CASA strikes again - with video evidence
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nowra
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank..People like me?...Sorry mate, im not CASA.. I just find it amusing that so much whinging and complaining goes on about people getting in trubz with the authorities when they break the rules. Not one of you have made a post(in this thread) promoting responsible flying, only complaining how the bad the boogey man CASA is such a big problem. This guy obviously did something that the powers that be deem to be so bad they are taking his licence off him.
And yes, i have had a please explain from them once when i inadvertently busted CTA. AS I BLOODY WELL SHOULD HAVE.
If im ever caught flying in a manner that deserves total stripping of my licence then i DESERVE the rough end of the pineapple.
Hows about promoting some airmenship instead of complaining like a little girl when people get what they deserve.
Ive had a gutfull of watching people get away with crap that could see them or more importantly other people wind up as a smoking crater in the ground.
If you dont wanna play by the rules, let me know when your going flying and ill keep my students out of the air.
Cheers mate, and ill also remember your handle.
And yes, i have had a please explain from them once when i inadvertently busted CTA. AS I BLOODY WELL SHOULD HAVE.
If im ever caught flying in a manner that deserves total stripping of my licence then i DESERVE the rough end of the pineapple.
Hows about promoting some airmenship instead of complaining like a little girl when people get what they deserve.
Ive had a gutfull of watching people get away with crap that could see them or more importantly other people wind up as a smoking crater in the ground.
If you dont wanna play by the rules, let me know when your going flying and ill keep my students out of the air.
Cheers mate, and ill also remember your handle.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank is right, it's guilty until proven innocen and you obviously haven't been a victim yet. I've been targeted once for something I didn't do and it was very hard work and a lot of research to prove my innocence. Even after providing fully documented and verified evidence, I got a "consider yourself cautioned," which is in my book an un-earned black mark.
There are bold and there are old.......
You can't blame CASA if they are presented with an obvious breach of the rules.
My own intention now is to fit a video camera and a data logger as potential evidence of my own compliance with the rules.
You can't blame CASA if they are presented with an obvious breach of the rules.
My own intention now is to fit a video camera and a data logger as potential evidence of my own compliance with the rules.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nowra
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smoke......fire.... Even in criminal law cases they detain the perpetrator until they are found innocent or guilty. I can understand the (in some cases) urgent need to get blokes out of the air. Where would they stand if while dilly dabbling around you plowed your Jabiru into a schoolbus?
(poor brent the victim)
(poor brent the victim)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Merv;
I've been flying since 1965 and I'm still alive. Must be doing something right. Haven't managed to prang into anybody yet and have no red marks on my licence. I have been victimised by CASA.
Other than being "compliant" what have you achieved to convince me not to stay on the ground while your students are flying?
You, not the "whingers" and "complainers" here are sticking it to the bloke likely as not to be out of work soon, yet still haven't told us what he did.
And, by the way, all aviation offences are strict liability offences which in turn are criminal offences. You are as guilty as those who use such laws to remove the burden of proof from the regulator and force it onto the accused.
Long live Rommany justice
I've been flying since 1965 and I'm still alive. Must be doing something right. Haven't managed to prang into anybody yet and have no red marks on my licence. I have been victimised by CASA.
Other than being "compliant" what have you achieved to convince me not to stay on the ground while your students are flying?
You, not the "whingers" and "complainers" here are sticking it to the bloke likely as not to be out of work soon, yet still haven't told us what he did.
And, by the way, all aviation offences are strict liability offences which in turn are criminal offences. You are as guilty as those who use such laws to remove the burden of proof from the regulator and force it onto the accused.
Long live Rommany justice
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 9th Feb 2012 at 09:28.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for making this personal Andrew / motzartmerv. You obviously have not witnessed such actions, good for you, I wish you well at your little country field.
Sunfish, great idea, but don't even consider posting the videos on youtube or any forums as people with no lives will pick at them until they find something that might incriminate you and you'll spend the rest of your remaining cash that you haven't spent on flying, on defending yourself. I have a similar video system in my car which has come in very handy and caught the odd accident.
Good work Frank. I'd call that progress. Took 8 years and you got some progress that might help to benefit others.
As for smoke... fire... That means nothing. So you are innocently banging along in your RV one Sunday, but nearby another RV from another state buzzes some guys house. You get the blame because you were in the air at the time and your RV looks similar and even has a couple of similar rego letters. You get the call from CASA and you try getting out of that one.....! I'll speak to you in a year or two when you've sorted it out.
Sunfish, great idea, but don't even consider posting the videos on youtube or any forums as people with no lives will pick at them until they find something that might incriminate you and you'll spend the rest of your remaining cash that you haven't spent on flying, on defending yourself. I have a similar video system in my car which has come in very handy and caught the odd accident.
Good work Frank. I'd call that progress. Took 8 years and you got some progress that might help to benefit others.
As for smoke... fire... That means nothing. So you are innocently banging along in your RV one Sunday, but nearby another RV from another state buzzes some guys house. You get the blame because you were in the air at the time and your RV looks similar and even has a couple of similar rego letters. You get the call from CASA and you try getting out of that one.....! I'll speak to you in a year or two when you've sorted it out.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nowra
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look fellas, you can all beat your chest as much as you like. It doesn't change anything. My point is pretty simple, if you fly in a manner that is gunna bring the hounds hunting your licence, then you deserve to be hunted.
If you don't, and are compliant, then you should encourage those that aren't, to change their ways. Not attack the regulator.
XXX, if thats what happend then that is a raw deal. But how does it pertain to this incident? Is this guy being falsely accused do you think? I note you started the thread "CASA strikes again." If a P plater gets caught doing 150 in a 60 zone, do we say "the coppas strike again", or do we say, f23kin d!khead p plater?? And who doesn't feel a cops been hard on them with a fine or something before.
Frank, what have i done??..Ive trained them to be compliant, you can rest easy and feel all warm and fuzzy in side with the knowledge none of them will fly through your loungroom (or aeroplane ) window.
If you don't, and are compliant, then you should encourage those that aren't, to change their ways. Not attack the regulator.
XXX, if thats what happend then that is a raw deal. But how does it pertain to this incident? Is this guy being falsely accused do you think? I note you started the thread "CASA strikes again." If a P plater gets caught doing 150 in a 60 zone, do we say "the coppas strike again", or do we say, f23kin d!khead p plater?? And who doesn't feel a cops been hard on them with a fine or something before.
Frank, what have i done??..Ive trained them to be compliant, you can rest easy and feel all warm and fuzzy in side with the knowledge none of them will fly through your loungroom (or aeroplane ) window.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank, don't let Merv wind you up too much mate. Whenever the heat is on CASA one or several of their own pull out an old prune handle or create a new one and target those of us who are vocal in our disgust at the Regulator. Merv will disappear again shortly.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nowra
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gobble...thats golden mate...pure gold...im a CASA plant now am I? You blokes are unreal..Someone comes on this crap talkin site and promotes compliance, and they are automatically from CASA..Professional pilots my sweet ass..
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wentworth
Age: 59
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gobbledock et al
He's real, he's an active CFI, he's passionate, he teaches in a very professional way, and we very badly need a lot more like him.
If he goes away, that's your loss.
He's real, he's an active CFI, he's passionate, he teaches in a very professional way, and we very badly need a lot more like him.
If he goes away, that's your loss.
Moderator
Sorry but you are wrong again. It happened in 1970. His old man wasn't a bad footballer though!
If we're talking about the hangar gutser, that happened after my time at the Flying Unit, definitely not 1970 - mid to late 70s as I vaguely recall. The chap concerned was an ex-footballer of note - perhaps his father also - on the latter point, I have no idea. The 125 prang was early 1967 so I'm a tad confused as to where 1970 might fit into the picture.
Mirage/Hornet/F35 in the circuit, hence I stopped flying the aeroplane and paying attention to its configuration.
You miss my point. The 125 prang was inexcusable and resulted from a breakdown in cockpit discipline. I don't recall anything wilful or reckless, though. We are all at risk of such events - the progressive development of SOP and similar protocols seeks to minimise the likelihood of occurrence.
"mate, you could have gone a little lower on that last beat-up"
Things certainly have changed over the decades.
One of my prized possessions is a photostat of a letter of some considerable vintage to a well-known aviator now long retired. The writer was the then DCA Regional Director of a particular Region and a long time mate of the retired well-known pilot. In respect of a recent aerodrome display by the latter in an ex-warbird of note, the RD's letter (on DCA letterhead) included a comment along the lines of "I am reliably informed that people in the second row had to stand on their toes to see most of your display". Could you imagine a similar letter seeing the light of day these days ?
Nonetheless, pragmatism indicates that the present world, overall, is the much safer place in which to fly even if it is still a long way from being perfect ...
If we're talking about the hangar gutser, that happened after my time at the Flying Unit, definitely not 1970 - mid to late 70s as I vaguely recall. The chap concerned was an ex-footballer of note - perhaps his father also - on the latter point, I have no idea. The 125 prang was early 1967 so I'm a tad confused as to where 1970 might fit into the picture.
Mirage/Hornet/F35 in the circuit, hence I stopped flying the aeroplane and paying attention to its configuration.
You miss my point. The 125 prang was inexcusable and resulted from a breakdown in cockpit discipline. I don't recall anything wilful or reckless, though. We are all at risk of such events - the progressive development of SOP and similar protocols seeks to minimise the likelihood of occurrence.
"mate, you could have gone a little lower on that last beat-up"
Things certainly have changed over the decades.
One of my prized possessions is a photostat of a letter of some considerable vintage to a well-known aviator now long retired. The writer was the then DCA Regional Director of a particular Region and a long time mate of the retired well-known pilot. In respect of a recent aerodrome display by the latter in an ex-warbird of note, the RD's letter (on DCA letterhead) included a comment along the lines of "I am reliably informed that people in the second row had to stand on their toes to see most of your display". Could you imagine a similar letter seeing the light of day these days ?
Nonetheless, pragmatism indicates that the present world, overall, is the much safer place in which to fly even if it is still a long way from being perfect ...
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kindly inform us about Bill Lord's "prang at Tocumwal" and its relevance to your argument. Thanks.
relevance to your argument
I said before, just about all the incidents/ accidents The Regulator had to deal with, probably any one may not have the same consequences for a private operator, but so many over so long a period points to some kind of systemic failure.
I don't think they operate any aircraft now, so they can be educated by the past on some issues.
Nobody has challenged the claim that The Regulator by any name has the worst aviation record of any operator in Australia.
Finally for Merv, Bill Lord was a highly experienced pilot by anyone's measure, yet he still succumbed to human error. When your students eclipse his flying record you can boast to me then with your assurances. In the meantime buddy, I do agree with your sentiments about dumb pilots doing dumb things, but you still haven't given me any indication of what the alleged offence was. That simple point may get a lot of people off your, and CASA's back.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thread this one.....very spirited and insightful as to regulatory perceptions. It will be interesting to see what time tells regarding all this...Of course, if you're not doing anything wrong it won't matter too much I'd imagine. On the other hand though.....I always try to follow the rules because that's how I was brought up and that's how I was taught....sorry guys, I don't know any different...
Stiky
Stiky
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And this is the downside to having a regulator almost everyone hates. When someone does something unsafe, people will defend him because they are worried CASA will over-react.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: nowra
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finally for Merv, Bill Lord was a highly experienced pilot by anyone's measure, yet he still succumbed to human error.
When your students eclipse his flying record you can boast to me then with your assurances.
That simple point may get a lot of people off your, and CASA's back.
I would expect someone of your experience to have the futures of these students and new pilots that frequent sites such as this, fore most in your mind when making post's.
What example and message are we sending them, right from the get go? That the real problem is with the regulator?? Sure the regulator has issues, no-one would deny that, but human factors accidents are still occurring, and the last year has proven one of the worst despite CASA's attempts to address the problem. And in my humble opinion this is due to the 'culture' you spoke of earlier.
What 'safety' culture are we passing on to new pilots when we complain about the regulator and give NO mention at all to the fact that for a licence to "never see the light of day again" a serious breach must occurred.That safety is a regulatory problem? Pretty sad if it is....
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA don't stop at the simple and effective control of those who break the rules, the mendatious nature of the whole place has fostered a culture of way out behaviour that baffles the general legal profession who do not see other agencies behaving in the same way as CASA.
CASA hides behind the fact that civil courts and the AAT do not ever rule against them once the "Blood on the ground" argument is trotted out.
It is not logic and support of the "rules" that CASA relies on, more like supposition, suggestion and outright distortion of the facts.
For the General Industry nobody will support errant behaviour and on balance the Industry is self reliant and compliant.
CASA hides behind the fact that civil courts and the AAT do not ever rule against them once the "Blood on the ground" argument is trotted out.
It is not logic and support of the "rules" that CASA relies on, more like supposition, suggestion and outright distortion of the facts.
For the General Industry nobody will support errant behaviour and on balance the Industry is self reliant and compliant.
I have had no dealings with CASA regarding flying incidents, but I have looked at aviation legal case studies very closely. I have to agree with motzartmerv (who is anything but a CASA stooge) in that if you fly like an idiot you deserve to get pinged. Many times I have seen people come extremely close to death through reckless flying.
That said, the main issue with CASA as far as I can see is that when they prosecute an individual, that person is not subject to due legal process. Politicians are completely ignorant when it comes to aviation and have absolutely no idea how to legislate for it. This is because most have never made anything of themselves in the real world, outside politics or government.
As a result we have a regulator that is a law unto itself; able to bypass the courts and investigate / prosecute on it's own behalf (even after a case is rejected by the DPP on it's merits). There is no level forum in which both sides can meet and argue their case before an independent arbiter.
Quite frankly CASA's role needs to be restricted. Legislation must be introduced to require all prosecution preceedings for breaches of the regs/act to be conducted by the DPP (or CASA prosecutors) through the court system, or not at all. And further to that, CASA must not be allowed to restrict operating certificates/crew licences for any period exceeding 30 days without court order. End of.
I have worked as a commercial pilot, still do on occasion, but this is one of several reasons why I would never, ever stake my livelihood on it.
That said, the main issue with CASA as far as I can see is that when they prosecute an individual, that person is not subject to due legal process. Politicians are completely ignorant when it comes to aviation and have absolutely no idea how to legislate for it. This is because most have never made anything of themselves in the real world, outside politics or government.
As a result we have a regulator that is a law unto itself; able to bypass the courts and investigate / prosecute on it's own behalf (even after a case is rejected by the DPP on it's merits). There is no level forum in which both sides can meet and argue their case before an independent arbiter.
Quite frankly CASA's role needs to be restricted. Legislation must be introduced to require all prosecution preceedings for breaches of the regs/act to be conducted by the DPP (or CASA prosecutors) through the court system, or not at all. And further to that, CASA must not be allowed to restrict operating certificates/crew licences for any period exceeding 30 days without court order. End of.
I have worked as a commercial pilot, still do on occasion, but this is one of several reasons why I would never, ever stake my livelihood on it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something that really hurts when fighting them is that when you head to the AAT you can't be awarded costs even if you "win." It's a bottomless money pit.