sensitive and flexible to the challenging circumstances faced by our regional and remote airports
Found a ‘V’ in my alphabet soup??

While on the subject of airports it would appear that one of the VIPA WLR submission’s focal points, along with the CAO 48.1 debacle, revolves around Sydney Airport, Ben’s Article yesterday...

Virgin pilots highlight Sydney Airport’s serious problems
The association will make the congested airport’s problems a part of its submission to the federal government’s Aviation Safety Regulation Review when it meets with its panel in Brisbane this Thursday.

VIPA is also calling for a restructure of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), measures to reduce pilot fatigue and other aviation regulation reforms.

The association’s president, Captain John Lyons, said “For pilots, the issue of a second Sydney airport is faster becoming an urgent debate about safety, rather than economics.”
Still on airports I heard a rumour....that the Archerfield’s tenancy group submission is as equally heavy hitting as the AAAA sub…hmm wonder if I can get a copy??…
Sarcs is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 02:43
  #332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,935
SARCS,
The Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce submission, as I understand it, largely draws on the major legal action initiated by the AACC, much of which is in the public domain.

See if you can find a member of the AACC and ask them for a copy

<http://www.aacci.org.au>

Tootle pi[p!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 04:36
  #333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 45
Deputy DAS Becomes A380 endorsed RORTS RORTS RORTS!

So why have the taxpayers forked out around $40k so that Terrence can have an A380 endorsement? Is this an accompliment to Sky Sentinel?
Why does a near 80 year old geriatric who couldn't even move his arthritic bones into the flight deck need such an endorsement? Is it for ego, out of boredom, some perverted sense of pride or just an addiction to wasting taxpayer money?

CAsA executive management's nosewheel has hit the ground and the remainder of the organisation has skidded to a halt (Oops, Creampuff know's all about nosehweel scrapings).

Why do bullies like Terry, Herr Campbell and Flyingfiend get promoted through the ranks? C'mon Flyingfiend, come out and play. What, scared of the AFP? Not so brave anymore old chap are you.

Why is 'the Doc' gaining behind the scenes votes? A showdown coming? Is he working with the department to rid the Skull? MrDork must be desperate, but then again he is the main problem. Get rid of all the DAS, MrDork, Truss, The Board, the lot of them. CAsA is a bunch of arseclowns
and are supported by the department and the Ministers office. What a shonky bunch of muppets and serial trough abusers.

C'mon Gaunty, Flyingfiend and Clinton, come out and play!!
CASAweary is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 06:57
  #334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,383
Casaweary, please tell us!! their not actually going to let him fly a real airplane are they?? by that I mean actually sit in a control seat and play
"I'm an airline Captain"?? surely not....I mean think of the risks!!..If he's just going to sit on the jump seat not so bad but I can envisage a raft of NCN's for improper operation against the operating crew because he is now an annointed expert, hell even if they are not endorsed FOI's direct how operations are to be conducted.
Thats up until a ding happens because of their insane procedures, then of course..."ME your honour?? Absolutely not!! these "Not fit and proper persons, criminals really" totally misconstrued what I was forcing....err suggesting they do".
We had a Captain sheik once, son of one of the rulers, decided to be an airline captain because he thought thats where the chicks were!! His country had to underwrite the insurance every time he flew...paid out a few mil in heavy landings and screwed engines its rumoured.
So who underwrites the insurance if this geriatric has a brain fart somewhere and bends an A380??...Damn it all my daddy said I should have been a lawyer!! Why didnt I listen!!

Last edited by thorn bird; 13th Feb 2014 at 22:25.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 07:17
  #335 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,935
Industry often comments that it is not possible to make this stuff up – only CASA has the prerequisite levels of incompetence to create and sustain such regulatory nonsense.
Folks,
Of all the quotable quotes from the AAAA submission, the above is just about my favorite.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 10:15
  #336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 66
Posts: 286
Thy trough runneth over

My favourite part of Casaweary's post:
CAsA executive management's nosewheel has hit the ground and the remainder of the organisation has skidded to a halt (Oops, Creampuff know's all about nosehweel scrapings).
Seems Casaweary knows a lot of history? Creampuff care to respond?
As for the quote about the deputy DAS, if this is true then whoever authorised his endorsement is not only an idiot but obviously a fellow abuser of the taxpayer purse. These blokes really are disconnected from reality aren't they? No wonder industry has started to revolt.

Thorn bird, no A380 will be bent. The old geezer can only bend the taxpayers purse by becoming endorsed. I doubt he could see all those gauges, colours or words on the FMS anyway. Plus incontinence is a problem for the elderly too so the flight deck is not the place to be!
Wonder if signed him off as being medically fit, Hemples doctor? Or maybe Terry is one of those blokes from the movie 'Cocoon'?
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 19:24
  #337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Creampuff care to respond?
My parents always advised me not to make eye contact with lunatics.

Jeremy Clarkson cautions against trying to engage in intelligent conversation with mouth-breathers.

So I’ll pass.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 22:32
  #338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,383
Para, all is well. no need to worry about A380's landing on the house.
Apparently the endo for Terrence was not so he could play "I'm an airline captain", just put a bit of icing on his retirement cake, something about being based on his last years salary which should be the equivalent of what a real A380 check and trainer earns, which is fair enough now he's an A380 expert.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2014, 22:46
  #339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
How come Gaunty got a mention. Is he part of the iron circle?
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2014, 04:13
  #340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,935
Folks,
I have a bit of a problem with this A380 story.

If the said gentleman's pension is to be based on an (presumably QF, as the only Australian example) A380 Check and Training Captain, I would have thought that was a reduction, compared to the CASA senior executive salary levels.

Tootle Pip!!
LeadSled 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.