Peace for our regulatory reform time! Again!
Thread Starter
Peace for our regulatory reform time! Again!
From CASA's Corporate Plan 2017 - 2018 with my bolding:
Note that "following" seems to mean following 2017 - 2018.
So the regulatory reform program will be completed by the end of 2021.
Even if that were true - it's actually male bovine excrement - just pause to ponder what an expensive hoax this continues to be. Another 20 million or so per year for at least another 4 years.
CASA can't complete the regulatory reform program. Even if it could, all of the hardest bits have been left until last, and some of the stuff that has been done is itself in need of reform. Ponder the mayhem wreaked by Part 61, which itself continues to be subject to review.
Applying the same unqualified people to the same flawed process will produce more of the same: Not much, and what is produced creates more mess.
By the end of 2021 Mr Carmody and MrC47 will be long-retired. I'd speculate on some sinecures - sorry key positions - in the Western Sydney Airports Corporation may beckon people of their talent. Imagine how many leaches are going to get bloated on that project.
It will be interesting to see in whose ear Mr Aleck will be whispering in 2021.
Just two quotes from previous works of fiction.
From Mr McCormick's "Aviation Safety Yearbook 2013" with my bolding:
Wow! So all of the rules were completed at the end of 2014 - two and half years ago? Can't wait for those masterpieces to be implemented by the end of 2021.
Bruce Byron's confidence-inspiring evidence to a Senate Committee in February 2005 - over a fcuking decade ago:
I suppose if the end of 2021 counts as "not long after 2006", Mr Byron's hopes will be realised.
In 2017-18 we will:
* develop and commence implementation of the final tranche of regulatory reform
* develop safety performance indicators
* ensure all internal process manuals are current
* review our RPAS safety regulatory strategy to inform future regulation of RPAS in consultation with the Government, industry and the community
* continue the implementation of the Government's response to the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review
Over the following three years we will:
* complete the regulatory reform program.
* develop and commence implementation of the final tranche of regulatory reform
* develop safety performance indicators
* ensure all internal process manuals are current
* review our RPAS safety regulatory strategy to inform future regulation of RPAS in consultation with the Government, industry and the community
* continue the implementation of the Government's response to the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review
Over the following three years we will:
* complete the regulatory reform program.
So the regulatory reform program will be completed by the end of 2021.
Even if that were true - it's actually male bovine excrement - just pause to ponder what an expensive hoax this continues to be. Another 20 million or so per year for at least another 4 years.
CASA can't complete the regulatory reform program. Even if it could, all of the hardest bits have been left until last, and some of the stuff that has been done is itself in need of reform. Ponder the mayhem wreaked by Part 61, which itself continues to be subject to review.
Applying the same unqualified people to the same flawed process will produce more of the same: Not much, and what is produced creates more mess.
By the end of 2021 Mr Carmody and MrC47 will be long-retired. I'd speculate on some sinecures - sorry key positions - in the Western Sydney Airports Corporation may beckon people of their talent. Imagine how many leaches are going to get bloated on that project.
It will be interesting to see in whose ear Mr Aleck will be whispering in 2021.
Just two quotes from previous works of fiction.
From Mr McCormick's "Aviation Safety Yearbook 2013" with my bolding:
Principal regulatory packages relating to the maintenance of aircraft involved in regular public transport operations, fatigue risk management for flight crew and flight crew licensing have been finalised, and our current schedule will see the remaining rules completed by the end of next year.
Bruce Byron's confidence-inspiring evidence to a Senate Committee in February 2005 - over a fcuking decade ago:
We have an action item to develop a plan to forward to the the minister about when we plan to have them to the minister, and I assume that plan would be done in the next couple of months. I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
And the "final outcome" will continue to completely hobble all levels of aviation in Australia, viz-a-vie the rest of the aviation literate world.
It is really sad how uncompetitive Australia has become in almost every segment, not just GA, and the major reason for the problem is CASA regulation, in $$ and restrictions imposed by those complex, convoluted and contradictory regulation.
Maybe is is just a cunning Canberra plot to boost the NZ aviation sector --- call it indirect foreign aid to NZ. Whatever, they are certainly making good use of the situation "across the pond".
But, of course, Safe Skies are empty skies, and sadly the rising tide of CASA regulation is now starting to drown Sports Aviation.
Tootle pip!!
It is really sad how uncompetitive Australia has become in almost every segment, not just GA, and the major reason for the problem is CASA regulation, in $$ and restrictions imposed by those complex, convoluted and contradictory regulation.
Maybe is is just a cunning Canberra plot to boost the NZ aviation sector --- call it indirect foreign aid to NZ. Whatever, they are certainly making good use of the situation "across the pond".
But, of course, Safe Skies are empty skies, and sadly the rising tide of CASA regulation is now starting to drown Sports Aviation.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not confined to a "CASA problem" or an aviation issue, it is across many sectors of the economy. It is a cultural problem which for various sociological reasons relating to history, design or accident, infects this country...
For example a relative of mine works in the regulatory space for animal medicines in NZ. They were offered a job with the Australian Government in the same area, but turned down the better salary due to the known problems they had....outdated regulations, an inability to change, overly beauracratic, pedantic and punitive. And just like aviation, NZ had updated their own regulations recently...
This is a country where a high speed train will cost ten times as much and take ten times as long to complete as the same length line in China. Or as someone a lot smarter then me said, a lucky country run by idiots.
For example a relative of mine works in the regulatory space for animal medicines in NZ. They were offered a job with the Australian Government in the same area, but turned down the better salary due to the known problems they had....outdated regulations, an inability to change, overly beauracratic, pedantic and punitive. And just like aviation, NZ had updated their own regulations recently...
This is a country where a high speed train will cost ten times as much and take ten times as long to complete as the same length line in China. Or as someone a lot smarter then me said, a lucky country run by idiots.
Thread Starter
The irony of Donald Horne's phrase continues to be lost on many. The whole sentence containing the eponymous phrase is:
Australia is a lucky country, run by second-rate people who share its luck.
leaf:
Couldn't agree more! I am just back from a month in Europe. Australians, particularly australian bureaucrats, have absolutely no idea of how irrelevant they are to the rest of the world, how stupid are their concerns and how destructive their regulations are to the Australian economy.
case in point; the entire CASA system and its practices, penalty rates in a regulated labor force, the entire "australian standards" boondoggle that drives up prices, etc., etc. new businesses cannot be started and existing ones cannot grow.
we need to take an axe to regulation across the country.
This is not confined to a "CASA problem" or an aviation issue, it is across many sectors of the economy. It is a cultural problem which for various sociological reasons relating to history, design or accident, infects this country
case in point; the entire CASA system and its practices, penalty rates in a regulated labor force, the entire "australian standards" boondoggle that drives up prices, etc., etc. new businesses cannot be started and existing ones cannot grow.
we need to take an axe to regulation across the country.
Hey Sunfish,
I thought we did that with a red tape ombudsman or what ever you want to call it. The only thing that I noticed to happen was that car rego stickers were no longer needed.
I thought we did that with a red tape ombudsman or what ever you want to call it. The only thing that I noticed to happen was that car rego stickers were no longer needed.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The only thing that I noticed to happen was that car rego stickers were no longer needed."
Was sticker-less cars introduced as an efficiency, or as a money making exercise?
Statistics show that since its introduction detection rates of un-registered vehicles has more than doubled. Revenue from fines imposed have almost tripled.
Statistics also show that the vast majority of the increased fines were issued to over sixty year olds, who maybe, because they are less Tech savvy than the younger brigade, relied on the stickers to remind them to renew their registration.
Cause and effect.
Was sticker-less cars introduced as an efficiency, or as a money making exercise?
Statistics show that since its introduction detection rates of un-registered vehicles has more than doubled. Revenue from fines imposed have almost tripled.
Statistics also show that the vast majority of the increased fines were issued to over sixty year olds, who maybe, because they are less Tech savvy than the younger brigade, relied on the stickers to remind them to renew their registration.
Cause and effect.
What an amazing surprise (if you were born yesterday or are a goldfish).
Fatigue rules have been deferred again (yet again) (yet again, again) (yet again, again, again) (yet again, again, again, again):
It's all about safety, of course. CASA would never take political interests into account.
I can just imagine Mr Carmody's response when they laid the latest CAO 48 turd (rolled in glitter of course) on his desk. The words "independent review" would have sprung from his lips quicker than the first item on a pilot's memorised emergency checklist.
Fatigue rules have been deferred again (yet again) (yet again, again) (yet again, again, again) (yet again, again, again, again):
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has once again deferred the introduction of new fatigue risk management rules by a further six months, announcing that their implementation will be informed by a new independent review.
The aviation safety regulator says that a team of specialists brought together by professional consultancy services company Dédale Asia Pacific will report back to the CASA board in early 2018 after it benchmarks the new Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 48.1 fatigue risk management rules against those of other leading aviation nations and regulators, including the US, Europe, the UK, Canada and New Zealand.
“This is a group of well qualified people with expertise in the right areas who will look at key fatigue issues and provide independent advice to CASA,” CASA board chair Jeff Boyd said in a statement on Monday.
“The review team will examine feedback previously provided to CASA and will establish a mechanism to engage extensively with industry and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that all views are considered. CASA will ensure that any proposed changes flowing from the review will be subject to appropriate consultation.”
With the review process now in place CASA says it has delayed its deadline for the introduction of CAO 48.1 to October 31 2018, with air operators having to submit their draft operations manual changes or an application for a fatigue risk management system to CASA by April 30 2018.
“The outcomes of the review will provide CASA with an informed basis for finalising the reform of the fatigue rules for air operators and pilots,” the CASA statement reads.
“The specialists have experience and expertise in studying the effects of fatigue on operational performance in a range of safety critical industries, as well as developing and evaluating fatigue models.”
The new CAO 48.1 rules have been welcomed by some aviation groups and condemned by others.
When their introduction was previously delayed, in October 2016, AusALPA, the Australian Airline Pilots Association, said its members were “very concerned” and described fatigue as a “clear safety issue” given how often it had been cited as a contributing factor in recent aviation accidents and incidents.
But the Australian Aviation Associations’ Forum (TAAAF), which comprises peak representative bodies in the local industry, has previously called on CASA to abolish CAO 48.1, arguing that “industry rejects the limited science it is based on, the ignoring of decades of safe operations, the massive costs it will impose and the complexity that will inevitably lead to non-compliance”.
The aviation safety regulator says that a team of specialists brought together by professional consultancy services company Dédale Asia Pacific will report back to the CASA board in early 2018 after it benchmarks the new Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 48.1 fatigue risk management rules against those of other leading aviation nations and regulators, including the US, Europe, the UK, Canada and New Zealand.
“This is a group of well qualified people with expertise in the right areas who will look at key fatigue issues and provide independent advice to CASA,” CASA board chair Jeff Boyd said in a statement on Monday.
“The review team will examine feedback previously provided to CASA and will establish a mechanism to engage extensively with industry and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that all views are considered. CASA will ensure that any proposed changes flowing from the review will be subject to appropriate consultation.”
With the review process now in place CASA says it has delayed its deadline for the introduction of CAO 48.1 to October 31 2018, with air operators having to submit their draft operations manual changes or an application for a fatigue risk management system to CASA by April 30 2018.
“The outcomes of the review will provide CASA with an informed basis for finalising the reform of the fatigue rules for air operators and pilots,” the CASA statement reads.
“The specialists have experience and expertise in studying the effects of fatigue on operational performance in a range of safety critical industries, as well as developing and evaluating fatigue models.”
The new CAO 48.1 rules have been welcomed by some aviation groups and condemned by others.
When their introduction was previously delayed, in October 2016, AusALPA, the Australian Airline Pilots Association, said its members were “very concerned” and described fatigue as a “clear safety issue” given how often it had been cited as a contributing factor in recent aviation accidents and incidents.
But the Australian Aviation Associations’ Forum (TAAAF), which comprises peak representative bodies in the local industry, has previously called on CASA to abolish CAO 48.1, arguing that “industry rejects the limited science it is based on, the ignoring of decades of safe operations, the massive costs it will impose and the complexity that will inevitably lead to non-compliance”.
I can just imagine Mr Carmody's response when they laid the latest CAO 48 turd (rolled in glitter of course) on his desk. The words "independent review" would have sprung from his lips quicker than the first item on a pilot's memorised emergency checklist.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lead,
I am still trying to fathom what CAO 48.1 is trying to fix.
The old 48 seemed to work rather well, for GA anyway, include the Standard industry exemptions to it rather than the two yearly two grand fee to CAsA, would have been an improvement, everyone seemed to understand it okay and it was relatively easy to concoct a flow chart to quickly check if you were "Compliant".
The new 48 is a nightmare, especially when you have to move from one schedule to another. I have heard some PHD IT students tried to engineer an App. for the new 48 allowing pilots to quickly check their "compliance" but gave up after a couple of months, they simply couldn't make it work.
To be frank I get far more fatigued under the new 48 than I ever did under the old.
Fatigue has always been a issue since time immemorial. There are just so many disparities in its affect on different people and a vast number of factors that contribute to it that make it impossible to eliminate it entirely.
The new 48 definitely contributes to fatigue. Just trying to nut out if I'm legal, or not, wears me out.
I am still trying to fathom what CAO 48.1 is trying to fix.
The old 48 seemed to work rather well, for GA anyway, include the Standard industry exemptions to it rather than the two yearly two grand fee to CAsA, would have been an improvement, everyone seemed to understand it okay and it was relatively easy to concoct a flow chart to quickly check if you were "Compliant".
The new 48 is a nightmare, especially when you have to move from one schedule to another. I have heard some PHD IT students tried to engineer an App. for the new 48 allowing pilots to quickly check their "compliance" but gave up after a couple of months, they simply couldn't make it work.
To be frank I get far more fatigued under the new 48 than I ever did under the old.
Fatigue has always been a issue since time immemorial. There are just so many disparities in its affect on different people and a vast number of factors that contribute to it that make it impossible to eliminate it entirely.
The new 48 definitely contributes to fatigue. Just trying to nut out if I'm legal, or not, wears me out.
It's trying to "fix" a big safety risk: Big commercial players not being able to work their cockpit labour harder.
Get with the program, TB. It's all about safety.
Get with the program, TB. It's all about safety.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh,.... okay Lead, safety is it? well thats good isn't it, but do they have to make it so complicated?
I mean most people really want to comply, and really do their best, but under the new 48 its very easy to unintentionally get caught out, especially when pilots are not specifically trained to understand "Legalise" and Chaos theory.
Maybe CAsA could open a call centre staffed by lawyers where one could call in, provide the scenario and get a certificate of compliance whereby if you stick to their script, your relieved from strict liability. It would certainly relieve a lot of peoples anxiety and improve safety. Regulatory stress certainly contributes to fatigue.
I mean most people really want to comply, and really do their best, but under the new 48 its very easy to unintentionally get caught out, especially when pilots are not specifically trained to understand "Legalise" and Chaos theory.
Maybe CAsA could open a call centre staffed by lawyers where one could call in, provide the scenario and get a certificate of compliance whereby if you stick to their script, your relieved from strict liability. It would certainly relieve a lot of peoples anxiety and improve safety. Regulatory stress certainly contributes to fatigue.
Wash your mouth out, TB. This is: "safety through simplicity". It's the whole point of the regulatory reform program.
Maybe CAsA could open a call centre staffed by lawyers where one could call in, provide the scenario and get a certificate of compliance whereby if you stick to their script, your relieved from strict liability.
Moderator
Next month marks the 29th Anniversary of the commencement of the 1988 Regulatory Reform process (which took Canada and New Zealand five years to complete).
Let us all rejoice and celebrate progress!!
Let us all rejoice and celebrate progress!!
CASA is nothing more than a club of Secret Men's Business comprised of self adulating public servants who foster personal empires and rip off the taxpayer while pretending to promote and enhance aviation safety. Nothing will ever change, unless someone directs CASA to employ people who actually know something about aviation, and can make a genuine and practical difference to the whole safety debate.
Folks,
In fact, the "rewriting" of CAO 48 has been going on for much longer than most of you realise.
How do I know this? Because I was the AFAP/OSB (Overseas Branch -- aka Qantas pilots - before AIPA) on the AFAP sub-committee discussing the very touchy subject (the buzzword "consultation" was a later development) with DCA in 1968. I seem to recall Joe Waxman was the "domestic" rep, GA didn't count, not even on the attendance list.
We did achieve one lasting change --- the expression B707 was amended to "turbojet" as other jets came on the Australian register. Other than that, nada!!
That's 49 years --- maybe next year we could organise a 50 year major celebration --- a celebration of Australian bureaucratic procrastination without peer. There is no doubt that we are world champion "regulators", our supremacy at "regulation" is internationally acknowledged and unchallenged.
Come to think of it, why would any other country want the title?
Rereading Donald Horn's "The Luck Country" should be on school reading lists --- but in this day and age it would probably be banned as violating "safe space", "fairness and equality" and "positive discrimination" policies.
Tootle pip!!
PS: I once went to a DCA organised airshow at YSBK, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the publication of the first Air Navigation Order. Only in Australia.
Most countries celebrate victorious battles ( The Battled of Britain, D-Day air shows in the UK, Battle of the Coral Sea in US as examples) but we glorify and salute the "First Air Navigation Order".
In fact, the "rewriting" of CAO 48 has been going on for much longer than most of you realise.
How do I know this? Because I was the AFAP/OSB (Overseas Branch -- aka Qantas pilots - before AIPA) on the AFAP sub-committee discussing the very touchy subject (the buzzword "consultation" was a later development) with DCA in 1968. I seem to recall Joe Waxman was the "domestic" rep, GA didn't count, not even on the attendance list.
We did achieve one lasting change --- the expression B707 was amended to "turbojet" as other jets came on the Australian register. Other than that, nada!!
That's 49 years --- maybe next year we could organise a 50 year major celebration --- a celebration of Australian bureaucratic procrastination without peer. There is no doubt that we are world champion "regulators", our supremacy at "regulation" is internationally acknowledged and unchallenged.
Come to think of it, why would any other country want the title?
Rereading Donald Horn's "The Luck Country" should be on school reading lists --- but in this day and age it would probably be banned as violating "safe space", "fairness and equality" and "positive discrimination" policies.
Tootle pip!!
PS: I once went to a DCA organised airshow at YSBK, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the publication of the first Air Navigation Order. Only in Australia.
Most countries celebrate victorious battles ( The Battled of Britain, D-Day air shows in the UK, Battle of the Coral Sea in US as examples) but we glorify and salute the "First Air Navigation Order".
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe for a country that started out as a penal colony orders and regulations have some sort of cultural significance...
Seems to go against the much treasured stereotype of the 'Aussie Larrikin' and the carefree Aussie lifestyle though.
Seems to go against the much treasured stereotype of the 'Aussie Larrikin' and the carefree Aussie lifestyle though.