Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strict liability: Well, just because it's law doesn't make it a good law. Many aviation administrative actionable offences have been made criminal offences. I believe road laws, even electronic speeding devices and alcohol instruments are open to challenge in a Court of law without seeking redress from the AAT.
Things are made complicated by the application of over regulation. An example, the Hamilton Is PA-32 fatal crash where the pilot was found to have a Non-therapeutic drug indicator after a considerable time, (weeks), from ingestion. Not only are the inclusions of this finding irrelevant in the final cause determination but was the main catalyst for the now disgraced drug and alcohol testing regime now foisted upon us.
Strict liability is abused by the CASA and the Brandis inquiry is focused upon this plus other matters that have been taken to like a duck to water by the same collective of dungeon dwelling, dysentery spreading amoebae's lurking under and around the CASA umbrella.
Things are made complicated by the application of over regulation. An example, the Hamilton Is PA-32 fatal crash where the pilot was found to have a Non-therapeutic drug indicator after a considerable time, (weeks), from ingestion. Not only are the inclusions of this finding irrelevant in the final cause determination but was the main catalyst for the now disgraced drug and alcohol testing regime now foisted upon us.
Strict liability is abused by the CASA and the Brandis inquiry is focused upon this plus other matters that have been taken to like a duck to water by the same collective of dungeon dwelling, dysentery spreading amoebae's lurking under and around the CASA umbrella.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
creampuff and gaunty you guys have destroyed your credibility in one post each.
congratulations.
but hey I'm a martian with a 41 year history of safe illegal aviation.
wtf would I know.
when are you people going to recognise that CASA has assembled together a mutually self supporting group of utter nutters.
all with the sincere stare, the concerned look on the face and utter nonsensical logic.
the snow job has seen $240,000,000 of taxpayers money evaporated with nothing acceptable as even the interim result.
ministers, there is nothing wrong with admitting that you were victims of a snow job.
the blatant waste of taxpayers funds must be put to a stop.
kill off the Clueless Arseholes Screwing Aviation bull****. bring in the New Zealand FAR's and get some sense back into aviation.
the lawyers aren't the way to make aviation safe.
me maintaining my aeroplane is the only safe way to fly the damn thing. thats why I do it. why the hell would you make it illegal. haven't you got a bloody clue??
congratulations.
but hey I'm a martian with a 41 year history of safe illegal aviation.
wtf would I know.
when are you people going to recognise that CASA has assembled together a mutually self supporting group of utter nutters.
all with the sincere stare, the concerned look on the face and utter nonsensical logic.
the snow job has seen $240,000,000 of taxpayers money evaporated with nothing acceptable as even the interim result.
ministers, there is nothing wrong with admitting that you were victims of a snow job.
the blatant waste of taxpayers funds must be put to a stop.
kill off the Clueless Arseholes Screwing Aviation bull****. bring in the New Zealand FAR's and get some sense back into aviation.
the lawyers aren't the way to make aviation safe.
me maintaining my aeroplane is the only safe way to fly the damn thing. thats why I do it. why the hell would you make it illegal. haven't you got a bloody clue??
But Frank, Brandis is a Laborial. He’s one of the people who’ve presided over the inexorable increase in regulation of every aspect of your life. He ‘knows’ that ‘safety’ depends on ‘strong’ regulation.
Good luck! Let us know how you go.
W8 - thanks; I think ...
Good luck! Let us know how you go.
W8 - thanks; I think ...
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry creampuff I read that post as you advocating the nonsense
I see that you merely state that it exists and give the enacting law.
you get another chance
I see that you merely state that it exists and give the enacting law.
you get another chance
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff;
Safety depends on common sense and that can't be regulated. Senator Brandis knows that, and may well be a laborious, Liberal Party lawyer, however he knows how lawyers think. I don't, always thought they were a peculiar lot and not to be left alone with cats.
Do you consider he would call an inquiry into the whole $hitfight if he thought it was going hooters?
Safety depends on common sense and that can't be regulated. Senator Brandis knows that, and may well be a laborious, Liberal Party lawyer, however he knows how lawyers think. I don't, always thought they were a peculiar lot and not to be left alone with cats.
Do you consider he would call an inquiry into the whole $hitfight if he thought it was going hooters?
We all know why politicians call inquiries, Frank … 
BTW, I agree with you in principle. All of the penalties in the civil aviation rules could be changed to “Death” and it wouldn’t make a schmick of difference to the accident and incident rate.
If I recall correctly, part of Mr McCormick’s self-serving but mercifully-curtailed spray at the start of the last round of Estimates hearings included a reference to having civil penalty rather than strict liability offences in the rules. I was reminded of that song lyric: “too much; too little; too late ….
BTW, I agree with you in principle. All of the penalties in the civil aviation rules could be changed to “Death” and it wouldn’t make a schmick of difference to the accident and incident rate.
If I recall correctly, part of Mr McCormick’s self-serving but mercifully-curtailed spray at the start of the last round of Estimates hearings included a reference to having civil penalty rather than strict liability offences in the rules. I was reminded of that song lyric: “too much; too little; too late ….
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Too much, too little, too CAsA, toot toot'...
If I recall correctly, part of Mr McCormick’s self-serving but mercifully-curtailed spray at the start of the last round of Estimates hearings included a reference to having civil penalty rather than strict liability offences in the rules. I was reminded of that song lyric: “too much; too little; too late ….
I believe somebody in CAsA recently sang Creamys love song to the outgoing ICC !! But don't worry, Truss has recently sung the same song to McSkull, and I am sure that Beaker will be serenaded with the same robust ballad come June/July. Who knows, maybe the IOS will get to sing this to the outgoing ****ty regs one day
Word of caution: If playing this to the other DAS please turn it up loud as the old boy is hard of hearing these days!
Folks,
I note the SAAA submission, the contents of which comes as no surprise for a bunch of, in my opinion, rent seakers, tryingt to, once again (there have been many attempts since 1998) for a return to the glory days of their CAA/CASA etc guaranteed income - a setup that, in my opinion, grossly impeded amateur building in Australia.
In short, in my opinion, SAAA want all the pre-1998 red tape and restrictions reintroduced, plus a few more sources of red tape revenue that didn't exist pre-1998.
The US style Experimental categories, including the Experimental Amateur Built have been a resounding success in Australia, why would we want to revert to the old, restrictive, and Oh! So Expensive red tape bureaucratic nonsense of the AABA system --- ????
There is certainly no safety justification, not even in terms of S.9A of the Act.
What SAAA is proposing, in my opinion, is a solution looking for a problem, and a guaranteed very expensive solution for amateur builders, to a problem that clearly does not exist. Any aviating is already expensive enough, without adding substantial extra costs.
The real problem for SAAA, in my opinion, was that they lost a significant regulated revenue source in 1998, and have been trying to get it back ever since.
Tootle pip!!
I note the SAAA submission, the contents of which comes as no surprise for a bunch of, in my opinion, rent seakers, tryingt to, once again (there have been many attempts since 1998) for a return to the glory days of their CAA/CASA etc guaranteed income - a setup that, in my opinion, grossly impeded amateur building in Australia.
In short, in my opinion, SAAA want all the pre-1998 red tape and restrictions reintroduced, plus a few more sources of red tape revenue that didn't exist pre-1998.
The US style Experimental categories, including the Experimental Amateur Built have been a resounding success in Australia, why would we want to revert to the old, restrictive, and Oh! So Expensive red tape bureaucratic nonsense of the AABA system --- ????
There is certainly no safety justification, not even in terms of S.9A of the Act.
What SAAA is proposing, in my opinion, is a solution looking for a problem, and a guaranteed very expensive solution for amateur builders, to a problem that clearly does not exist. Any aviating is already expensive enough, without adding substantial extra costs.
The real problem for SAAA, in my opinion, was that they lost a significant regulated revenue source in 1998, and have been trying to get it back ever since.
Tootle pip!!
And there you have it, gaunty.
Any ‘panel of industry peers’ would be at each other’s throats before morning tea on the first day…
Agreement on e.g. classification of operations? Snowflake's hope in hades!
Any ‘panel of industry peers’ would be at each other’s throats before morning tea on the first day…
Agreement on e.g. classification of operations? Snowflake's hope in hades!
Agreement on e.g. classification of operations? Snowflake's hope in hades!
Actually, a very reasonable Class. of Ops., with no industry dissenters, was finally completed during the time Byron was Director.
The incoming Mr. McCormick tossed it, just as he tossed Byron's directive that mandated government policy on Cost/Benefit justification and outcome based regulation.
Tootle pip!!
Actually, a very reasonable Class. of Ops., with no industry dissenters, was finally completed during the time Byron was Director. …
The incoming Mr. McCormick tossed it, just as he tossed Byron's directive that mandated government policy on Cost/Benefit justification and outcome based regulation.
But I could be wrong, and maybe I’m a glass half empty guy as guanty suggests, despite my having been spot on with nearly every prediction I’ve made in the last decade about the regulatory reform program.
So, time to put up or shut up, 'industry peers': Please cut and paste into this thread the very reasonable classification of operations rules that have no industry dissenters, all reviewed and written in "plane talk" by a panel of industry peers and free of tortuous legalese.
Please do it or please STFU.
My prediction: You won’t do it, because you can’t do it.
The 'industry’ is not agreed on an underlying philosophy for classification of operations. Anyone who’s read and understands the implications of the publicly available submissions to the ASSR Panel should already know that.
An academic contribution.
The Australian School of Business (IRRC) is nearing the end of a three year research project into the Future of aircraft maintenance in Australia:
The study report is due to be released later this year but in the meantime, using interim findings, the research team has made a submission to the WLR.. Although I am yet to track down the actual submission, the following article perhaps highlights the finer points of the ABS submission to the WLR panel :
Located in the world's fastest growing aviation region, Australia's vital air transport industry faces a shortage of skilled aircraft maintenance engineers that may increasingly be solved by moving much aircraft maintenance offshore.
This project will examine the options for this industry's future, exploring the safety risks of offshoring, and the costs of developing or losing a skilled national aircraft maintenance workforce.
It will develop a method for forecasting aeroskills requirements, explore new approaches to workforce development, and analyse the costs and benefits of allowing the industry to decline, rather than contributing to a strong national aerospace and technology sector.
This project will examine the options for this industry's future, exploring the safety risks of offshoring, and the costs of developing or losing a skilled national aircraft maintenance workforce.
It will develop a method for forecasting aeroskills requirements, explore new approaches to workforce development, and analyse the costs and benefits of allowing the industry to decline, rather than contributing to a strong national aerospace and technology sector.
Although I am yet to track down the actual submission, the following article perhaps highlights the finer points of the ABS submission to the WLR panel :
Sky Wars: Why Offshore Aircraft Maintenance is a Flawed Strategy
Published: March 10, 2014 in Knowledge@Australian School of Business
Aluminium smelting, oil refining, car making – the list of Australia’s vanishing industries grows longer. Among reasons for ceasing Australian operations, Holden, Ford and Toyota cited fierce global competition, a small local market and a relatively high wages bill. Now Qantas, in announcing plans last month to cut a further 5000 staff in the face of financial losses, has added arguments about the ‘unfair’ requirement that it service its aircraft in Australia. It's rival, Virgin, relies on overseas workshops.
Australian aircraft maintenance has been moving offshore for some time. This increasing trend has been put under the microscope by the Australian School of Business (ABS) during the past three years in an Australian Research Council study – The Future of Aircraft Maintenance in Australia: Aviation Safety, Workforce Capability and Industry Development.
The key researchers – ASB professor Michael Quinlan, associate professors Anne Junor and Ian Hampson, senior lecturer Sarah Gregson and research associate Doug Fraser – were inspired by concerns about the strategic and economic costs of offshoring, possible threats to passenger safety and a declining skill base in the Australian aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) industry.
The full study will be released later this year, but the researchers have utilised interim findings in an ASB Industrial Relations Research Centre submission to the federal government’s Aviation Safety Regulation Review, due to report in May. A key point in the submission is a looming skills crisis.
As local maintenance jobs have been cut, such as the 1000 positions Qantas is reported to have shed during 2012, the training capability for the next generation has gone into free fall. Junor has mapped MRO organisations and found as many as 50% have closed down in recent years and that difficulties in finding staff are prevalent among remaining providers. Defence facilities now account for about 75% of apprentice completions. One of the two civilian NSW centres presently approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to train aircraft engineers has 10-15 students this year. In 2013 it had 30. During the past 10 years it had about 100 per year.
Global Opportunity
According to Fraser, fostering MRO should be a no-brainer for Australian industry strategists.
“It’s no longer just a sideshow of running an airline. It’s a big global industry in its own right, worth around A$70 billion a year and likely to at least double during the next 20 years. It utilises the kind of highly skilled blue-collar labour that Australia has traditionally been good at developing. It offers many specialist areas of work where Australia’s comparative wage costs don’t seriously limit our competitiveness,” Fraser says.
“Above all, international authorities expect most regions of the world to fall well short of the training output needed to meet their own MRO requirements over the next decade.”
Fraser puts the decline in MRO skills down to a series of policy oversights by successive governments.
“Australia traditionally relied for the bulk of its technical training on big public-sector organisations such as the railways, Telecom and Defence establishments, and a few of the largest private companies,” he says. “In the 1980s we had Qantas, TAA and Ansett all running substantial apprenticeship programs. Qantas absorbed TAA, Ansett went out of business, and nobody else has stepped in to fill the gap.
"In effect, Australia's MRO training effort has been allowed to become hostage to the strategies and fortunes of a single company. If that company now can't look after itself, how is it going to look after the future needs of the Australian industry?"
The skills drain could leave the fledgling Australian aircraft-component industry in the same situation facing the car-component industry.
Says Junor: “At the moment, Australia is the biggest components supplier to Boeing outside the US. Running down the capacity of our automotive and aero-skills training facilities is hardly the way to ensure our continued integration into this large global market.”
Profits and Safety
And what impact will the cost-quality trade-off of offshoring maintenance have on Australia’s enviable airline safety record? Hampson sees gaps in the safety surveillance systems.
“There are doubtless many offshore shops which give top-quality service that Australian consumers can rely on,” he says. “We know from experience that there are some which definitely don’t. The problem is that we don’t have enough good information to tell which is which. Australia doesn’t even keep public records of which maintenance goes offshore, never mind where it goes. Once it does go offshore, no public records are kept of where the work has fallen short of standard, or what rework is needed in Australia when the plane comes back.
“The risk then is that because there isn't enough information about quality, choices will be made on the basis of price. This is a classic ‘market for lemons’ situation, where quality providers get driven out of the market and many others survive who don't deserve to."
Hampson believes market forces alone are unlikely to address this threat. Airline profits need to be balanced against the probability of a major accident. While any such incident would have fatal consequences for the business as well as for human life, it might or might not occur, and if it does, it will be at some unknown point in the future, possibly only once the aircraft has been sold on and become someone else’s worry.
“An Asian airline Boeing 747 in 1980 suffered a tail strike from landing too steeply. It was not repaired properly and cracks appeared and 22 years later the plane fell out of the air. Aircraft maintenance can be a health risk but it is difficult to know the extent,” Hampson says.
Relaxed Approach
The researchers note “a contrast between Australia's relaxed approach to the supervision of overseas repair shops handling Australian work, and the increasingly stringent regulatory approach which public concern in the US has obliged Congress and the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to apply to offshore providers”.
The FAA is subject to political supervision and accountability in ways that Australia’s CASA is not. The FAA was recently compelled by congressional legislation to tighten up its regulatory and supervisory practices. In Australia, the trend is for CASA to offshore its responsibilities to foreign aviation authorities to ensure safety standards. This leaves the certification of maintenance on Australian aircraft to the safety oversight, training and licensing procedures of another country.
“We wonder how consistent this is with the Australian safety program, as well as International Civil Aviation Organisation requirements that the State of Registry be responsible for the safety of maintenance performed on aircraft even in another country,” say the researchers.
Back of the Queue
The expected worldwide shortage of aircraft maintenance engineers is likely to increase offshore wages, negating much of the cost advantage of offshore maintenance and affect the viability of relying on offshore maintenance as the primary means of meeting Australia’s airworthiness requirements. Australian carriers may find themselves relegated to the back of the maintenance queue by other players with considerably greater political and/or market power.
Junor predicts a dissipation of Australia’s aircraft maintenance capability will have particular impact on the general aviation sector – regional airlines, commuter operators servicing fly-in fly-out, tourism ventures and the transport, freight and emergency services that support rural and remote communities. The major airlines may be able to rely on offshore maintenance but the general aviation sector cannot.
The submission argues that in the interests of the safety of the travelling public, Australia will need to rebuild its MRO capacity and the workforce to support it. This would require extensive structural reform, well beyond what the present market is likely to bring about.
Published: March 10, 2014 in Knowledge@Australian School of Business
Aluminium smelting, oil refining, car making – the list of Australia’s vanishing industries grows longer. Among reasons for ceasing Australian operations, Holden, Ford and Toyota cited fierce global competition, a small local market and a relatively high wages bill. Now Qantas, in announcing plans last month to cut a further 5000 staff in the face of financial losses, has added arguments about the ‘unfair’ requirement that it service its aircraft in Australia. It's rival, Virgin, relies on overseas workshops.
Australian aircraft maintenance has been moving offshore for some time. This increasing trend has been put under the microscope by the Australian School of Business (ABS) during the past three years in an Australian Research Council study – The Future of Aircraft Maintenance in Australia: Aviation Safety, Workforce Capability and Industry Development.
The key researchers – ASB professor Michael Quinlan, associate professors Anne Junor and Ian Hampson, senior lecturer Sarah Gregson and research associate Doug Fraser – were inspired by concerns about the strategic and economic costs of offshoring, possible threats to passenger safety and a declining skill base in the Australian aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) industry.
The full study will be released later this year, but the researchers have utilised interim findings in an ASB Industrial Relations Research Centre submission to the federal government’s Aviation Safety Regulation Review, due to report in May. A key point in the submission is a looming skills crisis.
As local maintenance jobs have been cut, such as the 1000 positions Qantas is reported to have shed during 2012, the training capability for the next generation has gone into free fall. Junor has mapped MRO organisations and found as many as 50% have closed down in recent years and that difficulties in finding staff are prevalent among remaining providers. Defence facilities now account for about 75% of apprentice completions. One of the two civilian NSW centres presently approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to train aircraft engineers has 10-15 students this year. In 2013 it had 30. During the past 10 years it had about 100 per year.
Global Opportunity
According to Fraser, fostering MRO should be a no-brainer for Australian industry strategists.
“It’s no longer just a sideshow of running an airline. It’s a big global industry in its own right, worth around A$70 billion a year and likely to at least double during the next 20 years. It utilises the kind of highly skilled blue-collar labour that Australia has traditionally been good at developing. It offers many specialist areas of work where Australia’s comparative wage costs don’t seriously limit our competitiveness,” Fraser says.
“Above all, international authorities expect most regions of the world to fall well short of the training output needed to meet their own MRO requirements over the next decade.”
Fraser puts the decline in MRO skills down to a series of policy oversights by successive governments.
“Australia traditionally relied for the bulk of its technical training on big public-sector organisations such as the railways, Telecom and Defence establishments, and a few of the largest private companies,” he says. “In the 1980s we had Qantas, TAA and Ansett all running substantial apprenticeship programs. Qantas absorbed TAA, Ansett went out of business, and nobody else has stepped in to fill the gap.
"In effect, Australia's MRO training effort has been allowed to become hostage to the strategies and fortunes of a single company. If that company now can't look after itself, how is it going to look after the future needs of the Australian industry?"
The skills drain could leave the fledgling Australian aircraft-component industry in the same situation facing the car-component industry.
Says Junor: “At the moment, Australia is the biggest components supplier to Boeing outside the US. Running down the capacity of our automotive and aero-skills training facilities is hardly the way to ensure our continued integration into this large global market.”
Profits and Safety
And what impact will the cost-quality trade-off of offshoring maintenance have on Australia’s enviable airline safety record? Hampson sees gaps in the safety surveillance systems.
“There are doubtless many offshore shops which give top-quality service that Australian consumers can rely on,” he says. “We know from experience that there are some which definitely don’t. The problem is that we don’t have enough good information to tell which is which. Australia doesn’t even keep public records of which maintenance goes offshore, never mind where it goes. Once it does go offshore, no public records are kept of where the work has fallen short of standard, or what rework is needed in Australia when the plane comes back.
“The risk then is that because there isn't enough information about quality, choices will be made on the basis of price. This is a classic ‘market for lemons’ situation, where quality providers get driven out of the market and many others survive who don't deserve to."
Hampson believes market forces alone are unlikely to address this threat. Airline profits need to be balanced against the probability of a major accident. While any such incident would have fatal consequences for the business as well as for human life, it might or might not occur, and if it does, it will be at some unknown point in the future, possibly only once the aircraft has been sold on and become someone else’s worry.
“An Asian airline Boeing 747 in 1980 suffered a tail strike from landing too steeply. It was not repaired properly and cracks appeared and 22 years later the plane fell out of the air. Aircraft maintenance can be a health risk but it is difficult to know the extent,” Hampson says.
Relaxed Approach
The researchers note “a contrast between Australia's relaxed approach to the supervision of overseas repair shops handling Australian work, and the increasingly stringent regulatory approach which public concern in the US has obliged Congress and the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to apply to offshore providers”.
The FAA is subject to political supervision and accountability in ways that Australia’s CASA is not. The FAA was recently compelled by congressional legislation to tighten up its regulatory and supervisory practices. In Australia, the trend is for CASA to offshore its responsibilities to foreign aviation authorities to ensure safety standards. This leaves the certification of maintenance on Australian aircraft to the safety oversight, training and licensing procedures of another country.
“We wonder how consistent this is with the Australian safety program, as well as International Civil Aviation Organisation requirements that the State of Registry be responsible for the safety of maintenance performed on aircraft even in another country,” say the researchers.
Back of the Queue
The expected worldwide shortage of aircraft maintenance engineers is likely to increase offshore wages, negating much of the cost advantage of offshore maintenance and affect the viability of relying on offshore maintenance as the primary means of meeting Australia’s airworthiness requirements. Australian carriers may find themselves relegated to the back of the maintenance queue by other players with considerably greater political and/or market power.
Junor predicts a dissipation of Australia’s aircraft maintenance capability will have particular impact on the general aviation sector – regional airlines, commuter operators servicing fly-in fly-out, tourism ventures and the transport, freight and emergency services that support rural and remote communities. The major airlines may be able to rely on offshore maintenance but the general aviation sector cannot.
The submission argues that in the interests of the safety of the travelling public, Australia will need to rebuild its MRO capacity and the workforce to support it. This would require extensive structural reform, well beyond what the present market is likely to bring about.
Flying the COOP...
The "Industry" never got a ANY chance to find if there were benefits to be had in the Classification of Ops Policy adopted by the Minister and the Board, April 1997. And IMHO there were many benefits.
....But alas
Once ingested into CASA and bowel-derized and turned to sh*t, the last vestiges of what could have produced some good results for owners and operators vanished from the CASA web site in 2003.
So much for all that hope, some sanity and the colossal cost ..yet again to the taxpayer...for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
It means ... the elected rep..the "minister" has NO balls, backbone, teeth or interest to drive it through to fruition.
It means ...the unelected swill/CAsA have the wherewithall to sink any policy unchallenged either by the "bored' or "miniscule"
It means...its time to smash a few windows to attract attention to the plight of GA.
....But alas
Once ingested into CASA and bowel-derized and turned to sh*t, the last vestiges of what could have produced some good results for owners and operators vanished from the CASA web site in 2003.
So much for all that hope, some sanity and the colossal cost ..yet again to the taxpayer...for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
It means ... the elected rep..the "minister" has NO balls, backbone, teeth or interest to drive it through to fruition.
It means ...the unelected swill/CAsA have the wherewithall to sink any policy unchallenged either by the "bored' or "miniscule"
It means...its time to smash a few windows to attract attention to the plight of GA.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aroa
Love it! "Bowel-derized"! A new word to add to the IOS dictionary!
And
Yes! Now you're talking boys! I will bring the rocks.
Once ingested into CASA and bowel-derized and turned to sh*t, the last vestiges of what could have produced some good results for owners and operators vanished from the CASA web site in 2003.
And
It means...its time to smash a few windows to attract attention to the plight of GA.
The archive...
And here's me thinking that Puffy...once an inside man..until the wheels fell off ....was the fount of all av-knowledge.
In my BIG box called CASA..the Collection of Absolute ****e Archive, which goes back for decades....I still have the paperwork regarding this COOP for the brave new GA world. Alas, its life was like a snowflake in hell...brief.
I'll hunt out the wonder words regarding its introduction (sic) of the then "Minister" and post herein. There are also pages of, defining all those wonderful things like...
..."A pilot, with an aircraft and his "toolbox" ( a camera??) can make a profit from any class of operation" etc, etc.
Oh words, oh wonder, OH bull**** ! Nil progress since...but worse !
Has anything changed? I was advised 6 years ago that CAsA was..."looking into" (!!??) removing criminal penalties for minor breaches of those (crap) regs like forgetting to completely fill in a line in yr log book. !! FFS a crime !!
Has that happened? NO, not to my knowledge. Not a whisper.
So what DO we get? Just the continual McComic vomit, Gobsome spinnery, and recently, the most nauseous hagiography from Hawke of the Bored, one had the misfortune to ever read!
Q..Good grief, Warren WTF are you. A.. the fairyland of CB
In my BIG box called CASA..the Collection of Absolute ****e Archive, which goes back for decades....I still have the paperwork regarding this COOP for the brave new GA world. Alas, its life was like a snowflake in hell...brief.
I'll hunt out the wonder words regarding its introduction (sic) of the then "Minister" and post herein. There are also pages of, defining all those wonderful things like...
..."A pilot, with an aircraft and his "toolbox" ( a camera??) can make a profit from any class of operation" etc, etc.
Oh words, oh wonder, OH bull**** !
Nil progress since...but worse ! Has anything changed? I was advised 6 years ago that CAsA was..."looking into" (!!??) removing criminal penalties for minor breaches of those (crap) regs like forgetting to completely fill in a line in yr log book. !! FFS a crime !!
Has that happened? NO, not to my knowledge. Not a whisper.
So what DO we get? Just the continual McComic vomit, Gobsome spinnery, and recently, the most nauseous hagiography from Hawke of the Bored, one had the misfortune to ever read!
Q..Good grief, Warren WTF are you. A.. the fairyland of CB
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big 'R' at heart?
And here's me thinking that Puffy...once an inside man..until the wheels fell off ....was the fount of all av-knowledge.
But interestingly 'Regulators' and ex 'Regulators' hold dear those special qualities that draws them to the fight over and over again - It's that bullying quality, sociopathic tendency and underdeveloped genitalia that binds them together much as the same way my excrement binds with corn. They live to 'R'egulate industry because it is an outlet for them - They were bullied at school, lost their virginity to a middle aged Aunt, have a wife who keeps one of the 'R'egulators testicles in her left hand and her Mother holds his right one in her hands. They can't cut it in the real aviation industry so they hide amongst those special breed government departments in which the culture encourages, promotes and fosters - incompetence, inbreeding, laziness, foolishness and spit roasting of executive management. We all know the type they are - usually they collect things like ice cream wrappers, nose hairs or scabs, listen to Harry Belafonte and they can recite the hippocratic oath backwards with a mouth stuffed with cucumber sandwiches and truffles! Once they retire or are finally pineappled they usually sulk away for a bit of time, ponder over what could have been, play with their enormous payouts or hush money for a while and then pop up in a similar role on a similar agency somewhere, where they can once again meld with like minded psychopaths and socio's and start plying their trade once again upon an unsuspecting industry! Oh there is the standard waffle and bravado - big talk about precious so-called successes, boasting about how much legalese and regulatory jargon they can speak, how many international olly jolly's they have attended over the decades and how many troughs they have skinned. Hell sometimes they even boast about what high level politicians they have eaten the odd canapé or three with, and how many times they have dressed up in their Professors uniform complete with pipe, slippers and spectacles and participated in nude conga lines with other supportive folk
But in the end they never change.
So, aroa, my friend, indeed you must remain aware that such individuals are out there 'R'egulating amongst us and you MUST ensure that you use the correct font in your log book, you keep your pilot shirt ironed, tucked in and your epaulettes are robustly polished, you correctly pronounce all words contained within the aviation phonetic code, and should you decide to indulge in a game of 'hide the salami' with a nubile inexperienced flight attendant in the Cabin you remove all DNA evidence before you leave the aircraft parked!
Last edited by Cactusjack; 13th Mar 2014 at 13:35.
Creamie,
The Classification of Operations, to which I referred was completed while Byron was Director, but, of course, like so much, it has been expunged from the CASA web site, as has so much of the historical record prior the current management.
Indeed, I am told that the Mr. McCormick advised the Chairman of the PAP that he (McCormick) wasn't interested in what had gone before, apparently he then regarded his appointment as "Year Zero" for CASA.
I have been looking through old backup disks for a copy of the Byron "final" version, but have not found it so far, all I have found is the working paper that started that project.
If I find a copy of the final version, I will post it, or post a link to Dropbox.
Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember the CASA Board signing of on a "final" Classification of Operations in 1997, although they did sign of on a number of things related to the CASA Review, instituted by Minister John Sharp. There certainly was a set of guidelines for the weight of regulation to apply to each category, with statements that the "fare paying passenger" was to attract the most attention from CASA, and areas where participants were "informed volunteers" would attract the least CASA resources.
Tootle pip!!
PS: CactusJack,
Quite a spray, but it does remind me of a paper, prepared by a psychologist on contract to CASA in the mid-1990s, who actually studied the kind of "personality" that applied to join or joined a body like CASA, and he clearly suggested that there were very definite personality traits in the kind of person that made up a significant proportion of AWIs and FOIs. At that time, a quite high proportion of the investigators were defrocked Commonwealth or State plod.
The Classification of Operations, to which I referred was completed while Byron was Director, but, of course, like so much, it has been expunged from the CASA web site, as has so much of the historical record prior the current management.
Indeed, I am told that the Mr. McCormick advised the Chairman of the PAP that he (McCormick) wasn't interested in what had gone before, apparently he then regarded his appointment as "Year Zero" for CASA.
I have been looking through old backup disks for a copy of the Byron "final" version, but have not found it so far, all I have found is the working paper that started that project.
If I find a copy of the final version, I will post it, or post a link to Dropbox.
Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't remember the CASA Board signing of on a "final" Classification of Operations in 1997, although they did sign of on a number of things related to the CASA Review, instituted by Minister John Sharp. There certainly was a set of guidelines for the weight of regulation to apply to each category, with statements that the "fare paying passenger" was to attract the most attention from CASA, and areas where participants were "informed volunteers" would attract the least CASA resources.
Tootle pip!!
PS: CactusJack,
Quite a spray, but it does remind me of a paper, prepared by a psychologist on contract to CASA in the mid-1990s, who actually studied the kind of "personality" that applied to join or joined a body like CASA, and he clearly suggested that there were very definite personality traits in the kind of person that made up a significant proportion of AWIs and FOIs. At that time, a quite high proportion of the investigators were defrocked Commonwealth or State plod.
COOPs flown then...?
Never had the shiny bars or the nubiles unfortunately Cactus..just a camera MUCH to my detriment.
But we wont going into all that... like the denial of my right to take a photo from a public space, a right earn a living, the right to free trade, and all from that "safety" agency that has NO legal right to regulate "commerce" !!
Any COOP of the Byron era must have been like a shooting star.. a brief flash and lost forever. Nothing I can recall in my sewage box re that one.
As for the (some) AWI s and FOIs ....and so called "investigators" of ex -cop history. No nothing about aviation, not interested in aviation, but well versed in verballing, skulldugery and shonky MOs for knocking off passing aviators
eg: John Moore, N Stallard ,et al for the infamous John Quadrio debacle.
eg: Stephen Cremerius, Peter Larard (rtd hurt), Ron Clarke, (fled) and John Retski (promoted!!) Liars and perjurers all! Just look at a Wilga Tail !
All aided and abetted by the likes of N Tredrea and Anustasi.
And so that you know its ops normal in the Fort ...there is a major episode still running at great cost and angst to the innocent due to incompetent and negilgent "investigation" regarding damage to Robbo 22 AZS... by N Haslam Senior Investigator (sic) and others.
Quite frankly they couldnt investigate their own willnots
Unfettered POWER brings UNACCOUNTABLE CORRUPTION of the systems.
Stay safe!!!
But we wont going into all that... like the denial of my right to take a photo from a public space, a right earn a living, the right to free trade, and all from that "safety" agency that has NO legal right to regulate "commerce" !!
Any COOP of the Byron era must have been like a shooting star.. a brief flash and lost forever. Nothing I can recall in my sewage box re that one.
As for the (some) AWI s and FOIs ....and so called "investigators" of ex -cop history. No nothing about aviation, not interested in aviation, but well versed in verballing, skulldugery and shonky MOs for knocking off passing aviators
eg: John Moore, N Stallard ,et al for the infamous John Quadrio debacle.
eg: Stephen Cremerius, Peter Larard (rtd hurt), Ron Clarke, (fled) and John Retski (promoted!!) Liars and perjurers all! Just look at a Wilga Tail !
All aided and abetted by the likes of N Tredrea and Anustasi.
And so that you know its ops normal in the Fort ...there is a major episode still running at great cost and angst to the innocent due to incompetent and negilgent "investigation" regarding damage to Robbo 22 AZS... by N Haslam Senior Investigator (sic) and others.
Quite frankly they couldnt investigate their own willnots
Unfettered POWER brings UNACCOUNTABLE CORRUPTION of the systems.
Stay safe!!!