Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are the budget cuts the reason for nothing on the DAS. I'm guessing some top level crats looking for posts. Maybe amsa and casa merging?
Truss report can then say all sorted.
I wonder if the extra 100 jobs that casa got will be cut back again. Or if the NZ rules will be adopted.
Truss report can then say all sorted.
I wonder if the extra 100 jobs that casa got will be cut back again. Or if the NZ rules will be adopted.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
APNG Fatal
I watched the Royal Commission into insulation today with great interest. Why wasn't DEWHA (same dept as Kokoda funding) highlighted over its subsidy of the accident flight to Kokoda regarding risk assessment. 16 people died including 13 Australians???
What risk assessment was done into that operation before they quickly pulled the subsidy post accident?
Additionally the ATSBeaker who assisted in the investigation came up with a bizarre Safety Recommendation that aircraft of this type be fitted with FDRs!!! My understanding is that Safety Recommendations are to PREVENT accidents, not help trying to work out what happened after! I guess Pel-Air makes a mockery of that as FDRs aren't that important!
How sad is the ATSBeaker! If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.
What risk assessment was done into that operation before they quickly pulled the subsidy post accident?
Additionally the ATSBeaker who assisted in the investigation came up with a bizarre Safety Recommendation that aircraft of this type be fitted with FDRs!!! My understanding is that Safety Recommendations are to PREVENT accidents, not help trying to work out what happened after! I guess Pel-Air makes a mockery of that as FDRs aren't that important!
How sad is the ATSBeaker! If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.
Last edited by Jinglie; 12th May 2014 at 15:28.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
004 # 761-"Speaking of budgets, I believe the following will be announced in regards to CAsA's budget tomorrow night by Smoking Joe Hockey and Mathias von Dutch;"
Serious cost cutting measures and a general 'clean out' with >20 < 30 "voluntary" redundancies. Or:
Leasing buildings not being used - to recover the costs of renting space, air conditioning it, and leaving it to the mice, rats and cockroaches, who really need the security service provided.
But Mr Hockey, the pot plants must stay (you know why) and PAWS needs another couple of million thrown at it and the consultants budget must not be tinkered with. Under no circumstances must the 'reg re-write' funding be cut; what the hell will those dependant on it do, wander aimlessly about the building making work?
PS. We hid your share of the $89 millions under one of the pot-plants; go get it tiger.
Toot toot.
Last edited by Kharon; 12th May 2014 at 20:20. Reason: "It's still the same old story" - as time goes by, init?
Bu..bu..budgetary matters & aviation safety agencies
Budget time for Beaker must be his favourite time of the year, a time when he gets a chance to really prove his worth, & when previously, he would have received a quiet nod from miniscule Albo when the miniscule was addressing his dept post budget...
But what about this year, will he get any kudos and an informal invite to dine at the trough?? Or will he be cast off into oblivion in some back water office, as a Senior OHS manager for the Treasury Dept or ATO??
And what about the other aviation safety trough dweller wannabes, what will become of them?? Will they get the chop or be allowed to continue to dine with a slight diminishment in the trough buffet??
Well maybe the clues are in the commission of audit report?? If so there could be an element of truth to the ASA privatisation rumour, "K" alludes to above...
From AA online (my bold at the bottom):
So there you are Beaker job well done..
..err but farming out more parts of ASA..
..is that such a wise idea??
Farewell Hoody relegated to PS redundancy..
ps Hoody good catch by the way and equally good retraction/correction letter to the Heff, maybe the DAS (STBR) could take some lessons in proper political etiquette...
Correspondence received from Mr Greg Hood, Executive General Manager, Airservices Australia, clarifying evidence given on 24 February 2014
pps Hoody just think if ASA is privatised there'll no longer be anymore Senate inquisitions, but the IOS will miss you..
But what about this year, will he get any kudos and an informal invite to dine at the trough?? Or will he be cast off into oblivion in some back water office, as a Senior OHS manager for the Treasury Dept or ATO??
And what about the other aviation safety trough dweller wannabes, what will become of them?? Will they get the chop or be allowed to continue to dine with a slight diminishment in the trough buffet??
Well maybe the clues are in the commission of audit report?? If so there could be an element of truth to the ASA privatisation rumour, "K" alludes to above...
From AA online (my bold at the bottom):
Review for Airservices, CASA spared in Commission of Audit reportItem by australianaviation.com.au at 7:41 pm, Thursday May 1 2014 1 Comment
A review could be launched into Airservices.
The federal government’s Commission of Audit has recommended a review into the operations and activities of government-owned monopoly air traffic management service provider Airservices Australia.
The report recommends: “an independent review be undertaken of Airservices Australia with a particular focus on the scope of its activities as well as its planned capital expenditure program.”
It also mentions the “the potential to outsource some of its [Airservices'] activities”. Notes one of the report’s appendices: “Areas for early consideration in relation to contestability may include Airservices Australia”.
There had been industry speculation the commission might recommended the outsourcing of Airservices’ Aviation Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) service.
The federal government’s other civil aviation bodies, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the ATSB, were spared the Commission of Audit’s attentions, rating only passing mentions.
A review could be launched into Airservices. The federal government’s Commission of Audit has recommended a review into the operations and activities of government-owned monopoly air traffic management service provider Airservices Australia.
The report recommends: “an independent review be undertaken of Airservices Australia with a particular focus on the scope of its activities as well as its planned capital expenditure program.”
It also mentions the “the potential to outsource some of its [Airservices'] activities”. Notes one of the report’s appendices: “Areas for early consideration in relation to contestability may include Airservices Australia”.
There had been industry speculation the commission might recommended the outsourcing of Airservices’ Aviation Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) service.
The federal government’s other civil aviation bodies, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the ATSB, were spared the Commission of Audit’s attentions, rating only passing mentions.
..err but farming out more parts of ASA....is that such a wise idea?? Farewell Hoody relegated to PS redundancy..
ps Hoody good catch by the way and equally good retraction/correction letter to the Heff, maybe the DAS (STBR) could take some lessons in proper political etiquette...
Correspondence received from Mr Greg Hood, Executive General Manager, Airservices Australia, clarifying evidence given on 24 February 2014
pps Hoody just think if ASA is privatised there'll no longer be anymore Senate inquisitions, but the IOS will miss you..
Beaker's bonus - Clawing back credibility??
There may not of been too many grinners in last nights budget but it would seem that the ATsBeaker may have received an unexpected windfall from the MH370 disappearance & investigation.. I also note with irony....the total cost for our contribution to the continued search effort...
Hi Ho..
... mi..mi..mi..Beaker's budgetary bowl runneth over... MTF
I also note with irony....the total cost for our contribution to the continued search effort...
MH370 search to cost $90m
THE search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 will cost Australian taxpayers up to $90 million, with the government anticipating the hunt will continue into next financial year.
The government has provided extra funding of $25m to the *Defence Department this year to cover the cost of the search, with a further $3m built in for 2014-15.
Additional funding for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau over two years will take the total cost of the search to $89.9m.
The 239 passengers and crew vanished on March 8 during a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing and the search is focused on 56,000sq km of ocean floor far off Western Australia.
No wreckage from the aircraft has been found.
THE search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 will cost Australian taxpayers up to $90 million, with the government anticipating the hunt will continue into next financial year.
The government has provided extra funding of $25m to the *Defence Department this year to cover the cost of the search, with a further $3m built in for 2014-15.
Additional funding for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau over two years will take the total cost of the search to $89.9m.
The 239 passengers and crew vanished on March 8 during a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing and the search is focused on 56,000sq km of ocean floor far off Western Australia.
No wreckage from the aircraft has been found.
... mi..mi..mi..Beaker's budgetary bowl runneth over... MTF
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the winning numbers are; 89,9, mi mi
Additional funding for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau over two years will take the total cost of the search to $89.9m.
Hmmm.$89 million dollar Beaker jackpot!! There seems to be something 'odd' in regards to aviation related funding. Those naughty trough dwelling CAsArites received a tasty $89 million a few years back, now the same figure is awarded to mi mi mi Beaker and his band of motley accountants! Is the figure of $89 million on both occasions just a coincidence? Is $89 million a lucky number? Does it take $89 million to comfortably fill a trough to the top? Is $89 million a more magical number, a spiritual number which brings the user/department/trough overseer good fortune and longevity in life?
Beaker wins the ATSB lotto;
Hmmm.$89 million dollar Beaker jackpot!! There seems to be something 'odd' in regards to aviation related funding. Those naughty trough dwelling CAsArites received a tasty $89 million a few years back, now the same figure is awarded to mi mi mi Beaker and his band of motley accountants! Is the figure of $89 million on both occasions just a coincidence? Is $89 million a lucky number? Does it take $89 million to comfortably fill a trough to the top? Is $89 million a more magical number, a spiritual number which brings the user/department/trough overseer good fortune and longevity in life?
Beaker wins the ATSB lotto;
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone take the trouble to tune into the New Zealand budget.
While we wallow in bureaucratic bullsh..t, our brethren across the ditch power ahead.
Our DAS actually had the hide to criticize them!!!
Well Mr. Comic DAS, care to show the industry somewhere...anywhere, just ONE THING, you and your corrupt, incompetent clowns have achieved, anything, just one single achievement your government required you and your corrupt incompetent clowns to achieve??
Na.... didn't think so, and you continue to deny the industry holds you in contempt.
While we wallow in bureaucratic bullsh..t, our brethren across the ditch power ahead.
Our DAS actually had the hide to criticize them!!!
Well Mr. Comic DAS, care to show the industry somewhere...anywhere, just ONE THING, you and your corrupt, incompetent clowns have achieved, anything, just one single achievement your government required you and your corrupt incompetent clowns to achieve??
Na.... didn't think so, and you continue to deny the industry holds you in contempt.
Beaker bucket & MMSM still catching up??
TB:
Q/ "...just ONE THING.."? Err he effectively gave us the PelAir debacle and..err Wodger's weport, which ultimately led to Truss & Co putting in place the WLR..
Maybe he has done us all a favour??
Anyway TB forget about the DAS (STBR), from what I hear they've sound proofed his office and are screening all his calls and many of his former minions are considering jumping ship to Beaker's bucket, which has just received a $60 million top up due to the MH370 search/investigation mission...
Moving along I noticed this headline this AM from the Oz, & surprise..surprise, old SC:Smaller players warn of ‘oblivion’
Oh well better late than never I suppose...
TICK..TOCK miniscule!
ps Dear miniscule...nicely parried (spun answer) to this (lefty) QIW:
Hmm...wonder in what context that QIW was asked??
Well Mr. Comic DAS, care to show the industry somewhere...anywhere, just ONE THING, you and your corrupt, incompetent clowns have achieved, anything, just one single achievement your government required you and your corrupt incompetent clowns to achieve??
Maybe he has done us all a favour??Anyway TB forget about the DAS (STBR), from what I hear they've sound proofed his office and are screening all his calls and many of his former minions are considering jumping ship to Beaker's bucket, which has just received a $60 million top up due to the MH370 search/investigation mission...
Moving along I noticed this headline this AM from the Oz, & surprise..surprise, old SC
:Smaller players warn of ‘oblivion’
GENERAL aviation will follow other Australian industries into oblivion unless there is a radical revision of the local regulatory environment, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia has warned.
In a submission to the federal government’s inquiry into aviation safety, AOPA has said Australia’s unique and complicated regulatory environment is strang*ling the small end of town.
It said the result was that too often *pilots, charter operators and maintenance people gave up because they believed it was “just too hard’’.
“Without a radical revision, it seems that GA will follow so many other Australian industries into oblivion, taking jobs, opportunities and skills with it,’’ the submission said.
“The prospective GA pilot faces problems with access to airfields, high costs and a far from appealing ageing aircraft fleet.
“The aircraft owner faces frequently hostile airport owners, a shortage of licensed maintenance engineers, rising maintenance costs, increased paperwork and such uncertainty with both the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and airport owners that it is difficult to obtain finance to purchase new aircraft.
“In contrast, ultralight aircraft have prospered in a realistic regulatory environment.’’
AOPA calls for a sweep of the existing rules and the adoption of US-style regulations for general aviation *similar to the New Zealand model.
It said attempting to patch up problems with Australia’s system “was like renovating a house with rotten foundations’’.
Areas AOPA wants improved include the level of industry consultation by CASA, a move away from CASA’s legalistic approach and more consistent enforcement. It also argued that aviation should be encouraged by CASA as part of its formal charter and that the regulator was fragmented and should act more *coherently across the whole org*anisation.
AOPA also is highly critical of the declining number of airfields and difficulties in getting access.
It labelled the Aviation Security Identity Card as a “major inconvenience’’ that made no practical contribution to security and had become a device enabling routine obstruction of legitimate operations.
The organisation said expensive airport security fences and gates deterred and inconvenienced legitimate people but did little to deter anyone with malicious intent.
“The failure of the commonwealth government to enforce deeds of agreement with airport owners has seen many airports become unwelcoming or even downright hostile to GA aircraft, in the airport owners’ efforts to seek profit from activities other than aviation,’’ it said.
“In particular, city airports *effectively exclude GA and thus many people who would use this transport system cannot.’’
AOPA’s submission is one of more than 270 received by the inquiry, with worries about CASA cited by chairman David Forsyth as a key concern.
These included concerns about the agency repeatedly changing direction about which overseas jurisdiction it would follow and the habitual use of unnecessarily complex terminology when dealing with the industry.
The committee hopes to have the report finalised by the end of the month. Industry groups are waiting for its findings and to see the government’s response.
In a submission to the federal government’s inquiry into aviation safety, AOPA has said Australia’s unique and complicated regulatory environment is strang*ling the small end of town.
It said the result was that too often *pilots, charter operators and maintenance people gave up because they believed it was “just too hard’’.
“Without a radical revision, it seems that GA will follow so many other Australian industries into oblivion, taking jobs, opportunities and skills with it,’’ the submission said.
“The prospective GA pilot faces problems with access to airfields, high costs and a far from appealing ageing aircraft fleet.
“The aircraft owner faces frequently hostile airport owners, a shortage of licensed maintenance engineers, rising maintenance costs, increased paperwork and such uncertainty with both the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and airport owners that it is difficult to obtain finance to purchase new aircraft.
“In contrast, ultralight aircraft have prospered in a realistic regulatory environment.’’
AOPA calls for a sweep of the existing rules and the adoption of US-style regulations for general aviation *similar to the New Zealand model.
It said attempting to patch up problems with Australia’s system “was like renovating a house with rotten foundations’’.
Areas AOPA wants improved include the level of industry consultation by CASA, a move away from CASA’s legalistic approach and more consistent enforcement. It also argued that aviation should be encouraged by CASA as part of its formal charter and that the regulator was fragmented and should act more *coherently across the whole org*anisation.
AOPA also is highly critical of the declining number of airfields and difficulties in getting access.
It labelled the Aviation Security Identity Card as a “major inconvenience’’ that made no practical contribution to security and had become a device enabling routine obstruction of legitimate operations.
The organisation said expensive airport security fences and gates deterred and inconvenienced legitimate people but did little to deter anyone with malicious intent.
“The failure of the commonwealth government to enforce deeds of agreement with airport owners has seen many airports become unwelcoming or even downright hostile to GA aircraft, in the airport owners’ efforts to seek profit from activities other than aviation,’’ it said.
“In particular, city airports *effectively exclude GA and thus many people who would use this transport system cannot.’’
AOPA’s submission is one of more than 270 received by the inquiry, with worries about CASA cited by chairman David Forsyth as a key concern.
These included concerns about the agency repeatedly changing direction about which overseas jurisdiction it would follow and the habitual use of unnecessarily complex terminology when dealing with the industry.
The committee hopes to have the report finalised by the end of the month. Industry groups are waiting for its findings and to see the government’s response.
TICK..TOCK miniscule!
ps Dear miniscule...nicely parried (spun answer) to this (lefty) QIW:
Tuesday, 13 May 2014 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 82
CHAMBER
QUESTION
Date Tuesday, 13 May 2014 Source House
Page 82 Proof Yes
Questioner Thomson, Kelvin, MP Responder Truss, Warren, MP
Speaker Question No. 70
Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Question No. 70)
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
(Question No. 70)
Mr Kelvin Thomson asked the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, in writing, on 25 February
2014:
In respect of the employment freeze on public service recruitment, how will the Civil Aviation Safety Authority oversee implementation of Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
Mr Truss: The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:
I am advised that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) will continue to undertake external recruitment activity to fill vacant critical and high priority roles which require aviation expertise. The implementation of Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 is a high priority for CASA and will be resourced on that basis.
CHAMBER
QUESTION
Date Tuesday, 13 May 2014 Source House
Page 82 Proof Yes
Questioner Thomson, Kelvin, MP Responder Truss, Warren, MP
Speaker Question No. 70
Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Question No. 70)
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
(Question No. 70)
Mr Kelvin Thomson asked the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, in writing, on 25 February
2014:
In respect of the employment freeze on public service recruitment, how will the Civil Aviation Safety Authority oversee implementation of Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
Mr Truss: The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:
I am advised that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) will continue to undertake external recruitment activity to fill vacant critical and high priority roles which require aviation expertise. The implementation of Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 is a high priority for CASA and will be resourced on that basis.
Last edited by Sarcs; 15th May 2014 at 22:45.
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
Apostasy!
QUOTE: "It labelled the Aviation Security Identity Card as a “major inconvenience’’ that made no practical contribution to security and had become a device enabling routine obstruction of legitimate operations" QUOTE.
This small matter didn't seem to stop them supporting the whole concept when it was first mooted. Indeed AOPAA attempted to become THE only accredited issuer of the bloody thing on the belief this would force pilots to join AOPAA for a reduced cost of issue. When this didn't happen they opposed it.
The Heretic who wrote this statement is too late and looks like walking one leg each side of the barb wire fence to trying to placate their procrastinating member, while not offending CASA too much.
This small matter didn't seem to stop them supporting the whole concept when it was first mooted. Indeed AOPAA attempted to become THE only accredited issuer of the bloody thing on the belief this would force pilots to join AOPAA for a reduced cost of issue. When this didn't happen they opposed it.
The Heretic who wrote this statement is too late and looks like walking one leg each side of the barb wire fence to trying to placate their procrastinating member, while not offending CASA too much.
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 16th May 2014 at 00:03. Reason: Attempting to redefine bull$hit into niceness.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still asking where is the $89.9m Mr Mrdack
Well the actual budget papers reveal some interesting stuff - amongst those is no change in the fuel excise and a fall in staff numbers of 22.
This article gives a good summary and some real questions and includes the following from the Budget papers.
Reckon the industry is not being "got at"
This article gives a good summary and some real questions and includes the following from the Budget papers.
Reckon the industry is not being "got at"
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The remainder of the money has probably gone into that 'special training pot' for the executives, some more A380 endo's, and Sky Sentinel software upgrades! The whole thing is a complete joke from the Minister down to the pot plant maintainers at Fort Fumble. Serial abuse of taxpayer money for decades, and it is accepted as standard, normal sanctioned practise.
Off with their heads!!
Off with their heads!!
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
$89.9 million pffft!
All around the CAsA house,
The monkey chased the pilots.
And after them in double haste,
Pop! goes the weasel.
(picture off cash blowing out of jack in the box). Someone will find one.
smilie of face going Oooh because mine don't work..... still.
The monkey chased the pilots.
And after them in double haste,
Pop! goes the weasel.
(picture off cash blowing out of jack in the box). Someone will find one.
smilie of face going Oooh because mine don't work..... still.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little ray of sunshine.
Extract – Rule of Law Institute of Australia (RoILA) submission. 27 March 2014.
To: Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee.
Food for thought; and perhaps, a gateway for industry. Well done the committee, managing to publish the submissions – seems it can be done. Where there's a will, there's a way.
To: Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee.
Second, the current Attorney-General, Senator George Brandis, to his great credit, has asked the Australian Law Reform Commission to conduct a sweeping review of Commonwealth legislation to find provisions that encroach upon "rights, freedoms and privileges". In December 2013 he said:
"I have asked the Commission to identify where traditional rights, freedoms and privileges are unnecessarily comprised within the legal structure of the Commonwealth. Where encroachments exist, the Commission will determine whether they are justified."
The Attorney-General has indicated the Commission should report by 1 December 2014, however it is possible the inquiry may run for much longer. It is clearly a very significant review of the Commonwealth legislation and will focus on the wide discretionary powers of most Commonwealth regulators including the AFP. When the opportunity arises RoLIA will be making significant submissions to the Inquiry and RoLIA has already engaged interns from two Universities to assist us in this process. To the extent it can the Committee and the Senate generally may wish to assist in this inquiry by, among other things, referring to the Commission at the appropriate time any matters it thinks should be brought to its attention.
"I have asked the Commission to identify where traditional rights, freedoms and privileges are unnecessarily comprised within the legal structure of the Commonwealth. Where encroachments exist, the Commission will determine whether they are justified."
The Attorney-General has indicated the Commission should report by 1 December 2014, however it is possible the inquiry may run for much longer. It is clearly a very significant review of the Commonwealth legislation and will focus on the wide discretionary powers of most Commonwealth regulators including the AFP. When the opportunity arises RoLIA will be making significant submissions to the Inquiry and RoLIA has already engaged interns from two Universities to assist us in this process. To the extent it can the Committee and the Senate generally may wish to assist in this inquiry by, among other things, referring to the Commission at the appropriate time any matters it thinks should be brought to its attention.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone have any idea when Air Services publish their accounts?
While I understand as a Government Corporation their accounts are probably as dodgey as a starting price bookies, I was wondering if they publish their directors bonuses.
I was lead to understand that these "performance" bonuses were loosely based on how much money they save, so it occurred to me given the Bucket loads saved on new Radar by forcing the Industry into ADSB ten years ahead of the rest of the world, and paying for it, they must be on a poultice load of bucks in bonuses.
While I understand as a Government Corporation their accounts are probably as dodgey as a starting price bookies, I was wondering if they publish their directors bonuses.
I was lead to understand that these "performance" bonuses were loosely based on how much money they save, so it occurred to me given the Bucket loads saved on new Radar by forcing the Industry into ADSB ten years ahead of the rest of the world, and paying for it, they must be on a poultice load of bucks in bonuses.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How we got our important survey – Part 1.
As the WLR review is sanctioned by the 'department' head for release to the miniscule, we of the BRB got together last evening to answer two burning question – (i) the strange and wonderful way of coincidence with the miraculous appearance of an industry PR survey at the time of the WLR release; and (ii) from which bottomless pit of ineptitude did the CASA drag survey notion from. The answer to Qi is, we believe self evident. Best we could come up with for Qii was the following explanation.
Some one left the keys to the word processor room laying about, which allowed a couple of the pencil cupboard inmates to sneak in and settle down to a long night of Gin and fantasy. The product of their late night happy, slappy writing binge produced a mighty word fest. The missive had to be drafted drunk; it's the only explanation, for no one in their senses could produce such a load of meaningless old cobblers.
Anyway - they must have smuggled it into the print run where it impressed some of their more light minded mates (who were stuck for ideas anyway), what with the high flown language, fatuous logic, previously unheard rhetoric; and, the added benefit of being totally incomprehensible made it a winner.... After much back slapping and high five-ing; the missive was presented, like the Emperors new clothes to the "Czar". Not wanting to appear thick, this fine gentleman nodded sagely and agreed with the 'mates' advice, - this was the answer to the massive PR problem. "We should make sure the industry gets this important safety message and we'll get lots of kudos" he cried "I'll wangle the survey money, you boys get to work: this will be a big PR win-win" for us".
So they set it all up and went at it; sure in the knowledge that the loaded questions and skewed answers would provide a perfect platform of mirrors and backdrop of smoke (just the ticket they chuckled); and, the bonus being that no bugger would know what TF they were looking at; but could not say so. You can't tell CASA it's bloody fairy story – and remain fit and proper.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
You will need a strong stomach (and a fine sense of the ridiculous) to read all of this –CAAP. In deference to my colleagues sensitive guts and early hour I have selected but two short paragraphs as an illustration. For your entertainment, delight and amusement; direct from CAAP 215 Annexe D page D 18. If you can't see the parallels, look - HERE, just read the email - HERE:-
Sponsored by the IOS Sheltered Workshop division. Providing expensive training teams for promoting the latest version of witless, mindless, pointless waffle.
Hope the same crew write the WLR, can't wait to read it - Toot toot.
Some one left the keys to the word processor room laying about, which allowed a couple of the pencil cupboard inmates to sneak in and settle down to a long night of Gin and fantasy. The product of their late night happy, slappy writing binge produced a mighty word fest. The missive had to be drafted drunk; it's the only explanation, for no one in their senses could produce such a load of meaningless old cobblers.
Anyway - they must have smuggled it into the print run where it impressed some of their more light minded mates (who were stuck for ideas anyway), what with the high flown language, fatuous logic, previously unheard rhetoric; and, the added benefit of being totally incomprehensible made it a winner.... After much back slapping and high five-ing; the missive was presented, like the Emperors new clothes to the "Czar". Not wanting to appear thick, this fine gentleman nodded sagely and agreed with the 'mates' advice, - this was the answer to the massive PR problem. "We should make sure the industry gets this important safety message and we'll get lots of kudos" he cried "I'll wangle the survey money, you boys get to work: this will be a big PR win-win" for us".
So they set it all up and went at it; sure in the knowledge that the loaded questions and skewed answers would provide a perfect platform of mirrors and backdrop of smoke (just the ticket they chuckled); and, the bonus being that no bugger would know what TF they were looking at; but could not say so. You can't tell CASA it's bloody fairy story – and remain fit and proper.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
You will need a strong stomach (and a fine sense of the ridiculous) to read all of this –CAAP. In deference to my colleagues sensitive guts and early hour I have selected but two short paragraphs as an illustration. For your entertainment, delight and amusement; direct from CAAP 215 Annexe D page D 18. If you can't see the parallels, look - HERE, just read the email - HERE:-
A consultant was engaged to conduct interviews with senior personnel and focus groups with the main occupational groups within the airline. The consultant not only provided expertise in these questioning techniques, there was a general perception of impartiality that appeared to encourage frank disclosure and discussion. Four focus groups were conducted (two pilot groups; 1 maintainer group; and 1 miscellaneous group) over two days. A report was delivered by the consultant that summarised the key training themes emerging from the interviews and focus groups.
The training development team used the consultant’s report, the analysis of company incident
reports, feedback from other airline safety managers, CASA and the ATSB website, and their own experience with external CRM training to develop a list of training needs in a rough priority order.
The training development team used the consultant’s report, the analysis of company incident
reports, feedback from other airline safety managers, CASA and the ATSB website, and their own experience with external CRM training to develop a list of training needs in a rough priority order.
Hope the same crew write the WLR, can't wait to read it - Toot toot.
Last edited by Kharon; 21st May 2014 at 22:02. Reason: Well - it's shriek-able, ain't it.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez Kharon you winkle out some weird stuff.
At first I thought Oh God!! more bloody shelf ware, then after a little read,
it is a joke isn't it?? got to be, someone taking the P..ss.
Blue Gum Airlines for goodness sake.
Well perhaps an indication of just how ignorant the numpies are.
Do they really imagine 6 clapped out old antiques will be able to support 20 Odd admin staff??
Thats before you start paying the mill or so for the AOC, probably hasn't dawned on them the model they used has already gone broke...
At first I thought Oh God!! more bloody shelf ware, then after a little read,
it is a joke isn't it?? got to be, someone taking the P..ss.
Blue Gum Airlines for goodness sake.
Well perhaps an indication of just how ignorant the numpies are.
Do they really imagine 6 clapped out old antiques will be able to support 20 Odd admin staff??
Thats before you start paying the mill or so for the AOC, probably hasn't dawned on them the model they used has already gone broke...
Parting shots from AMROBA
Heard a rumour that the Murky Machiavellian one is currently vetting the WLR report... If true MM here is some parting shots to consider, while reading the draft WLR report and the CVs of the potential future DAS, from AMROBA's latest newsletter...
And perhaps a parting QON (in bold) for our STBR DAS on the subject of EASA v FAR and the possible adoption of the NZ regs...
"...During the Aero Friedrichshafen event (April 9th-12th) EASA made an announcement which came as a surprise to many people – even to those members of the GA Safety Standards Consultation Committee Sub Group. No one – not even NAAs had any prior knowledge of the EASA announcement.
Simpler, lighter, and better rules for General Aviation.
The Agency is committed to changing the way it regulates GA and this new approach comes from the Executive Director (Patrick Ky).
The presenters said transposing CAT (Commercial Air Transport) rules for GA was wrong and the aim now is to make the rules risk based and proportionate which is in line with the requirements established in the GA road map.
Furthermore, EASA wishes to simplify the operations and administration procedures.
Although it was originally decided not to have a specific GA department, EASA is now in the planning for a GA department, the aim of which is to establish a focal point inside EASA for GA, which has accountability for the future health of GA across Europe.
The time frame for this work is 2014 to 2017. So why did we follow EASA?..."
Oh and MM while vetting the WLR draft report and potential DAS CVs, here is an IOS QON, that I know will be dear to your heart...
Q/ Were we the first ICAO signatory State to submit notified differences to, the freshly minted, Annex 19 i.e. SSP?? (reference pg 96-97 here)
Much more to follow...
Hot off the press...
Panel to submit air safety report
A MUCH anticipated federal government report into aviation safety is expected to be with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss next week.
Panel chairman David Forsyth and fellow members Roger Whitefield and Don Spruston have been working on the review since last year to look at how well Australia’s regulatory system is positioned globally, and have attracted a huge response from the industry.
“We’re still doing the final editing and we’ve just got a couple of issues where we’re double-checking some information, but basically we’re ready to go,’’ Mr Forsyth told The Australian yesterday.
He said the committee had been briefing Mr Truss and the department over the past six months so both were aware of the general thrust.
Mr Forsyth said the committee was happy it had covered the main issues according to the terms of reference and believed it had captured the important issues expressed by industry.
“We think we’ve made recommendations that will help to fix those issues,’’ he said.
“Of course, the hard job is for whoever the person is that takes on the role of (CASA director of aviation safety) — it depends on who that is, and how they go.
“But hopefully we’ve given them a bit of a blueprint so they can fix the major issues that have come up.’’
CASA and regulatory reform topped the list of industry concerns in almost 270 submissions and up to 20 supplementary papers.
Mr Forsyth said the “major irritant of the regulatory reform program’’ was not all down to CASA and there were also problems in areas such as the way Australia drafts laws.
The committee chairman reiterated his early comments that there was no silver bullet for regulatory reform but said the study had recommended the path it saw as the best.
“Each of the options has pluses and minuses, and we think the one we’ve recommended is on balance is the best way forward,’’ he said.
If true MM here is some parting shots to consider, while reading the draft WLR report and the CVs of the potential future DAS, from AMROBA's latest newsletter...
Regulatory Structures GA
Most governments are against imposing additional requirements on the public and individual participants but few achieve such an outcome.
Over the last decade we have seen a change from outcome based requirements to prescriptive regulations that also shifts the burden of proof from government to industry.
Standards are confusing to say the least.
Increasing unnecessary paperwork is killing the basic foundations of aviation, general aviation.
Splitting the maintenance capability between AOC pax operations and others was and is a backward step.
Nothing is being proposed to reduce the regulatory burden on the non airline and airline sectors. Changes introduced since 1991 has seen private VH registered aviation continue to decrease.
The regulatory changes has seen many shift to non VH registered aircraft where there is less regulatory burden.
Same aircraft, two different standards applied.
Is the safety of aviation affected by the type of person that wants to become a pilot, engineer, etc. or is it affected by the skills of these people.
New Zealand has a “fit & proper” person criteria that an aviation participant must meet prior to obtaining a government issued licence, certificate or approval. Why? Because under the NZ Aviation Act, the CAA(NZ) is also responsible for security matters.
So what is the best structure for GA?
Pilot licensing should be no different to the principles used in North America where there is a thriving non type certificated aircraft industry.
The legislation should be minimal and requiring CASA to promulgate minimum safety standards that this sector would need to comply with. This sector is all about individual standards not organisations.
Getting the structure right is important.
“The regulator may not have the skills or knowledge necessary to design and implement an alternative policy instrument. For example, in some technical areas regulators and policy makers may be influenced by the desire to specify highly technical standards, where they have very specific knowledge.”
Before regulatory change happened in aviation post the Authority’s HO move to Melbourne, Australia had the right structure but requirements had two flaws.
1. Orders were not changing quick enough to keep up with changes needed by industry—basically waited for ICAO standards to change.
2. Many requirements did not have a “head of power” in the legislation.
(my bold)The new CASA CEO will need to design a much better structure than the current system. Of course, his/her direction will be driven by the ASRR recommendations.
Most governments are against imposing additional requirements on the public and individual participants but few achieve such an outcome.
Over the last decade we have seen a change from outcome based requirements to prescriptive regulations that also shifts the burden of proof from government to industry.
Standards are confusing to say the least.
Increasing unnecessary paperwork is killing the basic foundations of aviation, general aviation.
Splitting the maintenance capability between AOC pax operations and others was and is a backward step.
Nothing is being proposed to reduce the regulatory burden on the non airline and airline sectors. Changes introduced since 1991 has seen private VH registered aviation continue to decrease.
The regulatory changes has seen many shift to non VH registered aircraft where there is less regulatory burden.
Same aircraft, two different standards applied.
Is the safety of aviation affected by the type of person that wants to become a pilot, engineer, etc. or is it affected by the skills of these people.
New Zealand has a “fit & proper” person criteria that an aviation participant must meet prior to obtaining a government issued licence, certificate or approval. Why? Because under the NZ Aviation Act, the CAA(NZ) is also responsible for security matters.
So what is the best structure for GA?
Pilot licensing should be no different to the principles used in North America where there is a thriving non type certificated aircraft industry.
The legislation should be minimal and requiring CASA to promulgate minimum safety standards that this sector would need to comply with. This sector is all about individual standards not organisations.
Getting the structure right is important.
“The regulator may not have the skills or knowledge necessary to design and implement an alternative policy instrument. For example, in some technical areas regulators and policy makers may be influenced by the desire to specify highly technical standards, where they have very specific knowledge.”
Before regulatory change happened in aviation post the Authority’s HO move to Melbourne, Australia had the right structure but requirements had two flaws.
1. Orders were not changing quick enough to keep up with changes needed by industry—basically waited for ICAO standards to change.
2. Many requirements did not have a “head of power” in the legislation.
(my bold)The new CASA CEO will need to design a much better structure than the current system. Of course, his/her direction will be driven by the ASRR recommendations.
"...During the Aero Friedrichshafen event (April 9th-12th) EASA made an announcement which came as a surprise to many people – even to those members of the GA Safety Standards Consultation Committee Sub Group. No one – not even NAAs had any prior knowledge of the EASA announcement.
Simpler, lighter, and better rules for General Aviation.
The Agency is committed to changing the way it regulates GA and this new approach comes from the Executive Director (Patrick Ky).
The presenters said transposing CAT (Commercial Air Transport) rules for GA was wrong and the aim now is to make the rules risk based and proportionate which is in line with the requirements established in the GA road map.
Furthermore, EASA wishes to simplify the operations and administration procedures.
Although it was originally decided not to have a specific GA department, EASA is now in the planning for a GA department, the aim of which is to establish a focal point inside EASA for GA, which has accountability for the future health of GA across Europe.
The time frame for this work is 2014 to 2017. So why did we follow EASA?..."
Oh and MM while vetting the WLR draft report and potential DAS CVs, here is an IOS QON, that I know will be dear to your heart...
Q/ Were we the first ICAO signatory State to submit notified differences to, the freshly minted, Annex 19 i.e. SSP?? (reference pg 96-97 here)
Much more to follow...
Hot off the press...
Panel to submit air safety report
- by: STEVE CREEDY
- From: The Australian
- May 23, 2014 12:00AM
A MUCH anticipated federal government report into aviation safety is expected to be with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss next week.
Panel chairman David Forsyth and fellow members Roger Whitefield and Don Spruston have been working on the review since last year to look at how well Australia’s regulatory system is positioned globally, and have attracted a huge response from the industry.
“We’re still doing the final editing and we’ve just got a couple of issues where we’re double-checking some information, but basically we’re ready to go,’’ Mr Forsyth told The Australian yesterday.
He said the committee had been briefing Mr Truss and the department over the past six months so both were aware of the general thrust.
Mr Forsyth said the committee was happy it had covered the main issues according to the terms of reference and believed it had captured the important issues expressed by industry.
“We think we’ve made recommendations that will help to fix those issues,’’ he said.
“Of course, the hard job is for whoever the person is that takes on the role of (CASA director of aviation safety) — it depends on who that is, and how they go.
“But hopefully we’ve given them a bit of a blueprint so they can fix the major issues that have come up.’’
CASA and regulatory reform topped the list of industry concerns in almost 270 submissions and up to 20 supplementary papers.
Mr Forsyth said the “major irritant of the regulatory reform program’’ was not all down to CASA and there were also problems in areas such as the way Australia drafts laws.
The committee chairman reiterated his early comments that there was no silver bullet for regulatory reform but said the study had recommended the path it saw as the best.
“Each of the options has pluses and minuses, and we think the one we’ve recommended is on balance is the best way forward,’’ he said.
Last edited by Sarcs; 22nd May 2014 at 15:01.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like Phelan is back from leave – Pro Aviation – update.
I'm not holding my breath and I'm going to make a prediction....
Based on Ten years studies of psychopathic narcissism in management, I believe that you will get the shock of your life when this review is released and you hear the Governments response.
Yes folks, the situation will only get worse. you are about to receive an even bigger dose of the current corruption and regulatory muck. CASA powers will be increased and it will continue its current behaviour totally unchanged. It will then attempt to get revenge on its detractors if they can be identified, probably by enforcing a process of micro management and further prescriptive regulation.
To put that another way, CASA will have argued and it will be accepted that the reason for industry despair is that CASA hasn't got enough resources. The answer therefore is to give CASA more, more staff, more powers, more lawyering, more layers of management, more Boards and more power to tax you for it.
Truss will be fobbed off by the making of cosmetic changes (greeted by CASA with the magic words "This changes everything!") but the iron ring will remain and be given more and deeper powers to regulate you out of existence.
To put that yet another way, Truss is no Frodo Baggins. He will not destroy the ring of power by throwing it into the crater of Mt. Doom.
Based on Ten years studies of psychopathic narcissism in management, I believe that you will get the shock of your life when this review is released and you hear the Governments response.
Yes folks, the situation will only get worse. you are about to receive an even bigger dose of the current corruption and regulatory muck. CASA powers will be increased and it will continue its current behaviour totally unchanged. It will then attempt to get revenge on its detractors if they can be identified, probably by enforcing a process of micro management and further prescriptive regulation.
To put that another way, CASA will have argued and it will be accepted that the reason for industry despair is that CASA hasn't got enough resources. The answer therefore is to give CASA more, more staff, more powers, more lawyering, more layers of management, more Boards and more power to tax you for it.
Truss will be fobbed off by the making of cosmetic changes (greeted by CASA with the magic words "This changes everything!") but the iron ring will remain and be given more and deeper powers to regulate you out of existence.
To put that yet another way, Truss is no Frodo Baggins. He will not destroy the ring of power by throwing it into the crater of Mt. Doom.