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 2nd Aug 2014, 03:54
  #981 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Quickly so I too can go out and sun myself;

1) Rocks vs rifle. Interesting. Would you like to stand 50 meters in front of me chucking rocks or firing a rifle with sights at you?

2) I have never sent a PM to you. Do you have any other identities I may have written to that you have mistaken subliminally?

3) You're delusional. CAsA are probably responsible for most "hits" on ANZ&P- PPRuNe. I know Senators X and Fawcett do read these threads. I have directed them to many and have acknowledgements. None openly contribute.

4) Your opinion, and as I don't know I can't help you. This thread is about the Truss ASSR. The street poster seems apt and suitable for inclusion here. Not sure about T shirts though, I've a better idea, a bit like the Abbott one.

5) I asked the question, what did the writer of "eternity" mean. As I don't know, I would be interested in your opinion. You seem have many for a simple "observer". (who contributes).

"Ditto" the weekend, thanks.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2014, 09:01
  #982 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Hi Frank. Send me an email (not a PM as they can be 'read'). I will let you know who LL is. You should have just asked me in the first place

Sarcs, thanks for posting the Whirlybird letter written by Messr Crook re Part 61. The compliance requirements are a nightmare and the additional training requirements are not only expensive but in this current aviation/economical climate will be business savaging to say the least. Another Fort Fumble exercise that is doomed to not work properly. They will end up manipulating, massaging and twisting it more than the Skull does to his cigars on a bad day!

Tick tock

Last edited by 004wercras; 2nd Aug 2014 at 09:03. Reason: Busy reading some of Lookyloo's Facebook rants and blogs to other organisations.
004wercras is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2014, 05:35
  #983 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
And the winner is????

The final interview from the short list of DAS candidates was meant to take place today, with the winners name announced in the coming week or two.
I wonder if the final interview included a game of corporate snakes and ladders, a team building exercise with Chairman Hawke around one of Can'tberras finest buffets, or maybe some apple bobbing? Either way the announcement is just around the corner, and many wait with baited breath. Personally I don't hold out any hope really, not unless Reverend Forsythe becomes anointed as Junior Minister for aviation, the entire board (except Boyd) is terminated, DAS's 2 and 3 are given their marching orders, and it starts snowing in Apia!!
As Sunny would say 'to put that another way' - I don't believe anything will change. However, and here is the silver lining - the next federal election may hold the key. If the punters are truly sick of the Abbott/Shorten mess of recent years and vote in the independents, the PUP's, Greens, the Lawnbowl party and whatever, then we may see change. Otherwise it is BOHICA time boys and gals (another option for a t-shirt Jinglie?).

Tick tock

Last edited by 004wercras; 4th Aug 2014 at 05:38. Reason: Had to feed Minnie, 'K' is off for the day, fishing along the banks of the Styx river.
004wercras is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2014, 19:32
  #984 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Bait is for fishin'

No mate, not fishin' – ambled over to the cat house, someone trod on a tigers tail and all hell broke loose, it's the real deal; drugs, sex and rock'n roll, the works. Most diverting.

I also heard DAS interviews on today. There is a whisper that certain individuals were chained up and sharp implements confiscated to prevent candidate carnage. I am curious though – a full panel? who are they; you can see Mrdak and Hawke being there, Boyd, (if they told him it was on), that makes two board and the miniscule's man, McComic is in the sin bin, so who were the other three? ? ?. So, couple or three days, chin wag with the minuscule and we'll know – all. This is a critical piece of the jigsaw puzzle and will answer many questions. Just hope 'they' have got it right because if there is to be true reform, as demanded and expected, the DAS will be pivotal.

Think on - If 'they' get it right, we would report the good things, tell happy stories about a flourishing, confident, robust industry. We could even put the house boat in dry dock for a while, it needs some TLC, Gobbledock could come home and we can laze about the place all day, run morning tea into lunch and declare beer-o-clock whenever it pleased.. I don't want to even think about the 'wrong' call.

My breath ain't quite bated, but every now and then, I hold it for a few seconds, then shake the old wooden head and plough on. We shall see; soon enough, not many sleeps to go now.

Toot toot..-.-

Oh, a mate over in the Ukraine says it's a good thing Beaker didn't go; he reckons the cadaver dogs would have had him, for certain sure. (quiet chuckle).

Two of my favourite things – in one;

“Bated” is one of those words that only appears as part of a phrase (“with bated breath”). It first appears in the Merchant of Venice:

Shall I bend low and in a bondman’s key,
With bated breath and whispering humbleness, Say this;
‘Fair sir, you spit on me on Wednesday last;
You spurn’d me such a day; another time
You call’d me dog; and for these courtesies
I’ll lend you thus much moneys’?

So what does it mean? When a hawk is tethered it’s called “bated” – it’s a contraction of “abated,” meaning “restrained.” So to listen with bated breath means to listen whilst restraining, or holding, your breath.

Occasionally, the phrase is erroneously written as “baited breath” (including, it’s alleged, in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) – clearly that makes practically no sense.
Sponsored by IOS chapter for peace in our time.

Last edited by Kharon; 4th Aug 2014 at 21:40. Reason: Left out the best bit.
Kharon is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 04:17
  #985 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 74
Can you help.

The PAIN association has been advised that certain individuals are purporting to represent, or to actually be an active part of the network to various individuals and agencies.

If anyone, or someone you know has received any form of communication from; or, been approached for comment or information by anyone claiming to represent PAIN within the preceding six months, could they please contact us through the PPRuNe private message service. We are particularly interested in any electronic communications from the following email address.

[email protected]

We apologise for any inconvenience or annoyance caused through unauthorised communication, we are taking steps toward resolving the issue.

Thank you.

P7. a.k.a. TOM.
PAIN_NET is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 04:23
  #986 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Errrmm, your post purports to represent "PAIN_NET".

Don't you think it's a little silly, all this melodromatic secrecy? It invites false identity theft....
Creampuff is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 05:48
  #987 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 74
Creampuff – with respect; the association is neither melodramatic or 'secret' in any respect, but it is discrete. The core research group are all very experienced aviation professionals, from many disciplines who have worked hard to earn a little credibility where it matters. The groups fundamental purpose is to assist, where possible others in the industry with their issues and problems.

I doubt anyone would steal a false identity as you opine:

It invites false identity theft
- but how would you respond if 'someone' purporting to be you was talking with CASA board members or other industry heavyweights?

All we are simply asking is that if anyone from PPRuNe has been contacted or have had an email from the address above; they inform us. We do not as a rule initiate contact or engage with people unknown to one of the core group.

P7 a.k.a. TOM

Last edited by PAIN_NET; 5th Aug 2014 at 05:48. Reason: "K", I see what you mean; he's all yours my boy, we'll see you for dinner.
PAIN_NET is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 06:57
  #988 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Discrete? If you say so …

We’re not particularly fussed about what people say about Creampuff. We are a discreet alliance of nobodies dedicated to the promotion of the group’s clay pigeon shooting averages.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 10:00
  #989 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
End of the day

White flag! The re-appointment of BEAKER says it all. As a proud professional with 30 in the industry, i've decided Australia is not the place to be anymore. Going with great skills to a brighter future. Well done Wuss, and Albo! Pathetic!
I don't suffer fool's lightly!
I won't say tick tock, but I will say "brace brace brace"!

Last edited by Jinglie; 5th Aug 2014 at 11:30.
Jinglie is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 11:32
  #990 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Beaker gets to play accountant!!

Latest from the Beaker files;

"In the meantime, ATSB chief Martin Dolan will be spending weeks sifting through the bids with the help of five bureaucrats, the WSJ reports".
Stellar groups jostle for MH370 search contract - Malaysiakini

This will keep him busy! Contracts, consultants, a giant pot money to the tune of $60 million, decisions decisions, the bald beardless one will mi mi mi be in his element! I wonder if he will pack his abacus and Bow tie analysis tool and head off to W.A for a visit offshore to the search site?
004wercras is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 11:45
  #991 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163

004, A "man can only take so much! When a ""govt takes too much" it's time to move on! Thanks. Ppruners and IOS, well done!
Jinglie is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2014, 21:18
  #992 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
I wonder...

Don't know as yet if the reappointment of Beaker is cause for alarm; only a faint whisper, but I did hear his appointment was 'short term' and future tenure depends very much on the Canadian report. Also, it's worth remembering that there is a recommendation in the Forsyth review for 'experience' to be brought into the ATSB, mindful that the 'Senators' may be smooth on the surface, but Beaker has gravely offended them, on more than one occasion.

Much to consider; if Truss is as ga ga as persistent rumours insist; perhaps the changes will start at the top; even if he digs in and stays on until the Qld elections, Abbott is no mug and his aviation flank is exposed. Could perhaps a junior minister be appointed? one with competence and experience, given the potential for bad reports being published; would be politically advantageous and operationally expedient.

Probably not, but they do need drivers – airframe – in China and I like the food and beer well enough. I'll give it month or so before grabbing the big port from storage and blowing the dust off.

Last edited by Kharon; 5th Aug 2014 at 21:23. Reason: Hate dragging dunnage around airports.
Kharon is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2014, 21:28
  #993 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Speed bump.

I wonder what heinous crime 004 has committed, this time? the posts I can read seem positively sanguine, with barely a curse to offend the delicate sensibilities.

Aye well – We can only hope it's a temporary. I will miss the pawky sallies, mulled wit and pointed barbs. But, you pays your money and takes your chances.

Sad little Toot toot.
Kharon is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2014, 23:19
  #994 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
The Last Hurrah!

It is my solemn duty to officially welcome the AHIA, back from the dark side, to join the swelling ranks of the IOS (membership card is in the mail..):AHIA mobilises industry volunteers to help with regulatory review.

"...But their requests have fallen on deaf ears; in fact, the silence from the politicians handling the fallout of the ASRR and post ASRR recommendations is concerning...

...If you think CASR Part 61 was hard to understand - just wait for the 133 (Air Transport) and 138 (Aerialwork) review. AHIA is looking ahead and there are some very expensive options coming up for things we have been doing for decades with no incidents...

...and starting a "call to arms" seeking experienced operators who can guide us all and provide timely feedback to the regulators to avoid draft rules being ignored and then later we cause a riot when they become law! (But you will need a speed reading course as everything seems to hundreds of pages long!)..."

However before entering the IOS favourite haunt (war room) for the Friday arvo constitutional (i.e. beer'n'nuts) can you please tie up that bloody rabid dog of yours...

MMSM right of reply: CASA says helicopter association’s claims are wide of the mark

"...For these reasons, among others, I was disappointed to see the negative comments made by the Australian Helicopter Industry Association about the new licensing suite of regulations, which take effect from September 1...

...Many of the claims made by the association were wide of the mark and do not reflect the close consultation CASA has been undertaking with the broader helicopter community, including association representatives..."

Hmm..where have I heard this before..:
CASA rejects the claim that elements of the manual can encourage unsafe practices. Where earlier drafts of the manual revealed some unintended consequences, appropriate changes were made, informed by constructive feedback from the industry. That is one of the purposes of the consultation process. It goes without saying that CASA would never intentionally introduce or retain requirements that might be detrimental to safety.
Oh well moving on..

Dougy's weekly insight yesterday: Besides paying tribute to the sad passing of Aussie aviation safety legend Macarthur Job (RIP), Dougy makes mention of the GDB ('Great {new} DAS debate'):
More than one correspondent has expressed the view that the new CASA DAS will need a broad range of skills, rather than specific industry experience. People have talked of elements such as risk management and communications. I would add vision and the ability to pick the right people to perform functional roles at the next level of management exceptionally. Well, we should now know sooner rather than later whether that’s the sort of package we’re getting.

I’m continuing to pick up on a rising tide of frustration and indeed anger at the lack of decision making in the Minister’s office. What had seemed to be a spirit of real engagement with industry has evaporated. Let’s hope it’s not irretrievable.
So Dougy feels it is all still to play for....next

From the RAAA 'Winter Newsletter' Paul Tyrell (from the RHS) seems to be still reasonably upbeat :
It may be winter in Canberra but things certainly haven’t cooled down for the RAAA. As many of you are aware the long awaited Aviation Safety Regulation Review was released.

The RAAA had significant input including five face to face meetings with the review panel. Of the thirty seven recommendations we only disagreed with three.

Prima facie it appears that the panel has listened carefully to RAAA and industry concerns. In some ways though, the report is the easy part. The test will be to see how Deputy Prime Minister Truss responds to the recommendations. He certainly has the ammunition to instigate significant change but it is unusual for government to act on every piece of advice.
Jeff Boyd, our immediate past Chairman, is warmly congratulated on his appointment to the Deputy Chair role at CASA. It is a sign that the government values regional aviation and long-term practical industry experience. We wish Jeff every success in this vital and challenging role...

...Soon we hope to hear who are the new CASA Board members. A new Director of Aviation Safety will also be appointed by 1 September and

followed closely by a fresh Industry Complaints Commissioner, with new responsibilities, joining the CASA team.

It is also likely that an extra ATSB Commissioner with significant aviation experience will be appointed in the near future. Finally, it is hoped that the announcement of the make-up of the Minister’s Aviation Advisory Council is not far away.
Time is ticking miniscule..

What is it to be the long drop or the 'Last Hurrah'??

Sarcs is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 05:51
  #995 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Addendum to my last...

From Oz Flying today...

Aviation Bodies Call for New Rules to be Deferred

08 Aug 2014

Aviation bodies have lobbyed Minister Warren Truss to have the new CASR Parts 61 and 141 deferred further.

The new regulations were due to be introduced on 1 September, having already been postponed from 4 December last year.

Part 61 deals with new licence and endorsement procedures, and Part 141 relates to training organisations.

Phil Hurst, CEO of the Aerial Agricultural Association of Australia (AAAA) told Australian Flying that they support any moves to stop the new rules coming into force in three weeks time.

"Our problem is that CASA is more and more like a rudderless ship on this issue and no-one seems to see what is coming – ie from 14 September all new licences must be trained for and issued under the new requirements," he said.

"The training orgs have not been reached out to by CASA or case managed so that they can start with compliant training from day one. The real weakness seems to be the Part 141 transition process – or lack of process perhaps.

"If companies are unable to start training under the new requirements in September because they have not been transitioned across to Part 141 by that time, I think you can imagine the outcome.

"Our particular concern remains the lack of a case-management strategy for all the companies likely to transition to a 141 organisation from the current ATO (Authorised Testing Officer) arrangements. While the requirements have been simplified, there is still a lot of work to be done on both sides. And of course there remain unresolved issues such as the role of ‘approved pilots’ under the new regime."

Last week, the Australian Helicopter Industry Association announced they had written to Warren Truss with similar concerns, and further support has since come from the Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association (AMROBA).

"Like most associations we have written to the Minister supporting this approach," said AMROBA CEO Ken Cannane.

"Because CASA is currently in a state of flux awaiting on the appointment of new Board members and a new DAS [Director of Aviation Safety] and the Minister is yet to announce the Government’s response to the damning criticisms of CASA in the Forsyth Report, all regulatory development should be put on hold.

"The Forsyth Report has strong industry support for most of the recommendations. The Minister must direct the Board/CASA to await the outcome of the above. The three-tier system will reduce the red tape created by this Part."

A key recommendation of the Forsyth Report was that CASA adopt a three-tier system of regulations, which are 1. Act 2. Regulation 3. Plain-English Standards.

The third tier is being seen by most aviation bodies as key to a better understanding of regulations.

Someone check the miniscule's vitals and FFS empty out his intray...

...I've now got some irate bloke on the line from the TWU banging on about whether we'd received his letter asking for an urgent meeting and had we read the Oz article apparently titled..Govt failing to act on safer skies: union
A SENIOR union leader has threatened internationally-backed industrial action to force the Abbott government to stop airlines from flying over war zones following the MH17 disaster.

TRANSPORT Workers Union (TWU) secretary Tony Sheldon also lashed out at the International Civil Aviation Organisation after their global conference last week in Montreal failed to deliver measures like enabling flight crews to stand down from work if they are set to fly over a conflict zone.

The union said that Australian government representatives were at the meeting which resolved to let airlines continue to assess safety risks.

"They've just re-stated the same failed policy that saw so many people lose their lives in Ukraine (on MH17)," Mr Sheldon said.

He accused the watchdog and government of allowing airlines to prioritise profit over the safety of passengers and aircrews.

Mr Sheldon said it would have cost Malaysia Airlines an additional $28,000 to take a different route to the fatal path taken by MH17.

"They chose profit before safety and now we are mourning dead ones today," Mr Sheldon said.

Aviation security expert Ron Bartsch said that while airlines are best positioned to assess the risks of flight paths, it is critical for governments to proactively share information if they want to prevent another tragedy like MH17.

"The Australian government is not alone in being behind the eight-ball here," said the former head of safety at Qantas.

"Governments need to be more active in communicating information about hazards and danger areas to the international body who can then disseminate those crucial details to the carriers."

The TWU indicated that they would take the issue to the International Transport Federation to force authorities to act.

"Since MH17, we've seen government inaction, airline inaction and watchdog inaction," Mr Sheldon said.

Qantas recently buckled to public pressure following the US regulator's warnings about flying over Iraq.

They joined Emirates and Virgin Atlantic airlines in diverting their Dubai to London route away from the conflict zone in the Middle East.

Last edited by Sarcs; 8th Aug 2014 at 06:13.
Sarcs is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 08:58
  #996 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 604
Meanwhile in the UK...

New Approach to Regulation

The U.K. Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) says it is moving toward "regulating in a more proportionate, effective and risk-based way," using the safety management systems in place at airlines, airports and ground handling organizations to help identify areas that present the greatest risks to safety.

"Performance-based regulation takes our safety oversight to a new level," Mark Swan, director of the CAA Safety and Airspace Regulation Group, said in early June. "By working hand-in-hand with the aviation industry, EASA [the European Aviation Safety Agency] and other national authorities to identify and manage risk effectively, we can concentrate our attention where it is most needed."

Swan added that industry cooperation would ensure the success of the new regulatory effort.

The CAA said that the new system would help the agency measure "the true extent of the risks to U.K. passengers and the general public" and identify and implement appropriate actions to manage risks. One key element calls for cooperating with civil aviation authorities in other countries that could take action to mitigate risks to U.K. operations.

The agency expects to have a full performance-based regulation system in place by April 2016 but already has established several elements of the system, including a new method of safety oversight based on identified risks and safety performance and a series of risk-mitigation activities and associated safety projects. The CAA also has established requirements for "an integrated safety risk-reporting and management system to better inform strategic decisions made by the CAA Board and the allocation of resources to act on them."
Source: AeroSafety WORLD July-August 2014

UK CAA can get its regulations overhauled to the new model in a couple of years, but here in Australia the numbnuts at CASA have dragged the process out for over 20 years while successive Ministers have sat on their ar$es twiddling their thumbs and doing fcuk-all to ensure that the mess we call our regulations got fixed.

To make matters worse (if that's at all possible) we apparently have Dolan reappointed as the Chief Commissioner.

SIUYA is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 19:51
  #997 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Headliners – and Has bin liners.

I did mention that the Abbott aviation flank was exposed; when MH 17 was destroyed, blind Freddy could see it was going to turn into a political bun-fight; and so it has. We now have 'Air safety' as a headline; no matter that the topics are 'flight paths', closed air space etc. it matters that the words air and safety are very topical.

If the idiot press (and some of the better ones) ever latch on to the notion that Australian aviation has got it's tits in the mangle, the spotlight will be on the Abbott government's aviation policy and what will they find? an industry on the brink of collapse, bad reports on CASA and worse on the ATSB; in short a shambles, not a good look. Maybe it's time to shut some of the stable doors, before the horses bugger off.

I'll second what Siuya says; with equal gusto.

Last edited by Kharon; 8th Aug 2014 at 21:49. Reason: Getting very untidy, ain't it minuscule?
Kharon is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 23:16
  #998 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Truss must have a medical problem to let Albanese off the hook when he had the chance. He could have blamed everything CAsA on Labor, alongside the GFC, Union embuggerance, The Greens, Palmer, UN, ICAO, Malaysia, global warming/ cooling, (insert name of the week), gay marriage, breast cancer, The ABC, Fairfax and of course the Ills of Society.

Now he's stuck with the baby and the bath water, the phone's ringing and The Jehovah's witnesses are knocking at the door.

Put your feet up Minister, give the job to Barnaby and Fawcett and let loose the dogs of war. Enough with the metaphors.

Where have all the sophists gone?
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2014, 23:40
  #999 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Snoop Sunday cogitation - All to play for.

A good point you make SIUYA, 2 conservative governments with the same desire to reduce red tape and therefore cost to industry stakeholders. However that is where the similarity stops...

The UK initiative started with the govt putting down the GA red tape challenge (RTC)...

CAP 1123quote from the CEO of the CAA
The UK General Aviation (GA) sector finds itself under increasing strain as costs of operation rise due to fiscal pressures, a greater focus on environmental issues and the application of a European regulatory framework, and perceived over regulation by the CAA. Too much prescription in the rules and a lack of proportionality have both impacted adversely on the sector.

The Government's GA Red Tape Challenge (RTC) was both timely and welcome. It has given my colleagues and I at the CAA a powerful reminder that we need to inject more pace into how we introduce a more proportionate and risk-based regulatory regime for the UK GA sector and push harder for change across Europe to meet the demand evident from
the GA community.
Hmm..certain parts of the following sound very familiar..
A fundamental theme running across the Red Tape Challenge was communication between the CAA and the GA community. Many felt that the CAA’s website could be improved and accessibility of CAA guidance made better. The Flight Crew Licensing: Mandatory Requirements, Policy and Guidance2, CAP 804, attracted particular criticism.

Another common concern was that regulations appeared to be introduced without due consideration of how they might impact on the GA sector. Many suggested that before any new regulations, interventions or guidance are introduced, their impact on the GA sector should be assessed and suitable changes made to reduce the impact, without compromising safety.

They asked that regulatory interventions should be risk-based, proportionate and the minimum necessary for safety.

There was naturally a strong desire to see greater efficiency from the CAA and a more customer-centric approach.

There was a general dissatisfaction with EASA rules and a perception that the CAA is prone to gold-plating these rules. The CAA has already responded publicly to this challenge. The CAA announced on 4 June that it is "committed to identifying and eliminating any such gold-plating".3
Interesting that the PBR approach (SIUYA post) is apparently strongly backed by EASA & ICAO..

Mark Swan (CAP 1184):

"...Performance-based regulation (PBR) is central to EASA's and ICAO’s future plans. The CAA is working closely with our international colleagues to shape how PBR works in practice. The UK industry has fed back that it believes PBR should make the CAA more proportionate and targeted, have a greater degree of commercial awareness and be more transparent about how money is spent..."

And the timeframe/progress report so far for the UK CAA PBR initiative
We aim to adopt a full PBR approach by April 2016. So far we have established:
  1. Performance-based oversight – A new process for carrying out safety oversight based on known risks and safety performance.
  2. An initial total aviation risk picture and a series of prioritised risk mitigation activities with associated safety projects.
  3. The requirements for an integrated safety risk reporting and management system to better inform strategic decisions made by the CAA Board, and the allocation of resources to act on them.
  4. The key governance fora (a Safety Action Group and Safety Review Board) that will underpin the CAA’s internal Safety Management System.
Great initiative but unfortunately it doesn't really help us much...

However before we all start drowning our sorrows in despair or jumping the ditch to NZed, please reconsider the rather optimistic message from the RAAA newsletter. Then consider the following recent RAAA submission to the PMC (cc'd to the miniscule): RAAA SUBMISSION - CUTTING RED TAPE
Table of Contents
II. Executive Summary
The Government has published the document “The Australian Government’s Guide to Regulation” to help policy makers in the future ensure that regulation is never adopted as the default solution, but rather introduced as a means of last resort(1). This initiative is welcomed by the RAAA but does not address the excessive regulatory burden currently
borne by industry.

The examples below are indicators that historic government monopoly and service behaviour is having a significant and deleterious effect on the regional aviation industry’s ability to grow and thrive.

Such behaviours must be expunged and the dead-weight of the government aviation bureaucracies lifted from an industry that is essential to Australia’s economic and social development.

Excessive red-tape only serves bureaucracies and throttles the industries that actually pay the taxes that keep government functioning.

Aviation is particularly susceptible to excessive red-tape because it is a highly regulated industry. Overblown safety and security arguments are often used to enable increases in red-tape and regulation for zero safety or operational gain.

The RAAA hopes sincerely that the government’s red-tape review is a serious attempt to release industry, and aviation specifically, from systems that serve no-one except the people administering them.

Given the losses or poor margins experienced by most parts of the aviation industry action on government red-tape can’t come soon enough.
Considering the above, & the fact that the previous RAAA Chairman is now sitting on the FF board, does anyone seriously think (for a moment) that the RAAA are just going to chuck it in cause we currently have another small speed bump (i.e. an ailing miniscule)??
Put your feet up Minister, give the job to Barnaby and Fawcett and let loose the dogs of war.
TICK..TOCK miniscule

ps Love the CVD para..
Whatever the merits of any arguments about CVDs, the letters mentioned above were totally inappropriate in the way they attempted to shift responsibility to assess the medical risks to the letter recipients. CASA issues medical certificates and industry participants are entitled to rely on those certificates. Creating uncertainty in this way, when supposedly new medical evidence has not been tested and the manner in which implications when tested might be applied to aviation had not been discussed with or forecast to the industry, was entirely unacceptable.

When this argument is juxtaposed with the fact that a closely related issue is being tested currently at the AAT, the reasons and justifications for the CASA letter appear problematic, possibly an abuse of process, and out of step with the Government’s guidelines for cutting red tape.
Sarcs is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 21:39
  #1000 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053

The issues raised in item 'V' (5 in new money) only lightly, almost unnoticeably touches on the very real issues associated with "manuals".

For starters; the very grey and much abused "accepted" or "approved" area is (IMO) one that must be addressed. As it stands, it's open slather and Raffetry's rules. This must be clearly redefined to the FOI dealing. If a thing is to be accepted then a personal 'preference' may be discussed, but ultimately it's the Chief pilot, not the FOI who carries then can. Where an "approval" is to be issued, then the FOI is only obliged to ensure compliance; not dictate how a manual may be structured and what it should or should not contain. This dislocation is most clearly apparent on "FCOM" and "Check lists". Subjective opinion is inflicted under duress lest the delay in obtaining 'approval' become financially unacceptable. For example this ridiculous idea of regurgitating almost the entire AFM into 'Part B' is so wrong, in so many way it's beyond being even remotely sane. Check systems (not lists) are another very contentious issue, some examples bordering on lunacy are actually out there, in use......Tick tock.

The idea of renewing an AOC to include a new, similar aircraft type is a great little earner. The costs are phenomenal, the time taken unbelievable and achieve little in the way of 'improved' safety. It's really just a rip off.

The good idea of 'upgrading' an AOC is another time consuming, expensive operation; another area which needs to be streamlined.

To actually start from scratch and obtain an AOC the patience of Job, the wealth of Croecus and the wisdom of Solomon are essential prerequisites; thats bad enough but the creatures to be dealt with beggar the imagination. The Kiwi's and even EASA guarantee three months and will refund any monies not used during process. Australia – can take up to a twelve month and will require a financial 'top up' at least once during process.

The 'red tape' and 'system' collude so very well, but unlike a tick, which will leave the host when the animal is dead, once CASA latches on – it stays on, feeding on the rotting carcass.

2008 was the time for the demanded changes; the Albo era gave us the McComic system of glutinous, black letter micro management and embuggerance. The Senate and Forsyth report insist there must be real changes. How about it, just once; can we have some value for the unimaginable amounts of money the industry has ploughed into the dead soil of 'Reform'; yes Sir, that is Real Reform with a capitol R.

Toot toot...

Last edited by Kharon; 10th Aug 2014 at 21:47. Reason: Selecting toys – for the throwing of.
Kharon 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.