Does CASA Have Serious Problems?
Thread Starter
Does CASA Have Serious Problems?
With the greatest respect to all of you, judging from posts to this website I wonder if CASA has some pretty serious administrative problems.
At one end of the Continent there is a skydiving operator who apparently deserves to be closed, but CASA cannot succeed (yet) in doing so.
At the other end (FNQ) CASA is apparently trying to close an operator who does not deserve to be closed.
Personally the very limited dealings I've had with CASA have been absolutely great - friendly, helpful and efficient.
What is going on?
At one end of the Continent there is a skydiving operator who apparently deserves to be closed, but CASA cannot succeed (yet) in doing so.
At the other end (FNQ) CASA is apparently trying to close an operator who does not deserve to be closed.
Personally the very limited dealings I've had with CASA have been absolutely great - friendly, helpful and efficient.
What is going on?
Last edited by Sunfish; 27th Dec 2004 at 20:40.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Pacific Ocean
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish.
I am guessing you are not an operator or a/c owner then.
Sure, The nice old lady at the front counter has always been polite to me when i need to change my address.
Where have you been the last 10 years?
JW
I am guessing you are not an operator or a/c owner then.
Sure, The nice old lady at the front counter has always been polite to me when i need to change my address.
Where have you been the last 10 years?
JW
Thread Starter
Nope, not an owner or operator, just a newbie PPL holder who has been working his @ss of for the last ten years in order to have the time and money for a little flying.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA Does have serious issues, being an aircraft owner, and ex Qf engineer, i have had me fair shair of casa brick walls! no real reason, just that they can.
still waiting on my medical! 105 days! now, and since 90 have past, i am grounded in all VH rego aircraft, so i am getting a lot of RAA time!
as far as im concerned CASA has no relevence , only hinderance, to the general aviation community, and CASA should be scaled down to look after Airline operations only.
still waiting on my medical! 105 days! now, and since 90 have past, i am grounded in all VH rego aircraft, so i am getting a lot of RAA time!
as far as im concerned CASA has no relevence , only hinderance, to the general aviation community, and CASA should be scaled down to look after Airline operations only.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ultralights,
It seems funny that the area of aviation you appear to be involved in has the worst safety record, and CASA's mission statement is to improve aviation safety through education etc.
It would therefore seem to be advantages to work together?
It seems funny that the area of aviation you appear to be involved in has the worst safety record, and CASA's mission statement is to improve aviation safety through education etc.
It would therefore seem to be advantages to work together?
Grandpa Aerotart
There are now and always have been very good people working for CASA....unfortunately the critical mass of unemployable, dishonest, incompetents was passed many years ago and there effect is the one most often felt by the industry.
My personal experience of CASA over the years has been more bad than good by a considerable margin.
Ask anyone who is, or has ever been, a Chief Pilot what they think of CASA over a few beers...sit back and be stunned by the stories of incompetence, dishonesty and sheer bastardry.
A Chief Pilot is supposed to be CASA's representative within the company...this supposes a level of trust and support for the CP against sometimes aggressive management.
The last time I was a CP, and I'll never accept that post again, my tenure ended after collusion between an ex mil CASA FOI and ex Mil management because I wouldn't lower my standards and do things like "Tell your pilots they can't say no to flying on their day off"...even when the only instance of that ever happening was an individual who was having his only rostered day off in 7 after the other 6 being on call 24 hrs a day. Or insisting that the jet we operated stay grounded until an undercarriage problem was fixed against constant pressure from 'management'.
After 6 months of digging my heels in over a raft of issues I was sacked and CASA immediately approved the most junior and inexperienced Captain in the company (<3000TT) over a 16000hr ex airline Fleet Captain and jet C&Ter as the new CP...even when they knew, as one CASA FOI admitted to me, that he was just a yes man for the management. Even when they were shown where to look to see evidence of his logbook command hrs being a work of fiction...even when it was proved that he had taken off 9000lbs over RTOW at night in high terrain...and on another occasion caused another jet to take evasive manouvres to avoid collision becase he wanted to argue with ATC rather than follow his clearance....when they were given evidence that he had been involved with the operation of another aircraft, on behalf of the company and after I left, completely illegally with a stretcher tied across the seats blocking the only emergency exit...etc etc. My efforts to sack him being blocked by his manager mate.
6 months of being backstabbed by this young pilot who was winding up a similarly incompetent, dishonest manager and pointing him at me (and the other 16000hr Captain).. was then approved as CASA's 'representative' within the company. The company imploded a year later and everyone was sacked, including the 'manager', by the parent multinational.
That individual is probably reading this and knows I am talking about him....think you won? Have you worked since in a corporate jet? Wonder why no-one will employ you in Oz? There's a reason for that you know....not that I'd know what that might be
Still CASA will employ you...you're probably already there although I don't know that for a fact.
He is the type that gets into CASA as a FOI on a far too regular basis...and why CASA is as it is.
My personal experience of CASA over the years has been more bad than good by a considerable margin.
Ask anyone who is, or has ever been, a Chief Pilot what they think of CASA over a few beers...sit back and be stunned by the stories of incompetence, dishonesty and sheer bastardry.
A Chief Pilot is supposed to be CASA's representative within the company...this supposes a level of trust and support for the CP against sometimes aggressive management.
The last time I was a CP, and I'll never accept that post again, my tenure ended after collusion between an ex mil CASA FOI and ex Mil management because I wouldn't lower my standards and do things like "Tell your pilots they can't say no to flying on their day off"...even when the only instance of that ever happening was an individual who was having his only rostered day off in 7 after the other 6 being on call 24 hrs a day. Or insisting that the jet we operated stay grounded until an undercarriage problem was fixed against constant pressure from 'management'.
After 6 months of digging my heels in over a raft of issues I was sacked and CASA immediately approved the most junior and inexperienced Captain in the company (<3000TT) over a 16000hr ex airline Fleet Captain and jet C&Ter as the new CP...even when they knew, as one CASA FOI admitted to me, that he was just a yes man for the management. Even when they were shown where to look to see evidence of his logbook command hrs being a work of fiction...even when it was proved that he had taken off 9000lbs over RTOW at night in high terrain...and on another occasion caused another jet to take evasive manouvres to avoid collision becase he wanted to argue with ATC rather than follow his clearance....when they were given evidence that he had been involved with the operation of another aircraft, on behalf of the company and after I left, completely illegally with a stretcher tied across the seats blocking the only emergency exit...etc etc. My efforts to sack him being blocked by his manager mate.
6 months of being backstabbed by this young pilot who was winding up a similarly incompetent, dishonest manager and pointing him at me (and the other 16000hr Captain).. was then approved as CASA's 'representative' within the company. The company imploded a year later and everyone was sacked, including the 'manager', by the parent multinational.
That individual is probably reading this and knows I am talking about him....think you won? Have you worked since in a corporate jet? Wonder why no-one will employ you in Oz? There's a reason for that you know....not that I'd know what that might be
Still CASA will employ you...you're probably already there although I don't know that for a fact.
He is the type that gets into CASA as a FOI on a far too regular basis...and why CASA is as it is.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 29th Dec 2004 at 06:14.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems funny that the area of aviation you appear to be involved in has the worst safety record,
Ultralight crashes only end up in the papers more often because they sell more papers than if just a light plane crashed.
not only does the RAA fleet have an equal safety record to GA, but it runs at less than 25% of the cost! which means more money for newer more modern aircraft, and more money for maintainence!!
Check Attitude
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish
A Royal Commission is the only solution,
Only in that environment can the factual and meticulously documented evidence
of numerous operators and pilots be tabled, evaluated, cross examined and validated.
Corroborating this would be the damning evidence as contained in the "Phelan Papers".
Then the witness statements, given truthfully and free of duress.
However, a Royal Commission cannot be allowed to happen, and won't be allowed to happen.
The repercussions are too frightening.
The industry can only hope that BB alternatively initiates a proper investigation of the FNQAO,
and when finished there, moves on to investigate other offices with a questionable track record.
BB, after all is the one who espouses Natural Justice, Fair and Impartial treatment, model litigators.
He can't just keep saying these things and not be seen demonstrating them.
refer to the other threads on CASA within D&G General Aviation.
A Royal Commission is the only solution,
Only in that environment can the factual and meticulously documented evidence
of numerous operators and pilots be tabled, evaluated, cross examined and validated.
Corroborating this would be the damning evidence as contained in the "Phelan Papers".
Then the witness statements, given truthfully and free of duress.
However, a Royal Commission cannot be allowed to happen, and won't be allowed to happen.
The repercussions are too frightening.
The industry can only hope that BB alternatively initiates a proper investigation of the FNQAO,
and when finished there, moves on to investigate other offices with a questionable track record.
BB, after all is the one who espouses Natural Justice, Fair and Impartial treatment, model litigators.
He can't just keep saying these things and not be seen demonstrating them.
refer to the other threads on CASA within D&G General Aviation.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Orbit
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I once needed a answer from CASA on an important airworthiness issue.................
After thinking about it for a while, I decided to talk to my next door neighbours 4 year old son to get his opinion first.
After talking to CASA, I was very glad that I had talked to the young lad next door as I at least had a sensible answer by the end of the day.
Wish a tidal wave hit every CASA building sent the silly peeps who work there out to sea.
.........yes, that would be nice I think........
After thinking about it for a while, I decided to talk to my next door neighbours 4 year old son to get his opinion first.
After talking to CASA, I was very glad that I had talked to the young lad next door as I at least had a sensible answer by the end of the day.
Wish a tidal wave hit every CASA building sent the silly peeps who work there out to sea.
.........yes, that would be nice I think........
Hmmmmm, it appears to be getting worse too. Particular individuals in certain offices appear to have some sort of agendas to fill.
What ever happened to the days of assisting companies with things and offering pointers on areas they would like to see improved rather than 'enforcing compliance' as one FOI said?
CASA is all to quick to pull out the big bad book of RCA's and hand you a wad of meaningless notices that don't effect safety.
I don't think I've seen an FOI pop into the office for a friendly chin wag and a coffee for years. It's all about compliance nowadays.
I really hope this thread gets a response from someone in the ivory tower.
/rant
What ever happened to the days of assisting companies with things and offering pointers on areas they would like to see improved rather than 'enforcing compliance' as one FOI said?
CASA is all to quick to pull out the big bad book of RCA's and hand you a wad of meaningless notices that don't effect safety.
I don't think I've seen an FOI pop into the office for a friendly chin wag and a coffee for years. It's all about compliance nowadays.
I really hope this thread gets a response from someone in the ivory tower.
/rant
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the gear,
unfortunately i don't prescribe to your view.
From my experience a fair majority of CASA staff are fantastic, unfortunately there are a few that fall very far short of reasonable.
The CASA folk i have dealt with that have come from the industry, i.e. experienced GA and Airline pilots, are absolute assets to both CASA and the industry.
The minority that are lamented within these topics are not experienced from within the industry.
The new AM seems like a nice honest bloke with a very hard job, good luck to him.
unfortunately i don't prescribe to your view.
From my experience a fair majority of CASA staff are fantastic, unfortunately there are a few that fall very far short of reasonable.
The CASA folk i have dealt with that have come from the industry, i.e. experienced GA and Airline pilots, are absolute assets to both CASA and the industry.
The minority that are lamented within these topics are not experienced from within the industry.
The new AM seems like a nice honest bloke with a very hard job, good luck to him.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 31st Dec 2004 at 00:14.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: FNQ
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CASA folk i have dealt with that have come from the industry, i.e. experienced GA and Airline pilots, are absolute assets to both CASA and the industry.
Handing out Show cause notices to some opperators while others pass inspections with flying colors, with obvious safety concerns highlighted.
The minority that are lamented within these topics are not experienced from within the industry.
Thats a big call mate, with all due respect do you know that for certain or is that speculation???
I did a 2 crew flight a while ago with a CASA FOI sitting behind us to get the company its RPT license. When we got back the FOI debriefed us on various things we could do differently and generally it was good constructive criticism. Then he asked for my license and medical. I had forgotten to sign my licence and yes I know I should have at I was in the wrong but the guy threatened to RCA me. Could not believe he was serious, rather then sliding it back across the desk and getting me to sign it he went the hard line? For the record he did not RCA me but why the threat over a signature???
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic,Australia
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
J0N0
Seems to me you put the FOI in a difficult position. While the error seems minor the safety theorists would say it reflects not only on you, but the CP and the whole company system. Consider a not impossible senario, approval is granted, accident leads to court action:
Barrister "So Mr FOI you approved the operation to carry this trusting member of the public (points to plaintiff in wheelchair) despite one of the pilots not having a valid licence"
Seems to me you put the FOI in a difficult position. While the error seems minor the safety theorists would say it reflects not only on you, but the CP and the whole company system. Consider a not impossible senario, approval is granted, accident leads to court action:
Barrister "So Mr FOI you approved the operation to carry this trusting member of the public (points to plaintiff in wheelchair) despite one of the pilots not having a valid licence"
Barrister "So Mr FOI you approved the operation to carry this trusting member of the public (points to plaintiff in wheelchair) despite one of the pilots not having a valid licence"
"You need to cover yourself" Dick only wanted us to adopt the U.S.A's airspace system, hurrumph, we appear to be adopting their litigation system as well
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are not RCA's issued for the breach of legislation ?, i.e CARs, CAA, then where is it a condition of holding a licence a requirement within the "Legislation" to sign the front page of the licence ?.
Anyone know if there is a definition for " Legislation" ?.
Or lets say 20.11 training, the legislation requires the CAO 20.11 training is conducted every twleve months, if you put it in your ops man to do every six months, if one of your pilots has been 9 or 10 months since last 20.11 check, he/she still meets the requirments of the "legislation", how can this be an RCA, no legislation has been breached.
Torres will best answer this one, what is a fixed terminal ?, ( refer CAR 206 ).
Anyone know if there is a definition for " Legislation" ?.
Or lets say 20.11 training, the legislation requires the CAO 20.11 training is conducted every twleve months, if you put it in your ops man to do every six months, if one of your pilots has been 9 or 10 months since last 20.11 check, he/she still meets the requirments of the "legislation", how can this be an RCA, no legislation has been breached.
Torres will best answer this one, what is a fixed terminal ?, ( refer CAR 206 ).
Lefty. Your Ops Manual is a document (or rather, a series of documents) that CASA signs-off on as your operating procedures that govern exactly how CASA will expect you will conduct business and operate your aircraft and oversee your aircrew. Part of your AOC requirements are that you operate solely within the envelope of your Ops Manual, as its very approval is the only guarantee that CASA has that your operation knows exactly how to operate legally, or at least in a manner that CASA approves of. If it is in your Manual that CASA has signed-off, then it is reasonable to expect CASA to expect you to comply with your own manual.
Unfortunately, that makes it another stick that can be used against you.
I cannot remember reading anywhere that it is a requirement to sign your licence upon reciept to make it any more valid either?
(edited to read more like what I was trying to say)
Regards,
OpsN.
Unfortunately, that makes it another stick that can be used against you.
I cannot remember reading anywhere that it is a requirement to sign your licence upon reciept to make it any more valid either?
(edited to read more like what I was trying to say)
Regards,
OpsN.
Last edited by OpsNormal; 1st Jan 2005 at 11:34.
Leftie. I was trying to avoid engaging in this thread as well..... 
Personally, I wish Woomera would combine all three CASA bitch threads into one thread...... 
There is no legal definition of the term "fixed terminals" within the present legislative framework. However, Creamie would point out that certain judges have ascribed a meaning to the term, based on fallacious advice from CASA Counsel, which I am sure he would now determine are precedents.
I suspect the term, which originated from the pre 1988 ANR's, refers to a designated, substantive passenger terminal, at a designated airport serviced under the previous two airline policy, which is/was the property of the Commonwealth and leased to the two designated airlines under that policy, Trans Australian Airlines and Ansett Airlines/Ansett-ANA.
If I am correct, then the terminal at, for example, Kubin and "terminals" at Mabuiag and Yorke (and I use the term "terminals" very loosely!) are not "fixed terminals". However, the passenger terminals at Sydney and Melbourne airports would have been "fixed terminals" under the old ANR's.
Similarly, "specified routes" were designated airline routes which were marked and specified on navigational charts, pre 1988. An operator, not being TAA or Ansett, could not conduct a commercial flight (whether ANR 203 exempt or charter) over those "specified routes" more than once in 28 days (later reduced to eight hours prior to, or four hours after the designated time of an approved airline service.)
You made a sweeping generalisation regarding ex military FOI's with which I do not agree. The abominable mess in the Torres Strait was created by FOI's drawn generally from commercial aviation and airlines, one at least being best described as an airline reject. The FOI from Canberra who finally sorted out the mess and was one of the few who displayed any form of common sense, was ex RAF and ex RAAF. Similarly, I know of other FOI's with both military and civil backgrounds who are excellent, and FOI's with both military and civil backgrounds that are worse than useless. I am aware of one ex RAAF Caribou driver (whose Caribou needed very extensive panel beating after one escapade in PNG) whose knowledge of the Act and CARs is abysmal, but who continues to be promoted well above his maximum level of incompetence!
If CASA was required to hold an AOC and perform to the same level of accountability expected of the aviation industry, their AOC would have been suspended or cancelled many years ago.
Personally, I wish Woomera would combine all three CASA bitch threads into one thread...... There is no legal definition of the term "fixed terminals" within the present legislative framework. However, Creamie would point out that certain judges have ascribed a meaning to the term, based on fallacious advice from CASA Counsel, which I am sure he would now determine are precedents.
I suspect the term, which originated from the pre 1988 ANR's, refers to a designated, substantive passenger terminal, at a designated airport serviced under the previous two airline policy, which is/was the property of the Commonwealth and leased to the two designated airlines under that policy, Trans Australian Airlines and Ansett Airlines/Ansett-ANA.
If I am correct, then the terminal at, for example, Kubin and "terminals" at Mabuiag and Yorke (and I use the term "terminals" very loosely!) are not "fixed terminals". However, the passenger terminals at Sydney and Melbourne airports would have been "fixed terminals" under the old ANR's.
Similarly, "specified routes" were designated airline routes which were marked and specified on navigational charts, pre 1988. An operator, not being TAA or Ansett, could not conduct a commercial flight (whether ANR 203 exempt or charter) over those "specified routes" more than once in 28 days (later reduced to eight hours prior to, or four hours after the designated time of an approved airline service.)
You made a sweeping generalisation regarding ex military FOI's with which I do not agree. The abominable mess in the Torres Strait was created by FOI's drawn generally from commercial aviation and airlines, one at least being best described as an airline reject. The FOI from Canberra who finally sorted out the mess and was one of the few who displayed any form of common sense, was ex RAF and ex RAAF. Similarly, I know of other FOI's with both military and civil backgrounds who are excellent, and FOI's with both military and civil backgrounds that are worse than useless. I am aware of one ex RAAF Caribou driver (whose Caribou needed very extensive panel beating after one escapade in PNG) whose knowledge of the Act and CARs is abysmal, but who continues to be promoted well above his maximum level of incompetence!
If CASA was required to hold an AOC and perform to the same level of accountability expected of the aviation industry, their AOC would have been suspended or cancelled many years ago.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ops,
I would agree, it is reasonable to expect, but, the CAO 20.11 example, still meets the legislative requirement, therefore is not a breach of legislation = does not meet the criteria for an RCA.
Thanks Torres
I would agree, it is reasonable to expect, but, the CAO 20.11 example, still meets the legislative requirement, therefore is not a breach of legislation = does not meet the criteria for an RCA.
Thanks Torres