Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the following questions are answered we might (?) be a bit wiser...
In regard to Part 61
1) where is the cost benefit analysis ? (seems there are lots of costs...for what?)
2) what are the real safety benefits? (over previous regs)
3) how does it comply with Government policy on reducing red tape?
That will do for now!!
In regard to Part 61
1) where is the cost benefit analysis ? (seems there are lots of costs...for what?)
2) what are the real safety benefits? (over previous regs)
3) how does it comply with Government policy on reducing red tape?
That will do for now!!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
McComic legacy of lunacy – Part 1 of 61.
It requires no more than 3 clicks of the mouse key to Google CAA NZ – click Rules – click part 61 – click Download. Your NZ Part 61 will turn up, good to go in less than one minute. Spend 30 minutes, cherry pick a topic or two over a coffee and the difference becomes immediately apparent. – HERE - (lazy buggers).
Try and do that with the grotesque Australian parody of part 61.
The clearly drafted NZ regulation does not require an 800 odd page Manual of Standards to support an 800 page regulation. The NZ version is not larded with CASA "may" or "satisfied"; the personal opinion of whoever makes the CAA decision does not matter, a thing is legal or it is not. The options built into the Australian version leave the rule set wide open to subjective opinion and prosecution. Not to mention corruption.
The obsessive compulsion to micro manage, the overarching arrogance which ensures that some half wit FOI becomes 'god' in concert with a maniacal devotion to never being beaten on a point of law have given us the travesty which is 61.
Then you must add the CASA brainwashing of 'flight test examiners'. These come in two flavours, courtesy of the rule set. The pedantic, who will fail you because 'policy' is to reduce speed to V2 after an EFATO; and the 'Subterranean' who will be practical and not only allow command prerogative to be exercised, but encourage it; just can't let it be 'seen'.
The Kiwi mindset is streets ahead with half the worlds NAA chasing to catch up, ever wondered why?. You will note that Australia is not in the race toward clarity, but ambling off toward evermore massive, overbearing rule sets which have been acknowledged and demonstrated by the sane world, as detrimental to safety. Not to mention the massive cost burden and much more red tape.
The truly nauseating party piece in yesterdays 'Australian' (CASA propaganda rag) spells it all out; more regulation equals more safety, while robustly maintaining that industry is just too thick to get it. Oh, we get it all right. Right in the ass – again.
We must hope now that the new DAS is an ex FAA director; one look at 61 and it'll be in the skip. What a great way to start a new era, if Truss ever gets around to announcing the board that is, just so we get an inkling of the way things are going to be.
Toot toot.
Oh, Anyone seen Farq-u-hardson about the place lately?, not gone to sleep on train again has he. Who knows, maybe he's doing his homework for estimates. No doubt the Senate crew have been doing theirs.
Try and do that with the grotesque Australian parody of part 61.
The clearly drafted NZ regulation does not require an 800 odd page Manual of Standards to support an 800 page regulation. The NZ version is not larded with CASA "may" or "satisfied"; the personal opinion of whoever makes the CAA decision does not matter, a thing is legal or it is not. The options built into the Australian version leave the rule set wide open to subjective opinion and prosecution. Not to mention corruption.
The obsessive compulsion to micro manage, the overarching arrogance which ensures that some half wit FOI becomes 'god' in concert with a maniacal devotion to never being beaten on a point of law have given us the travesty which is 61.
Then you must add the CASA brainwashing of 'flight test examiners'. These come in two flavours, courtesy of the rule set. The pedantic, who will fail you because 'policy' is to reduce speed to V2 after an EFATO; and the 'Subterranean' who will be practical and not only allow command prerogative to be exercised, but encourage it; just can't let it be 'seen'.
The Kiwi mindset is streets ahead with half the worlds NAA chasing to catch up, ever wondered why?. You will note that Australia is not in the race toward clarity, but ambling off toward evermore massive, overbearing rule sets which have been acknowledged and demonstrated by the sane world, as detrimental to safety. Not to mention the massive cost burden and much more red tape.
The truly nauseating party piece in yesterdays 'Australian' (CASA propaganda rag) spells it all out; more regulation equals more safety, while robustly maintaining that industry is just too thick to get it. Oh, we get it all right. Right in the ass – again.
We must hope now that the new DAS is an ex FAA director; one look at 61 and it'll be in the skip. What a great way to start a new era, if Truss ever gets around to announcing the board that is, just so we get an inkling of the way things are going to be.
Toot toot.
Oh, Anyone seen Farq-u-hardson about the place lately?, not gone to sleep on train again has he. Who knows, maybe he's doing his homework for estimates. No doubt the Senate crew have been doing theirs.
Last edited by Kharon; 3rd Oct 2014 at 20:29. Reason: Bit spoiled for choice yesterday Sarcs - nicely done..
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASSR submission.
I have managed to persuade the PAIN associates to release part of an unedited 'Draft' version of their submission made to the ASRR. The final edited version was completed from the draft version released – HERE - with various supportive attachments and two 'confidential' supplementary submissions. There is no parliamentary privilege covering the final version, however, detailed submissions by associates were considered sensitive.
I believe the ASRR has been emasculated, this notion supported by the lack of meaningful response to Forsyth and there being no publication of industry response to the ASRR report. I hoped that offering the draft submission to those interested, may rekindle industry determination to demand that the recommendations made by the Senate and the Forsyth review be implemented and fully supported by the Abbott government, as a matter of urgency.
I had to do some plain and fancy talking to get this document released, the slave time due will be willingly provided along with the midnight oil, ink, quills and parchment.
P7 a.k.a. TOM expects me to remind those downloading the document to only click once on the -
-.
Thanks guys.
P9 a.k.a K9
I believe the ASRR has been emasculated, this notion supported by the lack of meaningful response to Forsyth and there being no publication of industry response to the ASRR report. I hoped that offering the draft submission to those interested, may rekindle industry determination to demand that the recommendations made by the Senate and the Forsyth review be implemented and fully supported by the Abbott government, as a matter of urgency.
I had to do some plain and fancy talking to get this document released, the slave time due will be willingly provided along with the midnight oil, ink, quills and parchment.
P7 a.k.a. TOM expects me to remind those downloading the document to only click once on the -
-.Thanks guys.
P9 a.k.a K9
Last edited by Kharon; 3rd Oct 2014 at 21:43. Reason: No toot toot - decorum expected as part of deal - don't ask.
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
Rumor has it Terry was seen in Montreal at Isabelle's Fashion House getting quotes for an Elephant Tutu. It was alleged he was unsteady on his feet as he demonstrated a pirouette.
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 4th Oct 2014 at 01:26. Reason: PG remains unmedicated.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In regard to Part 61
1) where is the cost benefit analysis ? (seems there are lots of costs...for what?)
2) what are the real safety benefits? (over previous regs)
3) how does it comply with Government policy on reducing red tape?"
In Answer:
1) for what?...Zilch!
2) None
3) It doesn't
"Oh, Anyone seen Farq-u-hardson about the place lately?"
Unless he's dozed off in the John again it could be he's in retreat with CAsA legal.
A rumour is getting about of a boys in blue investigation underway, allegedly of corruption in Wodgers Warren, hope its not another kiddie fiddler.
Kharon the PAIN submission is well worth a read, thanks for organizing that. Put together with many of the others such as the RAA, hellio and AG boys, it paints a picure and it aint the one the Bullsh.t in Fridays Australian attempted to paint.
1) where is the cost benefit analysis ? (seems there are lots of costs...for what?)
2) what are the real safety benefits? (over previous regs)
3) how does it comply with Government policy on reducing red tape?"
In Answer:
1) for what?...Zilch!
2) None
3) It doesn't
"Oh, Anyone seen Farq-u-hardson about the place lately?"
Unless he's dozed off in the John again it could be he's in retreat with CAsA legal.
A rumour is getting about of a boys in blue investigation underway, allegedly of corruption in Wodgers Warren, hope its not another kiddie fiddler.
Kharon the PAIN submission is well worth a read, thanks for organizing that. Put together with many of the others such as the RAA, hellio and AG boys, it paints a picure and it aint the one the Bullsh.t in Fridays Australian attempted to paint.
Last edited by thorn bird; 4th Oct 2014 at 01:18. Reason: Ironing a few more brown paper bags, if the rumours are true may need a few more
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Willyleaks – Dinosaurs confirmed extinct.
The future of commercial air transport safety regulation and oversight should be based on carrier operational performance, not on documentary compliance with regulatory minutiae. according to lATA's regional director safety and operations for Europe, Giancarlo Buono.
Speaking at the 16-17 September Flightglobal Flight Safety 2014 conference at London Heathrow, Buono said: "It's the outcome that matters. The means of achieving a good safety performance is a matter of risk assessment usingng a safety management system."
He predicts the days of a "Tom and Jerry" relationship between regulator and regulated airlines will be consigned to history, and a system built on co-operation and performance will replace the old "cornpliar1ce-based" oversight system based on minimum legal standards.
Speaking at the same conference, the performance-based regulation manager at the lJK Civil Aviation Authority, John Clark, says the CAA began changing its safety oversight system from a compliance-based system to one based on measurable safety performance in April this year, and the evolution to U1e new system will be complete by April 2016. This transformation, Clark says, is not necessary only because it will produce better safety performance at airline level, but because national aviation authorities will face a resources crisis, and regulator/ airline co-operation is the only way to meet regulatory needs in a growing industry.
Buono confirms th at both the US Federal Aviation Administration and Europe's EASA are committed to moving to performance-based regulation, hacked by lCAO.
Courtesy - Flight Global – Safety – David Learmount.
Speaking at the 16-17 September Flightglobal Flight Safety 2014 conference at London Heathrow, Buono said: "It's the outcome that matters. The means of achieving a good safety performance is a matter of risk assessment usingng a safety management system."
He predicts the days of a "Tom and Jerry" relationship between regulator and regulated airlines will be consigned to history, and a system built on co-operation and performance will replace the old "cornpliar1ce-based" oversight system based on minimum legal standards.
Speaking at the same conference, the performance-based regulation manager at the lJK Civil Aviation Authority, John Clark, says the CAA began changing its safety oversight system from a compliance-based system to one based on measurable safety performance in April this year, and the evolution to U1e new system will be complete by April 2016. This transformation, Clark says, is not necessary only because it will produce better safety performance at airline level, but because national aviation authorities will face a resources crisis, and regulator/ airline co-operation is the only way to meet regulatory needs in a growing industry.
Buono confirms th at both the US Federal Aviation Administration and Europe's EASA are committed to moving to performance-based regulation, hacked by lCAO.
Courtesy - Flight Global – Safety – David Learmount.
BOLLOCKS;
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"25 years, AUD $230,000,000 all for naught;"
An Embarrassment?? I'd call it Corrupt misuse of public money
"This transformation, Clark says, is not necessary only because it will produce better safety performance at airline level, but because national aviation authorities will face a resources crisis, and regulator/ airline co-operation is the only way to meet regulatory needs in a growing industry."
It could be said that CAsA are already scraping the bottom of the gene pool finding anyone competent to fill positions in regulatory oversight.
Plenty of lawyers out there, but anyone with knowledge and experience in operations or maintenance are getting hard to find even for the industry.
I cant remember where I saw it but I think I read somewhere that the average age of LAME's was now in the fifties.
CAsA harassment and bullying is a massive impediment to anyone half way competent accepting a CP or Check and training role.
Both are poisoned challises with the very real threat of finishing your career as a "Not a Fit and Proper Person" with a felony conviction which puts paid to ever escaping from the madhouse aviation has become in Australia.
CAsA is already finding it difficult to recruit and as the industry dies, even harder. The inordinate length of time it takes them to approve anything is an impediment to investment, along with the capital risk, when the whole business can be pulled out from under you on the whim of a Wabbit, or FOI.
The regulations as they are, are an invitation to corruption. How long before their standard excuse, "We are sorry for the delay, we do not have the resources available at the moment to process your application" is followed by...." however for a small incentive I may be able to move you to the head of the queue."
If it isn't already happening.
An Embarrassment?? I'd call it Corrupt misuse of public money
"This transformation, Clark says, is not necessary only because it will produce better safety performance at airline level, but because national aviation authorities will face a resources crisis, and regulator/ airline co-operation is the only way to meet regulatory needs in a growing industry."
It could be said that CAsA are already scraping the bottom of the gene pool finding anyone competent to fill positions in regulatory oversight.
Plenty of lawyers out there, but anyone with knowledge and experience in operations or maintenance are getting hard to find even for the industry.
I cant remember where I saw it but I think I read somewhere that the average age of LAME's was now in the fifties.
CAsA harassment and bullying is a massive impediment to anyone half way competent accepting a CP or Check and training role.
Both are poisoned challises with the very real threat of finishing your career as a "Not a Fit and Proper Person" with a felony conviction which puts paid to ever escaping from the madhouse aviation has become in Australia.
CAsA is already finding it difficult to recruit and as the industry dies, even harder. The inordinate length of time it takes them to approve anything is an impediment to investment, along with the capital risk, when the whole business can be pulled out from under you on the whim of a Wabbit, or FOI.
The regulations as they are, are an invitation to corruption. How long before their standard excuse, "We are sorry for the delay, we do not have the resources available at the moment to process your application" is followed by...." however for a small incentive I may be able to move you to the head of the queue."
If it isn't already happening.
Last edited by thorn bird; 5th Oct 2014 at 06:22. Reason: Finding more brown paper bags
Thornbird, you don't give "incentives" that would be illegal. You give "presents". I don't believe I've ever smelt a whiff of corruption involving money, but the AAT is littered with examples of personal vendettas pursued by CASA.
Bad and imprecise legislation and regulation is an open invitation to corruption. In particular the use of the weasel words and phrases beloved by CASA are extremely dangerous.
For example the fact that CASA never "approves" a lot of things, it merely "accepts" them....or not. Then there is the "fit and proper person" test and of course those weasel words "acceptable" and "appropriate".
Fit and proper, acceptable and appropriate to whom? When? CASA declares it has the right to make subjective decisions which are the very anti thesis of the Weberian principles of public administration and the Government has totally abrogated their role to keep these clowns in line.
My guess now is that the Governments non response to the review will be released between Christmas and New Year together with the announcement that Mr. Farqueson is no longer the acting but now permanent Director Of Air Safety, to the general grief of what’s left of Australian Aviation.
Bad and imprecise legislation and regulation is an open invitation to corruption. In particular the use of the weasel words and phrases beloved by CASA are extremely dangerous.
For example the fact that CASA never "approves" a lot of things, it merely "accepts" them....or not. Then there is the "fit and proper person" test and of course those weasel words "acceptable" and "appropriate".
Fit and proper, acceptable and appropriate to whom? When? CASA declares it has the right to make subjective decisions which are the very anti thesis of the Weberian principles of public administration and the Government has totally abrogated their role to keep these clowns in line.
My guess now is that the Governments non response to the review will be released between Christmas and New Year together with the announcement that Mr. Farqueson is no longer the acting but now permanent Director Of Air Safety, to the general grief of what’s left of Australian Aviation.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange tales:
Sunny – "I don't believe I've ever smelt a whiff of corruption involving money,". etc.
[but] the AAT is littered with examples of personal vendettas pursued by CASA.
We see a few examples briefly aired on Pprune, but if real regulatory reform is to be achieved, this bloody awful administration must be brought to heel. No matter how good the rule set – without a regulator who is absolutely above suspicion, we will simply continue in the same vane, with new rules,
This new FAA reject – soon to be DAS better bring body armour and a SWAT team; the other side will. They are the home team with years of practice at covering the pug marks leading up to the kill, have all the local support and an entrenched system of protection which reaches into the deepest, darkest portals of the 'Crat Mutual Protection Society'. The Murky Machiavellian club is only the first layer of opposition, after that, even if you beat it, the senior league will grind any real reformer into the cold, arid desert of 25 years and counting.
Clean out the top three layers, encourage the 'white hats' and grab a big stick, like the Senate committee to provide top cover, the Bored to cover your arse and the CDPP to prosecute the known offenders; then maybe things will change. A new minuscule would be a great first step; can't see the new DAS pitching up to Abbott's office asking for a new minuscule somehow and getting it; can you??
Aye well – the BBQ needs a clean and Minnie is in spring cleaning mode. Best crack on.
Toot toot..
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
Corruption.
Corruption: n 1. The act of corrupting or state of being corrupt. 2. moral perversion; depravity. 3. dishonesty, esp bribery 4. putrefaction or decay. 5. alteration, as of a manuscript. 6. an altered form of a word. Corruptible adj susceptible to corruption; capable of being corrupted.
Corrupt. 1. lacking in integrity; open to or involving bribery or other dishonest practices. 2 morally depraved. 3. putrid or rotten. 4. contaminated; unclean. 5. made meaningless or different in meaning from the original by scribal errors or alterations. 6. containing errors. 7. to become or cause to become dishonest or disloyal. 8. to debase or become debased morally; deprave. 9. infect or contaminate; taint. 10. to cause to become rotten.
No, nothing seems to have changed. Perhaps there is a legal interpretation of the word corrupt. There is obviously a CAsA definition which would be a corruption of the original.
Corrupt. 1. lacking in integrity; open to or involving bribery or other dishonest practices. 2 morally depraved. 3. putrid or rotten. 4. contaminated; unclean. 5. made meaningless or different in meaning from the original by scribal errors or alterations. 6. containing errors. 7. to become or cause to become dishonest or disloyal. 8. to debase or become debased morally; deprave. 9. infect or contaminate; taint. 10. to cause to become rotten.
No, nothing seems to have changed. Perhaps there is a legal interpretation of the word corrupt. There is obviously a CAsA definition which would be a corruption of the original.
PBR v Big "R": AMROBA - "We are out of step globally".
Kharon - 25 years, AUD $230,000,000 all for naught; I'd call that a national embarrassment. Yet our home grown Frankenstein designers robustly maintain – it's all our fault and we are all just too dense to 'get' Parts 145 or 61.
From AMROBA latest newsletter - Volume 11, Issue 10
October — 2014:
Global/State Aviation Safety
Regulation alone cannot improve the safety record.
The most important role of the law of aviation is to provide
a framework that keeps the aviation industry safe, fair, and
efficient.
Aviation safety is a term encompassing the theory, investigation,
and categorisation of flight failures, and the prevention
of such failures through regulation, education, and
training. It can also be applied in the context of campaigns
that inform the public as to the safety of air travel.
Though often viewed as a simple entity (the safety record,
as it is called), safety is an extremely complex matter. It
depends upon a dedicated and talented workforce.
ICAO Annex 19 comprises Standards and Recommended
Practices (SARPs) related to the implementation of State
safety programmes (SSP) and safety management systems
(SMS), including provisions for the collection, analysis,
protection and exchange of safety information. These requirements
are essential to the successful evolution of a
proactive safety strategy.
The underlined paragraph is the basis why the ASRR report
recommended the philosophies of CASA needs to
change and so does the aviation law to enable the new
approach highlighted within Annex 19.
Maintenance personnel employed by airlines and aircraft
maintenance organisations are required to perform their
jobs in a manner that will result in a safe aircraft.
After approval for return to service the pilots, and other
flight crew members, are then expected to perform their
duties with the ultimate goal of a safe journey for passengers.
Implementation of aviation safety requirements worldwide
are varied. UN Regions: North America 93%; Europe 74%;
Asia 69%; Latin America & Caribbean 67%; Oceania 48%
& Africa 44%.
These are ICAO 2013 published figures.
Australia, like so many other countries, has an implementation
record above the global average of 61 per cent.
Australia has 5 government agencies involved in cooperation
programs in the Asia Pacific region, in particular with
Indonesia and PNG. Department of Infrastructure, CASA,
ATSB, ASA & AMSA cooperation and enhancement programs
include training, mentoring, and capability building
activities assisting the Pacific Aviation Safety Office.
ICAO will continue to progress safety-related projects
such as harmonization and recognition of approved
maintenance organizations, States’ responsibilities
when a type certificate is suspended or revoked, and security
sensitive airworthiness directives.
How can Australia participate in the Asia Pacific Region
providing assistance when it continues to develop uniquely
Australian aviation law? We are not harmonised.
Australia’s unique aviation legislative maintenance requirements
are not compatible with EASRs or FARs. No
matter where you look, we are out of step globally.
Regulation alone cannot improve the safety record.
The most important role of the law of aviation is to provide
a framework that keeps the aviation industry safe, fair, and
efficient.
Aviation safety is a term encompassing the theory, investigation,
and categorisation of flight failures, and the prevention
of such failures through regulation, education, and
training. It can also be applied in the context of campaigns
that inform the public as to the safety of air travel.
Though often viewed as a simple entity (the safety record,
as it is called), safety is an extremely complex matter. It
depends upon a dedicated and talented workforce.
ICAO Annex 19 comprises Standards and Recommended
Practices (SARPs) related to the implementation of State
safety programmes (SSP) and safety management systems
(SMS), including provisions for the collection, analysis,
protection and exchange of safety information. These requirements
are essential to the successful evolution of a
proactive safety strategy.
The underlined paragraph is the basis why the ASRR report
recommended the philosophies of CASA needs to
change and so does the aviation law to enable the new
approach highlighted within Annex 19.
Maintenance personnel employed by airlines and aircraft
maintenance organisations are required to perform their
jobs in a manner that will result in a safe aircraft.
After approval for return to service the pilots, and other
flight crew members, are then expected to perform their
duties with the ultimate goal of a safe journey for passengers.
Implementation of aviation safety requirements worldwide
are varied. UN Regions: North America 93%; Europe 74%;
Asia 69%; Latin America & Caribbean 67%; Oceania 48%
& Africa 44%.
These are ICAO 2013 published figures.
Australia, like so many other countries, has an implementation
record above the global average of 61 per cent.
Australia has 5 government agencies involved in cooperation
programs in the Asia Pacific region, in particular with
Indonesia and PNG. Department of Infrastructure, CASA,
ATSB, ASA & AMSA cooperation and enhancement programs
include training, mentoring, and capability building
activities assisting the Pacific Aviation Safety Office.
ICAO will continue to progress safety-related projects
such as harmonization and recognition of approved
maintenance organizations, States’ responsibilities
when a type certificate is suspended or revoked, and security
sensitive airworthiness directives.
How can Australia participate in the Asia Pacific Region
providing assistance when it continues to develop uniquely
Australian aviation law? We are not harmonised.
Australia’s unique aviation legislative maintenance requirements
are not compatible with EASRs or FARs. No
matter where you look, we are out of step globally.
The regulatory burdens faced by Australian businesses are high relative to those faced in other countries and
this relative position has worsened in recent years and has been a major factor in the deterioration of our
overall competitiveness ranking (Table 1).
this relative position has worsened in recent years and has been a major factor in the deterioration of our
overall competitiveness ranking (Table 1).
This deterioration makes it more difficult for Australian businesses to compete globally, but it also adds to our
growing international reputation as a high cost country in which to do business and detracts from Australia’s
attractiveness as a destination for business investment and collaboration.
growing international reputation as a high cost country in which to do business and detracts from Australia’s
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Industry ? – what industry.
However while we continue to have a dinosaur of a miniscule that is asleep at the wheel and seemingly cannot (or will not) accept that he is being ill advised by his agencies & dept...well?? Basically put we're all stuffed!
Perhaps it's time we stepped around the road block, appealed to the Prime minister, Barnaby Joyce and any of the hard working 'kosher' senators; any of those with enough juice to 'goose the goose'.
Asleep at the wheel be damned – check his pulse....
Australian helicopter growth slows suddenly
The Australian Helicopter Industry Association has always proudly stated that over past decades the Civic Aviation Safety Authority's Aircraft Register has grown by 6 to 8% each year. (Or at least twice the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, and three to four times faster than General Aviation aeroplane fleet listing).
FISCAL 2013/2014 (1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014) showed an increase from 1,951 to 2104 helicopters, up by 153 registrations. This was an increase of 7.8% to 30 Jun ’14, which was a good result.
As an aside Australia has the second largest helicopter fleet in the Western World; so any fleet variations are questioned closely.
However, AHIA is concerned at the slump of growth during First Quarter of the current FISCAL Year. (July to September). Our fleet only increased from 2104 to 2110, or 6. This represents an annual growth rate of only 1.14%.
WHY?
AHIA is conducting an investigation on behalf of their members and will provide a report ASAP. Some clues are that some major flying schools appear to have very low numbers at present, no doubt due to the need to sort out troublesome new CASR Part 61 Flight Crew Training requirements and associated costs which are hard to calculate due to changes flowing from the CASA/Industry working groups finding problems that need “exemptions”; some of these may incur extra costs during the transition period.
And as an aside, a major LAME training facility went into liquidation – and we need more technical people due to our ageing engineers and few trainees!
The AHIA study will be published in the next edition of Helicopters Australasia – a free e-newsletter – see AHIA website.
Putting aside the potential error of making too much of short-term data variations; the sudden change is unusual and we are watching with great interest.
As you can see below we are working with other government agencies that have to translate and implement the new CASRs into their language (or legal speak). In particular, schools providing courses for international students have to comply with CASA rules and Skills Council protocols in order to obtain approval to accept student visas or similar.
Rob Rich
AHIA Regulatory Review Coordinator for
Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council (Aircrew) and manufacturing Skills Australia (Maintenance technicians)
E: [email protected]
FISCAL 2013/2014 (1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014) showed an increase from 1,951 to 2104 helicopters, up by 153 registrations. This was an increase of 7.8% to 30 Jun ’14, which was a good result.
As an aside Australia has the second largest helicopter fleet in the Western World; so any fleet variations are questioned closely.
However, AHIA is concerned at the slump of growth during First Quarter of the current FISCAL Year. (July to September). Our fleet only increased from 2104 to 2110, or 6. This represents an annual growth rate of only 1.14%.
WHY?
AHIA is conducting an investigation on behalf of their members and will provide a report ASAP. Some clues are that some major flying schools appear to have very low numbers at present, no doubt due to the need to sort out troublesome new CASR Part 61 Flight Crew Training requirements and associated costs which are hard to calculate due to changes flowing from the CASA/Industry working groups finding problems that need “exemptions”; some of these may incur extra costs during the transition period.
And as an aside, a major LAME training facility went into liquidation – and we need more technical people due to our ageing engineers and few trainees!
The AHIA study will be published in the next edition of Helicopters Australasia – a free e-newsletter – see AHIA website.
Putting aside the potential error of making too much of short-term data variations; the sudden change is unusual and we are watching with great interest.
As you can see below we are working with other government agencies that have to translate and implement the new CASRs into their language (or legal speak). In particular, schools providing courses for international students have to comply with CASA rules and Skills Council protocols in order to obtain approval to accept student visas or similar.
Rob Rich
AHIA Regulatory Review Coordinator for
Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council (Aircrew) and manufacturing Skills Australia (Maintenance technicians)
E: [email protected]
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you know – the 'Truss' thread has averaged 16,800 reads per 28 days. Just saying.
Did you know the Senate thread in this embuggered iteration has averaged a touch over 18,000 reads per month. Just saying.
My rough numbers – but even a thicky could or should see that they are 'significant'; that's Uhmm what? – 35, 000 reads per 28 days give or take.
Well done IOS – Choccy frogs all around. Senate questions on notice next? – Wotchasay??
Toot Toot
Did you know the Senate thread in this embuggered iteration has averaged a touch over 18,000 reads per month. Just saying.
My rough numbers – but even a thicky could or should see that they are 'significant'; that's Uhmm what? – 35, 000 reads per 28 days give or take.
Well done IOS – Choccy frogs all around. Senate questions on notice next? – Wotchasay??
Toot Toot
Last edited by Kharon; 7th Oct 2014 at 08:44. Reason: Although what it all has to do with – I could not say.
Miniscule Wuss, Smithy & the ASA sleeping elephant??
"K" - Senate questions on notice next? – Wotchasay??
From FF AQONs on ASA safety issues continuing to be obfuscated i.e. smoke'n'mirrored...
:
Question no.: 270
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: Loss of Separation Assurance Incident
Proof Hansard Page: Written
Senator Xenophon, Nick asked:
CASA would be aware of a report released in late February by the ATSB regarding a loss of separation assurance incident in March 2012, involving two Garuda Airbus A330s. The ATSB was very critical of Airservices’ response to the safety issues in the report, and obviously this follows CASA’s audit of Airservices.
1. What actions is CASA currently involved in to improve the procedures within Airservices?
2. When can we expect to see a reduction in loss of separation incidents as a result of such improvements and better oversight?
3. Is CASA also working with Airservices in relation to their oversight of the provision of weather advice, with particular reference to the Mildura incident in 2013?
4. CASA would also be aware that the ATSB has just released a report into fume and smoke incidents in Australian aircraft. What steps will CASA be taking to respond to this report?
Answer:
1. CASA continues with ongoing surveillance of Airservices using a risk based software surveillance tool and regular reviews of air traffic service related incident data in order to streamline and best focus its operational surveillance activities.This includes, as necessary, a sampling of Airservices’ contingency and business continuity plans.CASA also holds regular meetings with Airservices to review and enhance existing air traffic procedures as well as to introduce new procedures where appropriate. { Err...BOLLOCKS}
2. CASA will maintain effective oversight of Airservices, identifying issues requiring attention and action, and taking such further steps as may be necessary to ensure those issues are effectively addressed. {Again absolute BOLLOCKS}
3. CASA is providing information to the ATSB investigation of the Mildura incident. In addition, both CASA and Airservices are participating in the development of a Bureau of Meteorology Aviation Weather Strategic Plan.
4. The report was a joint research project undertaken by CASA and the ATSB as members of the Joint Agency Aviation Safety Analysis Coordination Group (JAASACG). There is no requirement to formally respond to the report; however CASA has undertaken to act on the relevant recommendations.
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: Loss of Separation Assurance Incident
Proof Hansard Page: Written
Senator Xenophon, Nick asked:
CASA would be aware of a report released in late February by the ATSB regarding a loss of separation assurance incident in March 2012, involving two Garuda Airbus A330s. The ATSB was very critical of Airservices’ response to the safety issues in the report, and obviously this follows CASA’s audit of Airservices.
1. What actions is CASA currently involved in to improve the procedures within Airservices?
2. When can we expect to see a reduction in loss of separation incidents as a result of such improvements and better oversight?
3. Is CASA also working with Airservices in relation to their oversight of the provision of weather advice, with particular reference to the Mildura incident in 2013?
4. CASA would also be aware that the ATSB has just released a report into fume and smoke incidents in Australian aircraft. What steps will CASA be taking to respond to this report?
Answer:
1. CASA continues with ongoing surveillance of Airservices using a risk based software surveillance tool and regular reviews of air traffic service related incident data in order to streamline and best focus its operational surveillance activities.This includes, as necessary, a sampling of Airservices’ contingency and business continuity plans.CASA also holds regular meetings with Airservices to review and enhance existing air traffic procedures as well as to introduce new procedures where appropriate. { Err...BOLLOCKS}
2. CASA will maintain effective oversight of Airservices, identifying issues requiring attention and action, and taking such further steps as may be necessary to ensure those issues are effectively addressed. {Again absolute BOLLOCKS}
3. CASA is providing information to the ATSB investigation of the Mildura incident. In addition, both CASA and Airservices are participating in the development of a Bureau of Meteorology Aviation Weather Strategic Plan.
4. The report was a joint research project undertaken by CASA and the ATSB as members of the Joint Agency Aviation Safety Analysis Coordination Group (JAASACG). There is no requirement to formally respond to the report; however CASA has undertaken to act on the relevant recommendations.
) I noticed the following Exclusive article from the MMSM stable the Oz...
: Act on radar safety or I’ll sue: Dick Smith warns CASA However I do wonder if the MMSM article is only a knee jerk, regurgitated & selectively edited version of the following from the UK independently owned Daily Mail...
'Eventually there will be an accident': Aviator Dick Smith says pilots are 'flying blind' at regional airports as safety recommendations are ignored
Published: 14:27 AEST, 6 October 2014 | Updated: 17:17 AEST, 6 October 2014
Thousands of planes are 'flying blind without radar' when they land at regional airports because Airservices Australia has refused to comply with safety instructions, aviator and entrepreneur Dick Smith has warned.
The millionaire and former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority claimed that lives are being put at risk because the AA has been 'completely irresponsible' in not implementing a 2004 ministerial safety directive relating to radar at 10 airports.
Albury, Alice Springs, Coffs Harbour, Hamilton Island, Hobart, Launceston, Mackay, Maroochydore, Rockhampton and Tamworth airports currently do not use radar for incoming flights.
'They have to obey the ministerial directive and they have not obeyed it purely so they can make more profits,' Mr Smith told Daily Mail Australia.
Former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority Dick Smith said profits are being put before safety at regional airports across Australia
In 2004 a ministerial safety directive told CASA to implement radar systems for air traffic controllers at 10 regional airports but ten years later these airports still do not have radar
He warned the AA board members that not implementing radar technology means 'they will be personally liable and they will lose their houses' if an accident occurs.
The implementation was supposed to have taken one year but has still not been carried out after 10 years.
Mr Smith said that although there have not been any accidents because of a lack of radar so far, it is only a matter of time.
'It hasn't caused a crash yet but you don't have a ministerial safety directive that requires something to be implemented for no reason.
Eventually there will be an accident... it's obvious that if you don't install it that eventually you will have an accident.'
He explained that the category of air space that the airports use 'requires radar to operate properly'.
Alice Springs is one of the regional airports that was advised to install radar technology in 2004
Hamilton Island airport, where thousands of tourists fly into every year, was also told to get radar
'It means if you are flying an aircraft it's on the radar screen. But at the moment they are flying blind without radar. Air traffic control have to call them up and work out where they are and they say "20 miles" away,' Mr Smith said.
HOW MANY PLANES ARE 'FLYING BLIND'?
According to 2010 data from The Civil Aviation Authority thousands of planes fly out of the 10 regional airports every year:
'They have worked out that if they don't put the radar in and if they force the industry to put black boxes in instead they would make higher profits.'
Responding to legal advice issued by Mr Smith to Airservices Australia in relation to the radars, AA chairman Air Chief Marshal Houston, told the The Australian: 'Airservices has continued to progress technological and operational changes to enhance the safety of our services in regional Australia.
'There are now advanced technologies which in the near *future will, to a large extent, replace radar surveillance.'
However, Mr Smith refuted Mr Houston's claims that the airports are using new safety technology instead of radars.
'Their answer is modern technology will save money but it hasn't come in to use yet. They are putting profit in front of safety,' he said.
In a 2010 report that reassessed the ministerial advice, The Civil Aviation Authority noted: 'Radar is no longer the only technology available to provide surveillance to ATC. The introduction of satellite systems, air-to-ground data links and the emergence of new techniques provide surveillance coverage to ATC and will eventually replace the use of radar systems.
'Radar is considered to be old technology and is expensive to install and maintain when compared to newer technologies.'
The report also noted the high cost of installing radar technology and admitted that: 'The level of radar coverage surrounding the 10 Regional Aerodromes has not changed since the Ministerial Direction was given in 2004 although the TASWAM network has improved coverage in Tasmania.'
In 2010, there were 6,263 RPT flights a year from the Sunshine Coast Airport
- Entrepreneur Dick Smith says 2004 ministerial safety directive which said radars should be installed at 10 regional airports has been ignored
- The former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority claims profit is being put before safety
- Implementing radar services at the regional airports would cost tens of millions of dollars
- Airports without radars include Alice Springs and Coffs Harbour
- 'It's obvious that if you don't install it that eventually you will have an accident,' Mr Smith said
Published: 14:27 AEST, 6 October 2014 | Updated: 17:17 AEST, 6 October 2014
Thousands of planes are 'flying blind without radar' when they land at regional airports because Airservices Australia has refused to comply with safety instructions, aviator and entrepreneur Dick Smith has warned.
The millionaire and former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority claimed that lives are being put at risk because the AA has been 'completely irresponsible' in not implementing a 2004 ministerial safety directive relating to radar at 10 airports.
Albury, Alice Springs, Coffs Harbour, Hamilton Island, Hobart, Launceston, Mackay, Maroochydore, Rockhampton and Tamworth airports currently do not use radar for incoming flights.
'They have to obey the ministerial directive and they have not obeyed it purely so they can make more profits,' Mr Smith told Daily Mail Australia.
Former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority Dick Smith said profits are being put before safety at regional airports across Australia
In 2004 a ministerial safety directive told CASA to implement radar systems for air traffic controllers at 10 regional airports but ten years later these airports still do not have radar
He warned the AA board members that not implementing radar technology means 'they will be personally liable and they will lose their houses' if an accident occurs.
The implementation was supposed to have taken one year but has still not been carried out after 10 years.
Mr Smith said that although there have not been any accidents because of a lack of radar so far, it is only a matter of time.
'It hasn't caused a crash yet but you don't have a ministerial safety directive that requires something to be implemented for no reason.
Eventually there will be an accident... it's obvious that if you don't install it that eventually you will have an accident.'
He explained that the category of air space that the airports use 'requires radar to operate properly'.
Alice Springs is one of the regional airports that was advised to install radar technology in 2004
Hamilton Island airport, where thousands of tourists fly into every year, was also told to get radar
'It means if you are flying an aircraft it's on the radar screen. But at the moment they are flying blind without radar. Air traffic control have to call them up and work out where they are and they say "20 miles" away,' Mr Smith said.
HOW MANY PLANES ARE 'FLYING BLIND'?
According to 2010 data from The Civil Aviation Authority thousands of planes fly out of the 10 regional airports every year:
- Albury has 180 RPT flights a week
- Alice Springs has 128 RPT flights per week
- Coffs Harbour has 144 RPT flights a week in
- Hamilton Island has over 3,800 RPT flights a year
- Hobart has 14,285 RPT flights a year
- Launceston has 11,812 RPT flights a year.
- Mackay has 11,000 RPT flights a year
- Sunshine Coast/Maroochydore has 6,263 RPT flights a year
- Rockhampton has 11,500 RPT flights a year
- Tamworth has 2,911 RPT flights a year
'They have worked out that if they don't put the radar in and if they force the industry to put black boxes in instead they would make higher profits.'
Responding to legal advice issued by Mr Smith to Airservices Australia in relation to the radars, AA chairman Air Chief Marshal Houston, told the The Australian: 'Airservices has continued to progress technological and operational changes to enhance the safety of our services in regional Australia.
'There are now advanced technologies which in the near *future will, to a large extent, replace radar surveillance.'
However, Mr Smith refuted Mr Houston's claims that the airports are using new safety technology instead of radars.
'Their answer is modern technology will save money but it hasn't come in to use yet. They are putting profit in front of safety,' he said.
In a 2010 report that reassessed the ministerial advice, The Civil Aviation Authority noted: 'Radar is no longer the only technology available to provide surveillance to ATC. The introduction of satellite systems, air-to-ground data links and the emergence of new techniques provide surveillance coverage to ATC and will eventually replace the use of radar systems.
'Radar is considered to be old technology and is expensive to install and maintain when compared to newer technologies.'
The report also noted the high cost of installing radar technology and admitted that: 'The level of radar coverage surrounding the 10 Regional Aerodromes has not changed since the Ministerial Direction was given in 2004 although the TASWAM network has improved coverage in Tasmania.'
In 2010, there were 6,263 RPT flights a year from the Sunshine Coast Airport
Bravo Dick...
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Yosemite
Age: 52
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Break it all down
Dick very succinctly highlights one of the ongoing 'groundhog day' issues - the system is defective, an inquiry is held, recommendations are made, said recommendations always get ignored. It's a common theme that has become the norm. In all due respect to Houston and people like Staib - they always toe the party line because they have spent their careers, latter careers at least, serving their political masters by being their puppets and yes men/women and getting paid handsomely as a reward. They will never betray those who pull their strings, never. It's all a game of survival - survive your career as a bureaucrat right up to the last pay packet then retire off the back of the taxpayer! What these people do is not for the good of mankind I can assure you. Their spin, deceit, bull**** and deception is a part of their job position description. Just the way a fighter pilot is trained to fire a missile and destroy life without being emotionally attached to his actions, so too are our politicians and their bureaucratic department heads also trained to make decisions including lying, deceiving and obsfucating even to the point of putting our families and friends lives at risk and in some cases death has occurred, and they do so while sipping Cognac and eating cucumber sandwiches. No conscience, no morals, no care in the world. Its all a game.
We live and work within a crooked system, where life is cheap and government are even more crooked. We are absorbed within a system devoid of decency, transparency and honesty, where those making, enforcing, changing the rules are one and the same. The numbers are stacked. The cards are stacked. The judicial system is stacked. The outcomes are stacked. The only way to change the system is to attack it head on. Any bureaucracy can be smashed by the people if the support and numbers are there. The very citizens a government takes an oath to protect are also the very thing they are the most scared of. If you have strength in numbers you can move mountains boys. Unless there is some kind of civil aviation uprising change won't occur. You are talking about a 200 year old system that has been fine tuned and massaged to ensure that YOU never come off as the victor. It's time to change tact, adapt, surprise, and shock. Playing by their rules will result in absolutely nothing. We need to make the rules and then put a grapple in their mouths and drag them to the fight.
We live and work within a crooked system, where life is cheap and government are even more crooked. We are absorbed within a system devoid of decency, transparency and honesty, where those making, enforcing, changing the rules are one and the same. The numbers are stacked. The cards are stacked. The judicial system is stacked. The outcomes are stacked. The only way to change the system is to attack it head on. Any bureaucracy can be smashed by the people if the support and numbers are there. The very citizens a government takes an oath to protect are also the very thing they are the most scared of. If you have strength in numbers you can move mountains boys. Unless there is some kind of civil aviation uprising change won't occur. You are talking about a 200 year old system that has been fine tuned and massaged to ensure that YOU never come off as the victor. It's time to change tact, adapt, surprise, and shock. Playing by their rules will result in absolutely nothing. We need to make the rules and then put a grapple in their mouths and drag them to the fight.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"so too are our politicians and their bureaucratic department heads also trained to make decisions including lying, deceiving and obsfucating even to the point of putting our families and friends lives at risk and in some cases death has occurred, and they do so while sipping Cognac and eating cucumber sandwiches. No conscience, no morals, no care in the world. Its all a game."
There is a certain flight nurse who can attest to that, from bitter experience.
Fobbed off by a miniscules department head like she was a piece of cow **** stuck to his trousers.
There is a certain flight nurse who can attest to that, from bitter experience.
Fobbed off by a miniscules department head like she was a piece of cow **** stuck to his trousers.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here are a group of dedicated people doing something about this appalling airport privatisation situation and the Minister's complete lack of action.
Please consider making a contribution as this is the culmination of over eight (8) years of work and tireless effort to bring those responsible kicking and screaming to be held to account.
Minister Warren Truss is using your tax-payer dollars to fund a high-powered legal team - Ashurst Lawyers from Canberra to defend a position he rejected when he was last in Government.
If successful this action will be a watershed moment and turn the airport privatisation model on its head.
Please consider making a contribution as this is the culmination of over eight (8) years of work and tireless effort to bring those responsible kicking and screaming to be held to account.
Minister Warren Truss is using your tax-payer dollars to fund a high-powered legal team - Ashurst Lawyers from Canberra to defend a position he rejected when he was last in Government.
If successful this action will be a watershed moment and turn the airport privatisation model on its head.
We Need YOU!
Dear fellow Aviator,
AAT Proceedings
As you should be aware by now your Chamber (AACCI) has had proceedings in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) since August 2012. Our action is challenging ex-Minister Anthony Albanese's disastrous decision in May 2012 to approve the 2011-2031 Archerfield Airport Master Plan.
If permitted to stand unchallenged by your Chamber, the Minister’s approval would clear the way for Archerfield Airport Corporation (AAC) to proceed with an irreversible and permanent downgrading of the critical aviation infrastructure that exists at Archerfield Airport. This includes the unacceptable loss of the 04/22 runway complex, the Archerfield Control Tower, the fuel farms and above all would obliterate many aviation businesses without compensation.
This is solely an industrial land grab by AAC without appropriate regard to the consequences to and requirements of the aviation users (that's YOU!) and also the overall public interest both now and into the future.
The Chamber's action is now set down for trial commencing from the 18th November to 26th November 2014 with an airport site visit by the AAT Deputy President Hack on the 17th November 2014.
Up to twenty-seven (27) witnesses, (most of whom have made extensive written statements) will be appearing for the Chamber - including our expert witnesses. If you are a witness you will soon be receiving a summons to appear before the AAT. Although this will be for the entire period from and including the 18th November, the exact day or days you will be required will be confirmed closer to the time. Persons pre-approved by the AAT will be able to provide evidence by phone or video link.
All members and their supporters are welcome to attend the hearing but everyone who receives a summons cannot be present in the hearing room until after they have given their evidence as a witness. If you attend the AAT before you are called, objections could be raised against your evidence including the possibly of totally invalidating your evidence – so please exercise extreme care about this.
What will be achieved?
The AAT has stated they are not running a royal commission. That said, the main issues, properly prosecuted by expert legal counsel will result in the 2011-2031 Master Plan being rejected by the AAT and possibly replaced by the Chamber’s alternative master plan (which was ratified by the Chamber in General Meeting) being approved by the AAT to then become the 2011-2031 Master Plan.
This decision will not only help rescue Archerfield Airport from unscrupulous land development, but will help every other secondary airport and the ALOP airports throughout Australia.
It is extremely important to understand that this is not just an action for the benefit of Archerfield Airport alone.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the Department of Infrastructure and Transport clearly do not know their own rules. Both Government Departments have been acting merely as a post office and have not done their job.
There will be significant ramifications for the Minister and section heads of these departments from our proceedings as the spotlight is now turned on to what they have done.
Running these proceedings in the AAT has been and continues to be a massive and resource demanding undertaking.
This is a "one off" exercise to save your airport and your business – an opportunity that will not present itself again.
It is now the time for your focus, for your action, for you to play your part, and to help with the heavy lifting others have shouldered to “get us all over the line”.
To prosecute the trial for the Chamber, we are represented by our Solicitor and Barrister, both of whom have aviation qualifications and are familiar with Archerfield Airport. In addition to this we also have litigation support personnel (who are also pilots) and iconic expert witnesses donating their professional time.
Our solicitor costs $2000 per trial day and Barrister $4,000 per trial and preparation day.
We request each and every member to sponsor either the solicitor or the Barrister or both for one or more days. For most aviation businesses this is fully tax deductible.
You do not need to be a member of the Chamber to sponsor. The Chamber is an approved organisation to receive public donations for this purpose under the Collections Act 1966 (Qld). Donations can be made with anonymity.
You may chose the day (or days) that you want to sponsor. A list of the days and slots requiring sponsorship will soon be up on the Chambers Website and kept updated . (Note no names will appear thereon – unless you specifically request same) .
The AAT is open to the public and (unless you are a witness) you can attend to see what you are getting for your sponsorship day.
Where do I send my sponsorship funds?
The Chamber’s Bank Account Details for the “AAT Case Fighting Fund” are as follows:
Account Name: Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc.
Bank of Queensland – Springwood
BSB No: 124057
Account No:20220853
Don’t have the cash? – we can accept your credit card – donate on-line by clicking here and then selecting the 'Donate' button.
Know others that want to Help?
Help in sponsorship and extra litigation support and special project staff are needed.
Email this to your friend.
Lindsay Snell
President
Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc
Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc
GPO Box 2511
Brisbane Qld 4001
Australia
Website:- www.aacci.org.au
AAT Proceedings
As you should be aware by now your Chamber (AACCI) has had proceedings in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) since August 2012. Our action is challenging ex-Minister Anthony Albanese's disastrous decision in May 2012 to approve the 2011-2031 Archerfield Airport Master Plan.
If permitted to stand unchallenged by your Chamber, the Minister’s approval would clear the way for Archerfield Airport Corporation (AAC) to proceed with an irreversible and permanent downgrading of the critical aviation infrastructure that exists at Archerfield Airport. This includes the unacceptable loss of the 04/22 runway complex, the Archerfield Control Tower, the fuel farms and above all would obliterate many aviation businesses without compensation.
This is solely an industrial land grab by AAC without appropriate regard to the consequences to and requirements of the aviation users (that's YOU!) and also the overall public interest both now and into the future.
The Chamber's action is now set down for trial commencing from the 18th November to 26th November 2014 with an airport site visit by the AAT Deputy President Hack on the 17th November 2014.
Up to twenty-seven (27) witnesses, (most of whom have made extensive written statements) will be appearing for the Chamber - including our expert witnesses. If you are a witness you will soon be receiving a summons to appear before the AAT. Although this will be for the entire period from and including the 18th November, the exact day or days you will be required will be confirmed closer to the time. Persons pre-approved by the AAT will be able to provide evidence by phone or video link.
All members and their supporters are welcome to attend the hearing but everyone who receives a summons cannot be present in the hearing room until after they have given their evidence as a witness. If you attend the AAT before you are called, objections could be raised against your evidence including the possibly of totally invalidating your evidence – so please exercise extreme care about this.
What will be achieved?
The AAT has stated they are not running a royal commission. That said, the main issues, properly prosecuted by expert legal counsel will result in the 2011-2031 Master Plan being rejected by the AAT and possibly replaced by the Chamber’s alternative master plan (which was ratified by the Chamber in General Meeting) being approved by the AAT to then become the 2011-2031 Master Plan.
This decision will not only help rescue Archerfield Airport from unscrupulous land development, but will help every other secondary airport and the ALOP airports throughout Australia.
It is extremely important to understand that this is not just an action for the benefit of Archerfield Airport alone.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the Department of Infrastructure and Transport clearly do not know their own rules. Both Government Departments have been acting merely as a post office and have not done their job.
There will be significant ramifications for the Minister and section heads of these departments from our proceedings as the spotlight is now turned on to what they have done.
Running these proceedings in the AAT has been and continues to be a massive and resource demanding undertaking.
This is a "one off" exercise to save your airport and your business – an opportunity that will not present itself again.
It is now the time for your focus, for your action, for you to play your part, and to help with the heavy lifting others have shouldered to “get us all over the line”.
To prosecute the trial for the Chamber, we are represented by our Solicitor and Barrister, both of whom have aviation qualifications and are familiar with Archerfield Airport. In addition to this we also have litigation support personnel (who are also pilots) and iconic expert witnesses donating their professional time.
Our solicitor costs $2000 per trial day and Barrister $4,000 per trial and preparation day.
We request each and every member to sponsor either the solicitor or the Barrister or both for one or more days. For most aviation businesses this is fully tax deductible.
You do not need to be a member of the Chamber to sponsor. The Chamber is an approved organisation to receive public donations for this purpose under the Collections Act 1966 (Qld). Donations can be made with anonymity.
You may chose the day (or days) that you want to sponsor. A list of the days and slots requiring sponsorship will soon be up on the Chambers Website and kept updated . (Note no names will appear thereon – unless you specifically request same) .
The AAT is open to the public and (unless you are a witness) you can attend to see what you are getting for your sponsorship day.
Where do I send my sponsorship funds?
The Chamber’s Bank Account Details for the “AAT Case Fighting Fund” are as follows:
Account Name: Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc.
Bank of Queensland – Springwood
BSB No: 124057
Account No:20220853
Don’t have the cash? – we can accept your credit card – donate on-line by clicking here and then selecting the 'Donate' button.
Know others that want to Help?
Help in sponsorship and extra litigation support and special project staff are needed.
Email this to your friend.
Lindsay Snell
President
Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc
Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc
GPO Box 2511
Brisbane Qld 4001
Australia
Website:- www.aacci.org.au
Well done AACCI
Top job AACCI take it up to this poor excuse for a Minister and his self-preserving Dept Head, if I was able I'd be donating in a heartbeat...
However perhaps I can assist in other ways...
Example - topical videos perhaps...
Anyway best of luck & 'may the force be with you' (& also with John O'Brien) in the upcoming QLD AAT hearings...
Addendum - A miniscule reminder..
The Coalition’s plan for Aviation
30th August, 2013THE Coalition will strengthen our aviation industry to ensure that it is safe, reliable, competitive and proud to be Australian.
The Coalition’s Policy for Aviation will improve consultation, reform the structure of key safety agencies and provide support to struggling sectors of the industry.
The Coalition will invest an additional $3.5 million to support regional aviation by introducing a new and better targeted En Route Rebate Scheme for regional commercial airline carriers to support low volume and new routes to small and remote communities.
The Coalition will establish a high level external review of aviation safety and regulation in Australia to provide a root and branch assessment of current practices and provide a long-term framework for the future of aviation safety regulation in Australia.
Additionally, the Coalition will:
* focus on the better utilisation of Australian airspace, including tasking Airservices Australia with fast-tracking technological and navigational improvements at airports and pursuing methods to decrease aircraft noise for communities;
* recognise the importance of Australian airports to the economy, from our major gateway airports and small regional airports, to those that support flight training and general aviation;
* revitalise the General Aviation Action Agenda and establish a regular dialogue with the general aviation sector to address industry issues;
* continue to promote aviation liberalisation while recognising the need to protect our national interest;
* enhance aviation skills, training and development by undertaking a study into skills shortages in the broader aviation industry; and
* ensure that aviation security measures are risk based and implemented in a practical and common sense way.
Over the past six years Labor’s approach to aviation policy has seen cost after cost added to the bottom lines of airlines and airports, pilots and passengers.
Labor has introduced the carbon tax, increased red tape, raised the Passenger Movement Charge and abolished the En Route Rebate Scheme for small regional airlines.
The Coalition recognises that our aviation sector is a vital part of the economy. It employs in excess of 100,000 people and contributes an estimated $17.3 billion to the Australian economy.
The Coalition’s Policy for Aviation will invest $6 million to boost the productivity, safety and competitiveness of our aviation sector.
[ENDS]
MTF...
However perhaps I can assist in other ways...
Example - topical videos perhaps...
Anyway best of luck & 'may the force be with you' (& also with John O'Brien) in the upcoming QLD AAT hearings...
Addendum - A miniscule reminder..
The Coalition’s plan for Aviation
30th August, 2013THE Coalition will strengthen our aviation industry to ensure that it is safe, reliable, competitive and proud to be Australian.
The Coalition’s Policy for Aviation will improve consultation, reform the structure of key safety agencies and provide support to struggling sectors of the industry.
The Coalition will invest an additional $3.5 million to support regional aviation by introducing a new and better targeted En Route Rebate Scheme for regional commercial airline carriers to support low volume and new routes to small and remote communities.
The Coalition will establish a high level external review of aviation safety and regulation in Australia to provide a root and branch assessment of current practices and provide a long-term framework for the future of aviation safety regulation in Australia.
Additionally, the Coalition will:
* focus on the better utilisation of Australian airspace, including tasking Airservices Australia with fast-tracking technological and navigational improvements at airports and pursuing methods to decrease aircraft noise for communities;
* recognise the importance of Australian airports to the economy, from our major gateway airports and small regional airports, to those that support flight training and general aviation;
* revitalise the General Aviation Action Agenda and establish a regular dialogue with the general aviation sector to address industry issues;
* continue to promote aviation liberalisation while recognising the need to protect our national interest;
* enhance aviation skills, training and development by undertaking a study into skills shortages in the broader aviation industry; and
* ensure that aviation security measures are risk based and implemented in a practical and common sense way.
Over the past six years Labor’s approach to aviation policy has seen cost after cost added to the bottom lines of airlines and airports, pilots and passengers.
Labor has introduced the carbon tax, increased red tape, raised the Passenger Movement Charge and abolished the En Route Rebate Scheme for small regional airlines.
The Coalition recognises that our aviation sector is a vital part of the economy. It employs in excess of 100,000 people and contributes an estimated $17.3 billion to the Australian economy.
The Coalition’s Policy for Aviation will invest $6 million to boost the productivity, safety and competitiveness of our aviation sector.
[ENDS]
MTF...
Last edited by Sarcs; 8th Oct 2014 at 02:27.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bit more - on airports.
For those interested in keeping aerodromes operational and the miasma of 'dodgy doings' the Paul Phelan article in – ProAviation – and its supporting piece – HERE -is worth a read. It's been a low key event to date, but you get the feeling that the heat is being turned up – certainly got the Senate attention; if not that of 'our' minuscule....