classification regulation of closed charter CAR 206
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: sydney
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a disgrace!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hello pprune people, this is my first post on a site that until now I have never had a lot of time for. This is no reflection on all of the users, just something I did not feel I needed to be involved it.
WELL THAT ALL CHANGED THIS MORNING!!!!!!!!!
My FO showed me the posts in this latest CASA fiasco, and I saw red. Who do these CASA people think they are, or more to the point, who do these CASA people think we are?
What right does CASA have to release a document then as it may be a bit controversial when compared to their next policy document, delete/hide the entire document from the monthly CASA Briefing.
I am an avid reader of this monthly report and most times I find something of interest in it. I too read the document referred to by Crack Up, and it wasn't until I was shown this thread today that I realised the implications of just what CASA has done in this case. By removing the previous document (has this ever happened before...I doubt it!), they paved the way for their new policy in respect to interposed third parties. What a sham, if it's going to cause any grief to the new head man, hide the document away until we put the new policy into being.
I find it quite disturbing that manipulation of this sort is used by our regulator. Should they not treat us with some respect, and let us form our own opinions without trying to manipulate our minds. Both documents are related and need to be considered together, or better still, one should be deleted from CASA's agenda, and the real helpful reform pushed through sooner rather than later.
Come on John, continue on with the reforms that work so well in the USA, and don't get caught up in petty politics with your staff. Surely with your experience and obvious credentials, we can move our industry forward without delay. You put your name to the document, then stifled it's usefulness pandering to your staff.
Who got to you John, a big player who is losing 2 or 3 passengers a week to a little guy trying to eek out a meagre living in this retched financial climate. Give the little guys a boost not a kick in the pants! Bring in the reforms you put forward in May, and get rid of this retched useless "Policy" that will only knock a few more operators out of the skies.
I have been a "little guy" (a long time ago) and I know that they have to use all available resources to get a dollar, and that sometimes means pushing the boundry's as far as possible. I am happy to hop into a little single or twin at any time, they are maintained by proffessionals (all that I know at least) to proffessional standards set by CASA. The Big Bird I drive now is probably newer than the little guys fleet, but I don't think maintained to that much greater standards that shows the little guy to be unsafe. We all have to crawl before we walk, give these guys a chance or we won't have a GA sector much longer.
Cheers, JD
WELL THAT ALL CHANGED THIS MORNING!!!!!!!!!
My FO showed me the posts in this latest CASA fiasco, and I saw red. Who do these CASA people think they are, or more to the point, who do these CASA people think we are?
What right does CASA have to release a document then as it may be a bit controversial when compared to their next policy document, delete/hide the entire document from the monthly CASA Briefing.
I am an avid reader of this monthly report and most times I find something of interest in it. I too read the document referred to by Crack Up, and it wasn't until I was shown this thread today that I realised the implications of just what CASA has done in this case. By removing the previous document (has this ever happened before...I doubt it!), they paved the way for their new policy in respect to interposed third parties. What a sham, if it's going to cause any grief to the new head man, hide the document away until we put the new policy into being.
I find it quite disturbing that manipulation of this sort is used by our regulator. Should they not treat us with some respect, and let us form our own opinions without trying to manipulate our minds. Both documents are related and need to be considered together, or better still, one should be deleted from CASA's agenda, and the real helpful reform pushed through sooner rather than later.
Come on John, continue on with the reforms that work so well in the USA, and don't get caught up in petty politics with your staff. Surely with your experience and obvious credentials, we can move our industry forward without delay. You put your name to the document, then stifled it's usefulness pandering to your staff.
Who got to you John, a big player who is losing 2 or 3 passengers a week to a little guy trying to eek out a meagre living in this retched financial climate. Give the little guys a boost not a kick in the pants! Bring in the reforms you put forward in May, and get rid of this retched useless "Policy" that will only knock a few more operators out of the skies.
I have been a "little guy" (a long time ago) and I know that they have to use all available resources to get a dollar, and that sometimes means pushing the boundry's as far as possible. I am happy to hop into a little single or twin at any time, they are maintained by proffessionals (all that I know at least) to proffessional standards set by CASA. The Big Bird I drive now is probably newer than the little guys fleet, but I don't think maintained to that much greater standards that shows the little guy to be unsafe. We all have to crawl before we walk, give these guys a chance or we won't have a GA sector much longer.
Cheers, JD
Last edited by john dillinger; 23rd Aug 2009 at 11:10. Reason: mistake in heading
bushy. That sounds like rubbery use of CAR210? You would not be the first to be subject to that one.
Some years ago a GA operator conducted daily charter freight flights on behalf of a prominent freight company. The freight company asked their name be shown on the aircraft. CASA directed the name be removed as the freight company did not hold an AOC to conduct the operation.
Conversely, the Metro involved in the Lockhart River RPT accident carried the name of an operator and passengers were ticketed by that operator, which was not the AOC holder. The operation was clearly in breach of CAR210 and CASA took no action.
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 210
Restriction of advertising of commercial operations
(1) A person must not give a public notice, by newspaper advertisement, broadcast statement or any other means of public announcement, to the effect that a person is willing to undertake by use of an Australian aircraft any commercial operations if the last‑mentioned person has not obtained an Air Operator's Certificate authorising the conduct of those operations.
Some years ago a GA operator conducted daily charter freight flights on behalf of a prominent freight company. The freight company asked their name be shown on the aircraft. CASA directed the name be removed as the freight company did not hold an AOC to conduct the operation.
Conversely, the Metro involved in the Lockhart River RPT accident carried the name of an operator and passengers were ticketed by that operator, which was not the AOC holder. The operation was clearly in breach of CAR210 and CASA took no action.
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 210
Restriction of advertising of commercial operations
(1) A person must not give a public notice, by newspaper advertisement, broadcast statement or any other means of public announcement, to the effect that a person is willing to undertake by use of an Australian aircraft any commercial operations if the last‑mentioned person has not obtained an Air Operator's Certificate authorising the conduct of those operations.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you think about it, the CASA has very, very few people that have any hands-on knowledge of GA left. There used to be a few in there that are almost legend, but they've all retired. Even the ex-military types that went to the regulator weren't all that far removed from GA in the types of aircraft they operated. But it's all gone and replaced by career public servants. There is precious little aviation know-how left. Anyone who did have a clue bailed out for the airlines. Even the pilots left in the CASA get very few flying hours. There isn't the same movement through regional areas as there used to be and there's very little time or allowances for beers and dinners with the operators anymore and the exchange of informal information that occurred. Now GA operators view CASA staff as a portend of a show cause notice and treat them accordingly.
It's not enough for an employee of the regulator to simply know the rules. That person has to know why the rule was implemented: the intent behind the rule, otherwise he'll continue to run into issues of inappropriate application, no matter how well the rule is written. That's the information that has disappeared with the retirements towards the end of the 1980's and 90's.
Nowadays, the problem is made worse because even the best intentioned public servant is at the mercy of a politician who has an almost immediate copy of the latest opinion poll or survey and is keen to express an opinion and show of confidence to a journalist following up on breaking news. The GA industry has to learn to cope with this. GA occupies such a small proportion of the transport minister's portfolio and such a large proportion of the attention if something goes wrong, that it's easy to see why a politician takes a knee-jerk reaction to the latest opinion poll and chooses the easy option of directing CASA to "improve" GA safety. There are very few votes lost if a GA operator goes out of business compared to the potential votes lost if a politician is portayed as not caring about the travelling public.
I would love to see the regs get addressed, but hold out little hope for any major change until the pollies set an agenda, make sure it's on the right track, tweak it occasionally, but generally get out of the way.
In the same vein, the CASA has to embrace technology more. Information is available real time with social media: Tw-itter (I guess if it's spelt correctly it gets asterisked out), Facebook, etc., and the organisation is still messing around with PR on its website and face-to-face meetings, which are expensive and time consuming. Government departments are usually 10 years behind the leading edge of industry. The CASA has slipped to somewhere between 15 and 20.
It's not enough for an employee of the regulator to simply know the rules. That person has to know why the rule was implemented: the intent behind the rule, otherwise he'll continue to run into issues of inappropriate application, no matter how well the rule is written. That's the information that has disappeared with the retirements towards the end of the 1980's and 90's.
Nowadays, the problem is made worse because even the best intentioned public servant is at the mercy of a politician who has an almost immediate copy of the latest opinion poll or survey and is keen to express an opinion and show of confidence to a journalist following up on breaking news. The GA industry has to learn to cope with this. GA occupies such a small proportion of the transport minister's portfolio and such a large proportion of the attention if something goes wrong, that it's easy to see why a politician takes a knee-jerk reaction to the latest opinion poll and chooses the easy option of directing CASA to "improve" GA safety. There are very few votes lost if a GA operator goes out of business compared to the potential votes lost if a politician is portayed as not caring about the travelling public.
I would love to see the regs get addressed, but hold out little hope for any major change until the pollies set an agenda, make sure it's on the right track, tweak it occasionally, but generally get out of the way.
In the same vein, the CASA has to embrace technology more. Information is available real time with social media: Tw-itter (I guess if it's spelt correctly it gets asterisked out), Facebook, etc., and the organisation is still messing around with PR on its website and face-to-face meetings, which are expensive and time consuming. Government departments are usually 10 years behind the leading edge of industry. The CASA has slipped to somewhere between 15 and 20.
Last edited by Lodown; 24th Aug 2009 at 05:11.
Somewhere in law - don't ask me where 'cos I don't remember - and most certainly in accounting 'goods for trade' is defined as inventory offered for sale
Dr
