Hardy's Aviation Grounded?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardy Aviation and casa
The ABC article as:
See complete at:
NT airline challenges CASA grounding of Fly Tiwi - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
NT airline challenges CASA grounding of Fly Tiwi
Staff reporters
Posted 2 hours 50 minutes ago
PHOTO: Hardy Aviation subsidiary Fly Tiwi was grounded by CASA late last month because senior pilots failed a review test. (Supplied)
MAP: Darwin 0800
Northern Territory airline Hardy Aviation is taking legal action against the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) over the grounding of its subsidiary, Fly Tiwi.
Fly Tiwi's daily flights to the Tiwi Islands were grounded by CASA late last month because senior pilots failed a review test.
Hardy Aviation has been working with CASA to resume flights.
Managing director John Hardy says it has has been left with no choice but to take action against the conditions imposed by CASA, which include a review of all Hardy Aviation aircraft and pilots.
"Our lawyers have put together a submission and we are are going to before a judge in the Federal Court to try and get some sort of stay of this suspension or these conditions," he said.
Mr Hardy says he has more than 120 staff, and they are worried about what is happening.
"Everybody, to a man and woman, is nervous and twitchy and tense," he said.
"What is so irritating about this whole episode is the lack of care by CASA for the people who are most affected."
He says his lawyers have put together a submission to try and get what he calls onerous conditions overturned.
"Our lawyers said: 'John, make no mistake, they are trying to shut you down; you read the letter carefully, it may be ambiguous but really CASA has lied to you. They don't want you to operate'.''
Mr Hardy says the grounding has left hundreds of people in Tiwi Islands communities without freight and transport
Staff reporters
Posted 2 hours 50 minutes ago
PHOTO: Hardy Aviation subsidiary Fly Tiwi was grounded by CASA late last month because senior pilots failed a review test. (Supplied)
MAP: Darwin 0800
Northern Territory airline Hardy Aviation is taking legal action against the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) over the grounding of its subsidiary, Fly Tiwi.
Fly Tiwi's daily flights to the Tiwi Islands were grounded by CASA late last month because senior pilots failed a review test.
Hardy Aviation has been working with CASA to resume flights.
Managing director John Hardy says it has has been left with no choice but to take action against the conditions imposed by CASA, which include a review of all Hardy Aviation aircraft and pilots.
"Our lawyers have put together a submission and we are are going to before a judge in the Federal Court to try and get some sort of stay of this suspension or these conditions," he said.
Mr Hardy says he has more than 120 staff, and they are worried about what is happening.
"Everybody, to a man and woman, is nervous and twitchy and tense," he said.
"What is so irritating about this whole episode is the lack of care by CASA for the people who are most affected."
He says his lawyers have put together a submission to try and get what he calls onerous conditions overturned.
"Our lawyers said: 'John, make no mistake, they are trying to shut you down; you read the letter carefully, it may be ambiguous but really CASA has lied to you. They don't want you to operate'.''
Mr Hardy says the grounding has left hundreds of people in Tiwi Islands communities without freight and transport
NT airline challenges CASA grounding of Fly Tiwi - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 14th Dec 2012 at 02:51. Reason: Easier to read
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for Sh!ts and Giggles
Lets see if we can make some sense of this.
First of all does "Hardy's subsidiary Air Tiwi have an AOC"
Mmmmm don't think so.
So is it the only part of the whole operation that is run RPT therefore requiring a CAR217 structure for the whole operation?
I think so.
So if the CP and deputy CP fail a renewal it only affects the Air Tiwi operation so they can fly charter but not RPT and resume flying to the Tiwi Islands on an ad-hoc charter basis no doubt organised by their agents there while the continue to take CASA on.
That makes sense to me but I may be wrong. Would anybody else like to set me straight?
First of all does "Hardy's subsidiary Air Tiwi have an AOC"
Mmmmm don't think so.
So is it the only part of the whole operation that is run RPT therefore requiring a CAR217 structure for the whole operation?
I think so.
So if the CP and deputy CP fail a renewal it only affects the Air Tiwi operation so they can fly charter but not RPT and resume flying to the Tiwi Islands on an ad-hoc charter basis no doubt organised by their agents there while the continue to take CASA on.
That makes sense to me but I may be wrong. Would anybody else like to set me straight?
"Hardy's subsidiary Air Tiwi have an AOC"
Mmmmm don't think so.
Mmmmm don't think so.
So if the CP and deputy CP fail a renewal it only affects the Air Tiwi operation
The AOC holder is required to have a CP who has endorsements and ratings consistent to the operation, unless approved otherwise by CASA (CAO 82.3.23). So if the CP cannot carryout the duties required by the position and the company's operation, then the AOC holder cannot operate.
So CASA has determined that they are not safe to operate RPT but OK to continue doing charter? How does that work? Like being just a 'little bit' pregnant. If that is the situation, the lawyers will have a field day.
Folks,
Does anybody have any idea of the circumstances of the alleged failure --- was it in an aircraft, if so, what type. Or, was it in a simulator, if so what type and which simulator.
Tootle pip!!
Does anybody have any idea of the circumstances of the alleged failure --- was it in an aircraft, if so, what type. Or, was it in a simulator, if so what type and which simulator.
Tootle pip!!
Yeh, I understand all about CAR 217. If that is their checking and training system, it applies to charter as well. Unless they have separate AOCs and separate systems of checking. Maybe they do?
The point I am trying to make is that they are either safe to carry the paying public, or they are not. If they are not, they should be grounded - period. If they are OK enough for continued charter operations, then Hardy may have some strong grounds for litigation.
Bring on Parts 135 , 121 etc and lose this stupid, stupid differentiation and double standard between charter and RPT for ever, pleeese!
The point I am trying to make is that they are either safe to carry the paying public, or they are not. If they are not, they should be grounded - period. If they are OK enough for continued charter operations, then Hardy may have some strong grounds for litigation.
Bring on Parts 135 , 121 etc and lose this stupid, stupid differentiation and double standard between charter and RPT for ever, pleeese!
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 18th Dec 2012 at 21:56.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets not lose sight of the fact a lot of our aviation brethren are suffering from this, many concerned about losing their jobs.
Might I suggest those that don't know anything about Hardys business structure don't even try speculating, and those that wish to bag their operation take a little time to think of those being affected. Don't come in here and puff your chest out and make anonymous accusations.
On a personal note, JH doesn't need glasses. Still flies a 404 better than the young bucks. There's nothing dodgy about Hardys. Just a company with growing pains. They'll get things sorted. They are still one of the best GA operators around. Many current airline drivers cut their teeth with a HA on the tail, and look back on their time there with great fondness.
Thoughts are with those affected. Blue skies and tailwinds Lads.
Might I suggest those that don't know anything about Hardys business structure don't even try speculating, and those that wish to bag their operation take a little time to think of those being affected. Don't come in here and puff your chest out and make anonymous accusations.
On a personal note, JH doesn't need glasses. Still flies a 404 better than the young bucks. There's nothing dodgy about Hardys. Just a company with growing pains. They'll get things sorted. They are still one of the best GA operators around. Many current airline drivers cut their teeth with a HA on the tail, and look back on their time there with great fondness.
Thoughts are with those affected. Blue skies and tailwinds Lads.
TVL refueller reckons that some CASA big wig was making urgent mobile phone on a Saturday night to some bloke that owns a large fleet of aircraft that were grounded.
TVL refueller also purchased a large number of Telstra shares on the following Monday, due to inside information on very a large spike in mobile calls.
TVL refueller also purchased a large number of Telstra shares on the following Monday, due to inside information on very a large spike in mobile calls.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Lounge
Age: 53
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been in GA for over 27 years all over Australia and other parts in the world, but much of it in The TOP End, It is the area in Aviation I enjoy. So I feel I am qualified to make the following comments. As always you are welcome to disagree with me.
· I have never directly worked for Mr JH orHardy’s but I know very many who have and for very many years. Without a doubt– This is not a dodgy company!
Words from JH’s mouth when paying for thirdparty maintenance “I what the BEST maintained aircraft in Australia”
I have heard from him very many similarthings – also look at what he pay’s his staff, more than many in CASA in manypositions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
· CASA well where do we start?
· Known for employing people that cannot make itin the industry.
· Between them they have a different view oncompliance with a regulation but enforce their view.
· Give junior staff the little ASR book that cancripple a company with next to zero training on how to fill it out – (check forany requirement on the ASR – it is a hidden secret)
· Have no justification for their own work – it isa let run wild environment.
Now I have at a time been told by a CASA person, I can takea CASA staff personally to court on something that cost me about 30K – He madeit sound a simple thing! But he did not tell me (I knew) that if I did, he getsfull CASA support from their very large legal team at no cost. Simply put if Iwant to show him as the fool he was it will cost me legal fees to fight a legalteam (Ashby vs. Gov. Rings bells 17 lawyers paid by Gov. & still pay out50K). The chance of going broke is what they count on.
It is high time CASA personal are held accountable for theirown actions Good and Bad. Pay them more and sack the fools. My guess is an80-95% replacement in CASA staff. That would also have a great increase onsafety instead of wasting time on personal things that they like to enforce.
JH, GH, AH. I hope you settle this war, I know you run asgood a ship as you can- all the best.
· I have never directly worked for Mr JH orHardy’s but I know very many who have and for very many years. Without a doubt– This is not a dodgy company!
Words from JH’s mouth when paying for thirdparty maintenance “I what the BEST maintained aircraft in Australia”
I have heard from him very many similarthings – also look at what he pay’s his staff, more than many in CASA in manypositions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
· CASA well where do we start?
· Known for employing people that cannot make itin the industry.
· Between them they have a different view oncompliance with a regulation but enforce their view.
· Give junior staff the little ASR book that cancripple a company with next to zero training on how to fill it out – (check forany requirement on the ASR – it is a hidden secret)
· Have no justification for their own work – it isa let run wild environment.
Now I have at a time been told by a CASA person, I can takea CASA staff personally to court on something that cost me about 30K – He madeit sound a simple thing! But he did not tell me (I knew) that if I did, he getsfull CASA support from their very large legal team at no cost. Simply put if Iwant to show him as the fool he was it will cost me legal fees to fight a legalteam (Ashby vs. Gov. Rings bells 17 lawyers paid by Gov. & still pay out50K). The chance of going broke is what they count on.
It is high time CASA personal are held accountable for theirown actions Good and Bad. Pay them more and sack the fools. My guess is an80-95% replacement in CASA staff. That would also have a great increase onsafety instead of wasting time on personal things that they like to enforce.
JH, GH, AH. I hope you settle this war, I know you run asgood a ship as you can- all the best.
Last edited by caa; 25th Dec 2012 at 11:53.
If that is their checking and training system, it applies to charter as well
But it certainly applies to Metros, and if the C & T Manual so states, will apply to whatever aircraft are in the fleet.
Usually (but I concede that there could be exceptions), if an Operator must go to the hassle and expense of setting up an approved system under CAR 217, they will use that across the board.
Usually (but I concede that there could be exceptions), if an Operator must go to the hassle and expense of setting up an approved system under CAR 217, they will use that across the board.
Bring on Parts 135 , 121 etc and lose this stupid, stupid differentiation and double standard between charter and RPT for ever, pleeese!
Have you actually read and digested in detail Part 135, it sound to me like the answer is no.
The minimum aerodrome standards, alone, will bring a large % of light charter to a screaming halt. Quite a significant proportion of the aerodromes in ERSA do not meet the Part 135 minimum, probably 70% or more in the AOPA Guide would not meet the aerodrome requirement, including almost all strips on farms.
Having to have all maintenance done in a Part 145 workshop will be a huge financial impost, CAR 30 is bad enough for light aircraft, compared to US requirements.
The fuel requirements defy legal definition.
In it's present form (and I see little likelihood of change, unless we get a change of government before it is enacted) Part 135 will be a disaster for light aviation.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled: Having to have all maintenance done in a Part 145 workshop will be a huge financial impost, ...............
The fuel requirements defy legal definition.
The fuel requirements defy legal definition.
) the Part 135 requirements from what is required in other jurisdictions.