CASA Appoints new Safety Director
But Sunny, you can count on the fingers of one hand the number of names in that organisation chart that are still part of the organisation. Almost all of the others have moved on for reasons of sanity, or have been moved on for reasons of political expediency.
I'd agree with you if most of the names in that organisation chart were still in the organisation, standing their ground and fighting to increase the size of their empires. But they aren't.
I'd agree with you if most of the names in that organisation chart were still in the organisation, standing their ground and fighting to increase the size of their empires. But they aren't.
Then who are filling those roles Balloon? One of the problems for large organisations is the potential to promote narcissists. If good people are "moving on" and their roles are picked up by narcissists, then CASA is doomed.
See here for the most recent organisation chart https://www.casa.gov.au/files/casaorgstructurepng
and here for info on the current executive group
https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/file...f?v=1476938214
At least pontificate on reality, not the past!
and here for info on the current executive group
https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/file...f?v=1476938214
At least pontificate on reality, not the past!
Vag277, I see you have fallen for the old "reorganisation = change" trick. It was predicted by myself and others after the release of the Forsyth review report that CASA would respond by reorganising.
My quick scan of the before and after org charts shows indicates that the number of functional entities in CASA has increased from about 14 to 24. I haven't done a comparison of staff numbers yet.
My quick scan of the before and after org charts shows indicates that the number of functional entities in CASA has increased from about 14 to 24. I haven't done a comparison of staff numbers yet.
Fifty Four managers I counted on that organisation chart that are your problem.
Even with the best will in the world, each one of them will have a thirty page justification at to why their job needs to exist, why their powers should be increased, why they are critical to success, what sections of the Aviation Act and enabling legislation makes their role necessary, yadda, yadda, yadda. Not one of these managers is in favour of changing the status quo as it affects them.
Even with the best will in the world, each one of them will have a thirty page justification at to why their job needs to exist, why their powers should be increased, why they are critical to success, what sections of the Aviation Act and enabling legislation makes their role necessary, yadda, yadda, yadda. Not one of these managers is in favour of changing the status quo as it affects them.
With respect, Sunny is on to the structure of the "iron ring", the custodians of the CASA Kultcha, the "true believers" that they, and only they, can "manage" air safety in Australia ---- bathed in the "mystique of air safety".
What you very accurately describe is “the other big problem”.
Quite some time ago, I had a very interesting few hours with a very senior (Labor) staffer discussing what was a clearly understood problem, those hours were spent discussing whether any reform was possible , without “blowing the place up” (probably not a description you would use in the present day and age). The conclusion was that what frightened his boss was how you handled the “day to day” of CASA while you rebuilt the whole place from the ground up.
John Anderson, as Minister, came to the same conclusion, that only wholesale change would work, but he got “blown up” instead, when his plans for radical change were blocked stone cold by PM&C.
It is pretty clear that neither side of politics has any real interest in taking on "air safety", short of a catastrophe of some kind that can be sheeted home to CASA.
The not so slow demise of Australian aviation is the result of the timidity of the industry and the politicians, to tackle a (let's be honest) obvious problem.
Tootle pip!!
You're confusing cause for effect. What you call the 'iron ring' is caused by - is the product of - an abdication of political responsibility for aviation regulation.
Your 'iron ring' didn't force successive ministers to abdicate all practical responsibility for aviation regulation to CASA. It was a deliberate choice of successive ministers. The 'iron ring' merely seized upon the opportunity presented by the stultifying mediocrities that have presumed the title "government" over the last couple of decades. Someone has to be the last bastion between the innocent public and aviation industry anarchy.
The "industry" being "timid" is not the problem. The problem is that most of the "industry" votes for the same side: The Laborials.
Your 'iron ring' didn't force successive ministers to abdicate all practical responsibility for aviation regulation to CASA. It was a deliberate choice of successive ministers. The 'iron ring' merely seized upon the opportunity presented by the stultifying mediocrities that have presumed the title "government" over the last couple of decades. Someone has to be the last bastion between the innocent public and aviation industry anarchy.
The "industry" being "timid" is not the problem. The problem is that most of the "industry" votes for the same side: The Laborials.
Do you two want to sort out whether PM&C can/cannot fix CASA?
Sunfish wrote:
Leadsled wrote:
Sunfish wrote:
The actual mechanics of a break up and restructure of CASA are easily managed by the Department of PM & C. That requires the creation of a small first class team tasked with rewriting the Act and adopting the FAA regulations as a template. Any tendency to develop a "unique Australian system" must be avoided or we will end up with another unworkable monstrosity.
John Anderson, as Minister, came to the same conclusion, that only wholesale change would work, but he got “blown up” instead, when his plans for radical change were blocked stone cold by PM&C
Lookleft, PM&C have the capability to fix the CASA mess, most probably by rewriting the Act, adopting an FAA template, terminating CASA and making people reapply for positions in two new organisations.
However as leadsled wrote, the Government first needs to authorise such a project - which they won't do unless forced by a catastrophic accident or serious well thought out pressure applied by GA industry (negative political advertising in marginal seats).
Note also that Qantas, Virgin, etc. don't care about CASA. The airlines have too much political pull and CASA hasn't had the technical capacity to regulate the major airlines since at least as long ago as my time - 1976.
I confirmed that with a big airline 'driver" a few months ago. CASA asks to see something about something e.g. iPads in cockpit, the airline just tells CASA technical BS that they don't understand and they go away again for another two years.
CASA is more at home prosecuting little fish like Gyrocopter and Jabiru pilots.
However as leadsled wrote, the Government first needs to authorise such a project - which they won't do unless forced by a catastrophic accident or serious well thought out pressure applied by GA industry (negative political advertising in marginal seats).
Note also that Qantas, Virgin, etc. don't care about CASA. The airlines have too much political pull and CASA hasn't had the technical capacity to regulate the major airlines since at least as long ago as my time - 1976.
I confirmed that with a big airline 'driver" a few months ago. CASA asks to see something about something e.g. iPads in cockpit, the airline just tells CASA technical BS that they don't understand and they go away again for another two years.
CASA is more at home prosecuting little fish like Gyrocopter and Jabiru pilots.
Have another look Sunfish. Leadsled stated that the minister did go ahead and try and restructure CASA but
which contradicts what you just said!
CASA still has the ability to ground Tiger and to deny the 737 on its AOC until they could prove to its satisfaction that it was ready. I'm talking present day not when Malcolm Fraser was PM.
his plans for radical change were blocked stone cold by PM&C.
CASA still has the ability to ground Tiger and to deny the 737 on its AOC until they could prove to its satisfaction that it was ready. I'm talking present day not when Malcolm Fraser was PM.
Lookleft, PM & C trumps the Minister every time. It would need a Cabinet decision to go after CASA, not just the Minister.
As for Tiger, well of course CASA can make Tiger wait for its AOC, but that is all it can do unless their is a major public failure it cannot ignore.
As for Tiger, well of course CASA can make Tiger wait for its AOC, but that is all it can do unless their is a major public failure it cannot ignore.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish circa 1940
My dear Winston!
You can't possibly appoint Lord Beaverbrook as Minister for Aircraft Production !!!! Young Sunfish (my fag at Winchester don't you know ) tells me Max isn't an RAF Pilot. He's a bally newspaper man. Even worse.....a Canadian!!! Gosh. What would he possibly know about aircraft?
Fast forward to 2017. Captain Sherm and the Shermettes all speak fluent German. Still......thanks young Sunfish
You can't possibly appoint Lord Beaverbrook as Minister for Aircraft Production !!!! Young Sunfish (my fag at Winchester don't you know ) tells me Max isn't an RAF Pilot. He's a bally newspaper man. Even worse.....a Canadian!!! Gosh. What would he possibly know about aircraft?
Fast forward to 2017. Captain Sherm and the Shermettes all speak fluent German. Still......thanks young Sunfish
Moderator
Some of us have been around aviation long enough to remember the forerunner of the "Iron Ring", which was the "Group Captain's Club" in DCA.
Same old boys club, same philosophy, same agenda, mostly newer Members!
Same old boys club, same philosophy, same agenda, mostly newer Members!
My dear Winston!
You can't possibly appoint Lord Beaverbrook as Minister for Aircraft Production !!!! Young Sunfish (my fag at Winchester don't you know ) tells me Max isn't an RAF Pilot. He's a bally newspaper man. Even worse.....a Canadian!!! Gosh. What would he possibly know about aircraft?
Fast forward to 2017. Captain Sherm and the Shermettes all speak fluent German. Still......thanks young Sunfish
You can't possibly appoint Lord Beaverbrook as Minister for Aircraft Production !!!! Young Sunfish (my fag at Winchester don't you know ) tells me Max isn't an RAF Pilot. He's a bally newspaper man. Even worse.....a Canadian!!! Gosh. What would he possibly know about aircraft?
Fast forward to 2017. Captain Sherm and the Shermettes all speak fluent German. Still......thanks young Sunfish
Moderator
My dear Winston!
Some of us have been around aviation long enough to remember
.. however, one might opine that Max's son might have fitted the second quote's necessaries ..
Some of us have been around aviation long enough to remember
.. however, one might opine that Max's son might have fitted the second quote's necessaries ..
Moderator
Beechjet
It is those Dick was referring to here:
You will need to ask around. 
It is those Dick was referring to here:
"That's the way the system works. They think: "We are powerful and we are totally unaccountable. "' DICK SMITH, August 1998.
Sherm, Lord Beaverbrook wasn't doing the much harder task of managing a program dunnunda, he only had to deal with the Germans.
A competent manager would have access to sufficient resources to give specialist advice if and when needed. Keeping pilots in cockpits seems a better use of talent.
Heck, next someone would say that Trump is not fit for the office of POTUS as he had bone spurs! Golly.
A competent manager would have access to sufficient resources to give specialist advice if and when needed. Keeping pilots in cockpits seems a better use of talent.
Heck, next someone would say that Trump is not fit for the office of POTUS as he had bone spurs! Golly.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ON TOP OF OLD SMOKEY
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled #45 -
What would be the chances of an effective quorum getting up, representative, gathered from across all sectors of the industry, empowered to investigate any and every relevant aspect of political and bureaucratic governance, primarily so as to explain and justify necessary reforms?
It is pretty clear that neither side of politics has any real interest in taking on "air safety", short of a catastrophe of some kind that can be sheeted home to CASA.
The not so slow demise of Australian aviation is the result of the timidity of the industry and the politicians, to tackle a (let's be honest) obvious problem.
The not so slow demise of Australian aviation is the result of the timidity of the industry and the politicians, to tackle a (let's be honest) obvious problem.