CASA's revised GAAP procedures.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The article states:
I haven't seen one GA pilot applaude the changes in this forum.
So who sits on the Industry Consultative Committe? Clearly no one from Airservices Australia, nor any pilots or operators affected by the changes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is hardly industry consultative.
The moves are widely applauded by general aviation pilots and operators but are expected to be opposed by some interest groups. AOPA President Phillip Reiss however describes the moves as “a breath of fresh air.”
At an Industry Consultative Committee meeting on July 29 he made no apologies for the rapid adoption of the measures, saying he had two reports indicating unacceptable safety situations and that he had absolutely no choice but to take immediate positive action.
The "rapid adoption" (almost a panic response) to me always smelt a bit of ass covering, even more so when the new Director says he had "two reports indicating unacceptable safety situations and that he had absolutely no choice but to take immediate positive action". Ass covering has unfortunately become rampant in the Canberra bureaucracy, not just in CASA.
The fundamental problem with these knee-jerk reactions is that they fail to take into account the bigger picture and may well make things worse instead of better, as potentially in this case.
Together with his other knee-jerk reaction re RA-Aus and CTA, methinks we might have a difficult time ahead of all of us with this Director. Last thing we need is a panic merchant at the helm.
BTW - to avoid flaming, I actually don't disagree with his stance on RA-Aus and CTA - I just express surprise at the sudden and unexplained reversal of direction under the new leader and express my concern at what both situations say about his management style.
The fundamental problem with these knee-jerk reactions is that they fail to take into account the bigger picture and may well make things worse instead of better, as potentially in this case.
Together with his other knee-jerk reaction re RA-Aus and CTA, methinks we might have a difficult time ahead of all of us with this Director. Last thing we need is a panic merchant at the helm.
BTW - to avoid flaming, I actually don't disagree with his stance on RA-Aus and CTA - I just express surprise at the sudden and unexplained reversal of direction under the new leader and express my concern at what both situations say about his management style.
Just in case no one has ever seen the aerodrome in which or own GAAP procedures where copied..VNY Van Nuys in all it's glory. Note the requirments to contact Class C As well as adjoining classB airspace as well as high terrain and the limited availability of VFR approach and we have something very similar to BK...How can a VFR approach VNY from 360 degrees and any altitude?
VNY
Fees: (Varies) $3.00/single to $15.00+/twins.
Op Hours: continuous
Approaches: 1. Monitor ATIS prior to calling Approach, Tower or Ground.
2. Call SoCal Approach prior to entering Class C.
3. Call Tower prior to entering Class D.
4. Remain on Tower freq. 'till instructed to change to GND.
5. Don't forget to close your flight plan.
Departures: 1. Monitor ATIS prior to calling Clearance or Ground.
2. Call Clearance @ 126.6 for IFR or Class C clearances.
3. Call Ground when ready to Taxi.
3. Call Tower when for take-off.
4. Call SoCal Departure for VFR advisories or flight following.
5. Call Hawthorne FSS to open flight plan.
Hmmm, Reads the same as our GAAP procedures
Notes: Caution:Reported to be the busiest GA airport in the US.
Caution: VNY lies beneath BUR Class C airspace. Pilots must contact SoCal Approach prior to entering Class C.
Caution: Eastbound traffic to BUR overflies VNY as low as 2,800' MSL.
Caution: VNY lies in a valley surrounded by higher terrain.
Caution: Extensive helicopter traffic.
NOTE- reporting points-FREEWAY
-SAN FERNANDO RESERVOIR
-CONTROL BASIN
-TANK
-SEPULVIDA PASS nice little flags everywhere.
EDIT- I am sure readers can find lots more...even the odd VFR route to VNY
Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 12th Aug 2009 at 06:39.
Word is there may be a case to take to the AAT.
Possibly a case to sue for loss of business.
So far some businesses at Jandakot are reportedly losing 20% of thier business due to the delays, and the schools trying to turn out cadets at a set rate will get further and further behind. We are all limited by daylight, duty times, circuit curfews etc. We are being denied access to infrastructure that we have paid for over and over again. And which belongs to all the people of Australia. Should we cap the number of cars on the taxpayer funded roads because someone over east had a car crash? OR try to imporve driver education?
Clearance denials are becoming rife particularly on 12/30 ops. Someone was orbiting at Powerhouse yesterday afternoon!
In weather like today a clearance denial could result in a VFR aircraft into IMC incident.
Had they bothered to follow recommendation 1 of the Ambidji report then we could have told them this.
I wonder if McCormick is so sure his instrument is safe that is is prepared to take personal responsibility if someone is killed at an IRP following a clearnace denial?
Possibly a case to sue for loss of business.
So far some businesses at Jandakot are reportedly losing 20% of thier business due to the delays, and the schools trying to turn out cadets at a set rate will get further and further behind. We are all limited by daylight, duty times, circuit curfews etc. We are being denied access to infrastructure that we have paid for over and over again. And which belongs to all the people of Australia. Should we cap the number of cars on the taxpayer funded roads because someone over east had a car crash? OR try to imporve driver education?
Clearance denials are becoming rife particularly on 12/30 ops. Someone was orbiting at Powerhouse yesterday afternoon!
In weather like today a clearance denial could result in a VFR aircraft into IMC incident.
Had they bothered to follow recommendation 1 of the Ambidji report then we could have told them this.
I wonder if McCormick is so sure his instrument is safe that is is prepared to take personal responsibility if someone is killed at an IRP following a clearnace denial?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly YPJT,
I think that the 'knee-jerk,' as some have described it, has been a result of the constant pressure and scare-tactics over years and years, which has included media manipulation and half truths (in my opinion) that the regular dumb-ass just sucks up as fact.
The need to 'do something' has overridden some form of measured response, because the regulator has been hounded by those with access to both the media and the (ignorant) pollies.
A previous transport minister is a case in point. Not a clue, but swallowed rubbish from a few vested interests. My opinion is that this put intolerable pressure on the regulator, diverted resources and, ultimately, delayed the regulatory reform program.
New boy comes in and has to 'do something.' And gets it wrong.
Personally, I wouldn't like his job. Expected to get instant results in an industry that is replete with egos, influence and political ignorance.
I feel sorry for the bloke.
I think that the 'knee-jerk,' as some have described it, has been a result of the constant pressure and scare-tactics over years and years, which has included media manipulation and half truths (in my opinion) that the regular dumb-ass just sucks up as fact.
The need to 'do something' has overridden some form of measured response, because the regulator has been hounded by those with access to both the media and the (ignorant) pollies.
A previous transport minister is a case in point. Not a clue, but swallowed rubbish from a few vested interests. My opinion is that this put intolerable pressure on the regulator, diverted resources and, ultimately, delayed the regulatory reform program.
New boy comes in and has to 'do something.' And gets it wrong.
Personally, I wouldn't like his job. Expected to get instant results in an industry that is replete with egos, influence and political ignorance.
I feel sorry for the bloke.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There were clearance denials at Bankstown this afternoon as i was departing. Someone called inbound and got the "Clearance not available, remain outside the Bankstown control zone, call again at Prospect in 2 minutes"
Love this new system..
Improved safety holding at the inbound points.
Thanks CASA
Love this new system..
Improved safety holding at the inbound points.
Thanks CASA
I think the main impediment to the implementation of NAS-related changes over the years has been industry consultation and agreement. In fact early in the piece, the NAS Implementation Group stated at a meeting that the time for consultation was over, and their intention was only to inform the industry of changes, not seek agreement. Naturally there was industry resistance to this stance.
Now it seems the inform rather than consult, seek input and agreement method might be on again.
The regional RAPAC forums don't commence again until September/October, but any input should be directed to either your industry association or the regional RAPAC convener at the following link. There is also a list of RAPAC dates on the same page:
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - RAPAC
Now it seems the inform rather than consult, seek input and agreement method might be on again.
The regional RAPAC forums don't commence again until September/October, but any input should be directed to either your industry association or the regional RAPAC convener at the following link. There is also a list of RAPAC dates on the same page:
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - RAPAC
I feel sorry for the bloke
But I also think that his background might be leading him (understandably) to making snap decisions rather than arriving at a considered view. While I agree that we can become too bound up in process rather than actions, some things need some thought before we act. And this is one of them.
From all I can make out, AirServices was caught by surprise on this (lack of consultation) - they are the guys who have to implement it, surely you need to consult to make sure they have the resources? I wouldn't be surprised if the whole Class D GAAP thing has to be deferred for some time because of this lack of consultation (just like aspects of the alcohol/drug testing regime had to be deferred because some of our largest operators allegedly weren't ready for it).
Same thing with the RAA/CTA thing - this had been debated at length and agreed and it was with Parliamentary Counsel to do the final drafting, all done and dusted. Then suddenly the whole process is unilaterally short-circuited, with no reasons given.
Not the way to run a regulator in my view. It seems to me we can look forward to a much tougher, more macho, "my way or the highway", autocratic CASA - and time will tell whether that improves or weakens safety.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CaptainM,
Maybe that was also due to the political imperative to 'do something.' I'd argue that the 'do something' was fuelled by the sort of influence that seems to persist today. Use one's influence in the press, scare the crap out of the pollie, and get the (ignorant) pollie to insist on 'action.'
IMHO, NAS was just that. A hopeless dork (who happened to be the transport minister) signing up to something he knew nothing about.
I think that CASA does want to consult, but you are never going to get consensus. CTAF/CTAF(R) is a case in point - absolute polarisation with no chance of consensus.
For instance, while I thought NAS was a bucket of poo, my personal view, with respect to CTAF/CTAF(R), is that you've got more chance of hitting a radio-equipped aircraft with a radio fail than you have of hitting a no-radio aircraft.
So, on the one hand, I won't be swayed by Leady's arguments about NAS in general, but agree with him 100% on the CTAF issue.
In short, someone has to make a decision in a fractured industry. Unfortunately, this one was done in haste - but haste fuelled by undue pressure from vested interests.
Maybe that was also due to the political imperative to 'do something.' I'd argue that the 'do something' was fuelled by the sort of influence that seems to persist today. Use one's influence in the press, scare the crap out of the pollie, and get the (ignorant) pollie to insist on 'action.'
IMHO, NAS was just that. A hopeless dork (who happened to be the transport minister) signing up to something he knew nothing about.
I think that CASA does want to consult, but you are never going to get consensus. CTAF/CTAF(R) is a case in point - absolute polarisation with no chance of consensus.
For instance, while I thought NAS was a bucket of poo, my personal view, with respect to CTAF/CTAF(R), is that you've got more chance of hitting a radio-equipped aircraft with a radio fail than you have of hitting a no-radio aircraft.
So, on the one hand, I won't be swayed by Leady's arguments about NAS in general, but agree with him 100% on the CTAF issue.
In short, someone has to make a decision in a fractured industry. Unfortunately, this one was done in haste - but haste fuelled by undue pressure from vested interests.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The previously very vocal NAS supporters on this forum seem to have gone a bit quiet.
J
PS I hope he has lots of holding fuel!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't hold your breath waiting for consultation. CASA and AsA lost almost all ability to consult effectively about 10-15 years ago when all the experienced people who knew what they were doing were encouraged to depart (read: pushed) so that NAS could keep flailing with its head just above water. It's becoming apparent that NAS should have been left to drown. The faster the better.
There is very little real aviation knowledge left in the regions that can make a difference in CASA and AsA. They hear the words, but not the implications. The professional management of CASA and AsA has assumed a purely political function waiting for the day a minister grows some balls or gets the guts to kick some.
There is very little real aviation knowledge left in the regions that can make a difference in CASA and AsA. They hear the words, but not the implications. The professional management of CASA and AsA has assumed a purely political function waiting for the day a minister grows some balls or gets the guts to kick some.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK....
I think I got it.....
* 2 x aircraft collide whilst taxying at YSBK with nil injuries resulting = 2 x electronic billboards positioned at respective vehicle entries into YSBK advising new GAAP procedures in place, aircraft require clearance to cross runways...
* 2 x aircraft collide whilst approaching YSBK from an inbound point with loss of 2 lives resulting = ?
Oh hang on....I ain't got it....
For a moment there I thought something proactive was happening...
Sorry all......
I think I got it.....
* 2 x aircraft collide whilst taxying at YSBK with nil injuries resulting = 2 x electronic billboards positioned at respective vehicle entries into YSBK advising new GAAP procedures in place, aircraft require clearance to cross runways...
* 2 x aircraft collide whilst approaching YSBK from an inbound point with loss of 2 lives resulting = ?
Oh hang on....I ain't got it....
For a moment there I thought something proactive was happening...
Sorry all......
Stikybeke.....you may be on to something here....I vote the CASA put in an heliostat at the reporting points of our GAAP aerodromes with a lighted billboard showing the number of the next customer....We could call it the "DICK BLIMP" It would serve the dual purpose of notifying who is next without any unneccessary chatter on the controller frequency and give a fixed point in space so pilots can see who is around them so they can organise an orderly que (holding pattern) whilst they wait their turn.....[/humour]
Reality is fast approaching with a very nasty outcome. The OAR needs to step in and put a hold on this change and revert back to GAAP procedures.
Reality is fast approaching with a very nasty outcome. The OAR needs to step in and put a hold on this change and revert back to GAAP procedures.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, now there's an idea. No more CASA.
Create a 'safety' board made up of people who actually participate in day to day operation of aircraft, gotta work better than this current system.
Create a 'safety' board made up of people who actually participate in day to day operation of aircraft, gotta work better than this current system.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see (I think) that David Copperfield, the Master of Illusion, is in touring Australia at the moment......(except he doesn't do BBQ's)....perhaps he could be of some assistance?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And still the endless pile of rubbish continues to be delivered by CASA. In today's mail, the next lovely glossy brochure regarding the changes to GAAP procedures. More of our hard earned tax-payer money well spent.
Filed in the appropriate yellow lid filing cabinet.
Filed in the appropriate yellow lid filing cabinet.
CASA's revised GAAP procedures
etrust -
Why wouldn’t you connect the people at Airservices Australia with NAS? Surely you understand that in the original NAS implementation group, the Airservices representative and strong supporter of NAS was Mr Stephen Angus?
Mr Angus would still be one of the strongest supporters of following the Government NAS policy.
Perhaps someone can point out what Mr Angus’ present job in the senior management hierarchy at Airservices is?
Why wouldn’t you connect the people at Airservices Australia with NAS? Surely you understand that in the original NAS implementation group, the Airservices representative and strong supporter of NAS was Mr Stephen Angus?
Mr Angus would still be one of the strongest supporters of following the Government NAS policy.
Perhaps someone can point out what Mr Angus’ present job in the senior management hierarchy at Airservices is?