CASA Suspends Barrier Aviation Operations
Good point HMHB, I wonder what has changed so drastically that it was necessary to ground the airline at the point of "maximum financial impact" or perhaps "maximum delay in response time".
Or are we simply just talking coincidence here?
Do we perhaps have a problem in that CASA's regulatory approach is so totally hamstrung by law and regulation that its only response to a perceived safety threat is to go for the jugular and try and bankrupt the offender as quickly as possible and before they can drag CASA through the courts at great expense to the taxpayer?
If that is the case, then giving more powers and discretion to CASA might be a good thing for the industry so that CASA has more tools available and isn't forced to rely on the blunt instrument all the time?
Of course the other way to deal with that might be to add a "get out" clause in the preamble to the legislation as well as the legislation itself to qualify CASA's duties regarding safety so that they are not seen as "absolute" but "commercially reasonable" and consistent with a goal of fostering the industry.
That would give CASA a defence in case of accident that their approach was consistent with international best practice and remove the option of achieving GA safety by simply killing it. That would remove the regulatory approach cynically described as "empty skies are safe skies" since CASA would no longer has an absolute duty of care to passengers and apparently no care at all for the industry,
Of course that would then remove the CASA absolute defence that makes the AAT Commissioners stand to attention and salute every time its used by CASA - the appeal to a bald and unqualified "Safety".
Perhaps this quote might be relevant in this regard:
Mothers needlessly banned from heating up baby food by health and safety jobsworths, Government says - Telegraph
Should CASA be required by law to use common sense?
I and perhaps the Senators might also like to assure themselves that CASA has not decided that its in its interest to deal with fewer but larger operators, and has taken a confidential decision to make it difficult for new players to enter the industry whle forcing others to leave or amalgamate. Unvarnished statistics about the GA industry (excluding RAA and SAAA) might prove illuminating on this matter.
.....and to cover the Sunfish backside, it may well be that Barriers transgressions are major and inexcuseable and CASA had given them plenty of time to straighten up and fly right, but what would I know?
Or are we simply just talking coincidence here?
Do we perhaps have a problem in that CASA's regulatory approach is so totally hamstrung by law and regulation that its only response to a perceived safety threat is to go for the jugular and try and bankrupt the offender as quickly as possible and before they can drag CASA through the courts at great expense to the taxpayer?
If that is the case, then giving more powers and discretion to CASA might be a good thing for the industry so that CASA has more tools available and isn't forced to rely on the blunt instrument all the time?
Of course the other way to deal with that might be to add a "get out" clause in the preamble to the legislation as well as the legislation itself to qualify CASA's duties regarding safety so that they are not seen as "absolute" but "commercially reasonable" and consistent with a goal of fostering the industry.
That would give CASA a defence in case of accident that their approach was consistent with international best practice and remove the option of achieving GA safety by simply killing it. That would remove the regulatory approach cynically described as "empty skies are safe skies" since CASA would no longer has an absolute duty of care to passengers and apparently no care at all for the industry,
Of course that would then remove the CASA absolute defence that makes the AAT Commissioners stand to attention and salute every time its used by CASA - the appeal to a bald and unqualified "Safety".
Perhaps this quote might be relevant in this regard:
‘The Health and Safety Executive says it is fed up with being cited as an excuse for preventing people from taking reasonable risks as they go about their lives. The organisation’s chairman Judith Hackett told BBC Breakfast it is time for people to stand up to ‘jobsworths’ who wrongly use the health and safety mantra as a barrier to common sense.
............ Mr Hoban’s remarks come after an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive found that the rules are often being wrongly applied or used an excuse.
The HSE looked at 100 cases, and found that in 38, health and safety rules were simply being used as an excuse for unpopular decisions. In more than a quarter of cases, the rules had simply been wrongly applied
’
............ Mr Hoban’s remarks come after an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive found that the rules are often being wrongly applied or used an excuse.
The HSE looked at 100 cases, and found that in 38, health and safety rules were simply being used as an excuse for unpopular decisions. In more than a quarter of cases, the rules had simply been wrongly applied
’
Should CASA be required by law to use common sense?
I and perhaps the Senators might also like to assure themselves that CASA has not decided that its in its interest to deal with fewer but larger operators, and has taken a confidential decision to make it difficult for new players to enter the industry whle forcing others to leave or amalgamate. Unvarnished statistics about the GA industry (excluding RAA and SAAA) might prove illuminating on this matter.
.....and to cover the Sunfish backside, it may well be that Barriers transgressions are major and inexcuseable and CASA had given them plenty of time to straighten up and fly right, but what would I know?
Last edited by Sunfish; 26th Dec 2012 at 17:04.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
even CASA is not dumb enough to suspend an AOC based on the ramblings of a disgruntled ex staff member
There are very very strong rumours about this being over a poison pen statement / letter, of one previously sacked and disgruntled Horn Island employee.
This person comes with a rumoured history, a rather negative one from NZ, PNG and now Australia.
I get the feeling there is going to be egg on a number of faces over this.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of you blokes make me laugh. I'd lay money that you'd be the types that would get picked up for speeding by the police, argue the point when there is no doubt it was you. Take it to court, where the fine would be upheld, then call the coppers for every name under the sun because:
A. You'd been doing it for thirty years and never been caught;
B. Because you have no grasp on the reality of the dangers of your actions;
C. You don't like coppers.
The suggestion that CASA would flippantly suspend an AOC is absolutely ludicrous. Likewise that they would do it without hard and substantial evidence. None of you, including myself, know the history behind the suspension. Everything else is speculation. It doesn't matter whether they've been in business for a week or 50 years. The result is the same. If you're non-compliant sooner or later you can expect to be reined in. For all any of us know this has been going in for a very long time and many of us have had our suspicions.
CASA has a job to do as does every other regulatory division of government. I'd hazard a guess that they've learnt a trick or two along the way to stop wayward operators slipping through their fingers through legal loopholes. If CASA have it wrong I hope the lawsuit and damages claim is extensive.
A. You'd been doing it for thirty years and never been caught;
B. Because you have no grasp on the reality of the dangers of your actions;
C. You don't like coppers.
The suggestion that CASA would flippantly suspend an AOC is absolutely ludicrous. Likewise that they would do it without hard and substantial evidence. None of you, including myself, know the history behind the suspension. Everything else is speculation. It doesn't matter whether they've been in business for a week or 50 years. The result is the same. If you're non-compliant sooner or later you can expect to be reined in. For all any of us know this has been going in for a very long time and many of us have had our suspicions.
CASA has a job to do as does every other regulatory division of government. I'd hazard a guess that they've learnt a trick or two along the way to stop wayward operators slipping through their fingers through legal loopholes. If CASA have it wrong I hope the lawsuit and damages claim is extensive.
Last edited by Defenestrator; 26th Dec 2012 at 23:42.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defenstator,
Your last post would have to be one of the most ignorant posts I have ever read.
Sure nobody likes being booked, but doing 80 in a 60 zone is pretty clear cut.
Have you considered being compliant is not black and white ?, that one FOI or AWIs interpretation of a piece of legislation can be so drastically different to the next FOI or AWI.
Have you considered a great deal of information published and enforced by CASA has no actual legislated head of power, i.e. they couldn't enforce it in a court of law if they chose too ?, manuals of standards (MOS), AOCM, CAAP for example, there are plenty more, so they don't take it too court, more often than not they do exactly what Torres suggested:
So having been in the industry for thirty years is irrelevant ?, sounds like the kind of thinking that sees bare licenced pilots in the right hand seat of a jet and captains with bare ATPLS as OK, do you see it this way ?.
Someone mentioned Barry earlier, dead men can't defend themselves, but of the several thousand of pilots he trained, a very very very very large number of them speak nothing but praises, irrelevant ?, I don't think so.
Perhaps Torres is best qualified to answer that one.
Your last post would have to be one of the most ignorant posts I have ever read.
Sure nobody likes being booked, but doing 80 in a 60 zone is pretty clear cut.
Have you considered being compliant is not black and white ?, that one FOI or AWIs interpretation of a piece of legislation can be so drastically different to the next FOI or AWI.
Have you considered a great deal of information published and enforced by CASA has no actual legislated head of power, i.e. they couldn't enforce it in a court of law if they chose too ?, manuals of standards (MOS), AOCM, CAAP for example, there are plenty more, so they don't take it too court, more often than not they do exactly what Torres suggested:
"CASA's administrative action is a form of economic regulation - or financial strangulation. Ground the b@stards without trial long enough to break them financially!"
Someone mentioned Barry earlier, dead men can't defend themselves, but of the several thousand of pilots he trained, a very very very very large number of them speak nothing but praises, irrelevant ?, I don't think so.
The suggestion that CASA would flippantly suspend an AOC is absolutely ludicrous.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Over the Rainbow
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get the feeling there is going to be egg on a number of faces over this.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Socket,
Go read the media releases, they asked for more time to finish their investigation, does not sound like any evidence was presented, examined or cross examined.
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Move to extend Barrier Aviation suspension
How do you take your eggs
.
Go read the media releases, they asked for more time to finish their investigation, does not sound like any evidence was presented, examined or cross examined.
CASA made the application to the Court because investigations into Barrier Aviation will not be completed by the end of the initial five working day suspension period.
How do you take your eggs
.
Barrier Aviation and the now defunct Falcon Airways, was there a connection in between both these companies? Someone mentioned something in a earlier post.
disgruntled Horn Island employee.
Last edited by Car RAMROD; 27th Dec 2012 at 01:47.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horn Island a hole ?, try Oombulgurri, Doomadgee, Kowanyama, Ringers Oak, Leigh Creek, Burketown, Hells Gate or Fitzroy Crossing ( there are many more names that deserve to be on this list ).
Horn Island is a holiday destination in comparison.
Hating a place, doing your time and being glad to leave is one thing.
Leaving and committing professional suicide is another.
Horn Island is a holiday destination in comparison.
Hating a place, doing your time and being glad to leave is one thing.
Leaving and committing professional suicide is another.
Last edited by Shed Dog Tosser; 27th Dec 2012 at 01:56.
14 Objectives of Minister
- The objectives of the Minister under this Act are—
- (a) to undertake the Minister's functions in a way that contributes to the aim of achieving an integrated, safe, responsive, and sustainable transport system; and
- (b) to ensure that New Zealand's obligations under international civil aviation agreements are implemented.
- The functions of the Minister under this Act are—
- (a) to promote safety in civil aviation:
- (b) to administer New Zealand's participation in the Convention and any other international aviation convention, agreement, or understanding to which the Government of New Zealand is a party:
- (c) to administer the Crown's interest in the aerodromes referred to in Part 10:
- (d) to make rules under this Act.
The above is S14/14A of the NZ Civil Aviation Act 1990.
I suggest our Kiwi cousins are a lot smarter than we are, aviation wise, the above is a very significant example.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 2nd Jan 2013 at 01:25.
Shed Dog,
MOS are disallowable instruments, they are enforceable. Effectively a third tier of legislation.
As for the AOCM, this is treated as a holy text, to be worshiped and revered by it's priestly class, the FOI, and like most such holy texts, its meaning is whatever the local high priest decrees.
-----but don't forget, your "accepted" Operations Manual is enforceable, even bits that you had to include, although there was no legal head of power to require their inclusion, but no AOC if you didn't see the error of your way, and voluntarily submit to the "higher orders".
Tootle pip!!
MOS are disallowable instruments, they are enforceable. Effectively a third tier of legislation.
As for the AOCM, this is treated as a holy text, to be worshiped and revered by it's priestly class, the FOI, and like most such holy texts, its meaning is whatever the local high priest decrees.
-----but don't forget, your "accepted" Operations Manual is enforceable, even bits that you had to include, although there was no legal head of power to require their inclusion, but no AOC if you didn't see the error of your way, and voluntarily submit to the "higher orders".
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 2nd Jan 2013 at 01:25.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shed Dog,
This thread has eluded to alleged details of aircraft being flown with known defects and a culture within said company of pressuring pilots to do so. From what i can glean from media releases this is one of many reasons the AOC was suspended. Pardon my 'ignorance' but given your robust knowledge of regulatory process, please point out to me where in the legislation this is acceptable. If it's your opinion that this is acceptable then it's you my friend that is ignorant not I. You can sight all manner of failings on CASA's part but at the end of the day the 'speeding ticket' will stand. The rest of the nonsense you rebutted with isn't worthy of comment.
D
This thread has eluded to alleged details of aircraft being flown with known defects and a culture within said company of pressuring pilots to do so. From what i can glean from media releases this is one of many reasons the AOC was suspended. Pardon my 'ignorance' but given your robust knowledge of regulatory process, please point out to me where in the legislation this is acceptable. If it's your opinion that this is acceptable then it's you my friend that is ignorant not I. You can sight all manner of failings on CASA's part but at the end of the day the 'speeding ticket' will stand. The rest of the nonsense you rebutted with isn't worthy of comment.
D
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defentrator,
Allegations are exactly that, allegations.
Barrier has not been found guilty of anything, just an allegation/s.
So the speeding ticket comparon is idiotic, barrier has been arrested, yet the police do not yet have sufficient evidence to lay charges or present a case, so they've requested no bail and another six odd weeks to investigate. Does this sound fair to you.
History teaches us that, as torres suggested, casa is finacially strangling the company.
So the whole concept of innocent until proven otherwise does not appear to be the case, does it?
The only information that appears to have been presented is the "imminent risk" statement, this has been used many many times.
Imagine in two or three months time, this is all proven to be caused by a vindictive sacked employee, yet barrier will have been without an income for three months, chances of survival get pretty small.
Again remember, no evidence has been presented and challenged, neither will it need to be until sometime in feb 2013, how would your household function with no income for three months?, bet your banker would not see the funny side of it.
There has been only one allegation on this thread about inappropriate behaviour which another poster called as BS and the poster then deleted ( beaver rotate i believe ).
There have been mutliple cases of disgruntled little pricks causing huge amounts of financial damage to companies as revenge for sacking or humiliation.
If you can not understand that, say hi to your friends in fairy land for me.
Allegations are exactly that, allegations.
Barrier has not been found guilty of anything, just an allegation/s.
So the speeding ticket comparon is idiotic, barrier has been arrested, yet the police do not yet have sufficient evidence to lay charges or present a case, so they've requested no bail and another six odd weeks to investigate. Does this sound fair to you.
History teaches us that, as torres suggested, casa is finacially strangling the company.
So the whole concept of innocent until proven otherwise does not appear to be the case, does it?
The only information that appears to have been presented is the "imminent risk" statement, this has been used many many times.
Imagine in two or three months time, this is all proven to be caused by a vindictive sacked employee, yet barrier will have been without an income for three months, chances of survival get pretty small.
Again remember, no evidence has been presented and challenged, neither will it need to be until sometime in feb 2013, how would your household function with no income for three months?, bet your banker would not see the funny side of it.
There has been only one allegation on this thread about inappropriate behaviour which another poster called as BS and the poster then deleted ( beaver rotate i believe ).
There have been mutliple cases of disgruntled little pricks causing huge amounts of financial damage to companies as revenge for sacking or humiliation.
If you can not understand that, say hi to your friends in fairy land for me.
Last edited by Shed Dog Tosser; 27th Dec 2012 at 03:52.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cairns
It's a sad day when CASA shuts an operation down on the most critical day of the year.
The language of their press release sounds very carefully worded and very confident.
I've haven't been near Cairns in over 20 years but I'm guessing that lots of the well known names there 20 years ago are still around today.
Cairns has a corrupt element especially when it comes to Qld and Fed Government contracts. I recall some local cops having some very corrupt relationships and putting the competition out of action by any means was all part of the game that they played.
The press release talks about pilot reports, that would most probably be former pilots and when you operate in remote areas, grounding an aircraft at a remote location, is a nightmare for operators.
There are 365 days in a year, CASA chose the WORST DAY in the year and
it creates OPTICS that begs questions and CASA if its got it's act together, needs to explain, in its press release, WHY, it chose this day to ground their operation.
IF it was not a CASA coincidence, then why did "the pilots" most probably former pilots "wait" till December Xmass to make their call(s).
Their Fleet are typical of the charter that's been going on in Cairns for for the last 30 years and they are all relatively high maintenance airplanes and that's to be expected with that fleet in Cairns.
Regards
Ramjet
The language of their press release sounds very carefully worded and very confident.
I've haven't been near Cairns in over 20 years but I'm guessing that lots of the well known names there 20 years ago are still around today.
Cairns has a corrupt element especially when it comes to Qld and Fed Government contracts. I recall some local cops having some very corrupt relationships and putting the competition out of action by any means was all part of the game that they played.
The press release talks about pilot reports, that would most probably be former pilots and when you operate in remote areas, grounding an aircraft at a remote location, is a nightmare for operators.
There are 365 days in a year, CASA chose the WORST DAY in the year and
it creates OPTICS that begs questions and CASA if its got it's act together, needs to explain, in its press release, WHY, it chose this day to ground their operation.
IF it was not a CASA coincidence, then why did "the pilots" most probably former pilots "wait" till December Xmass to make their call(s).
Their Fleet are typical of the charter that's been going on in Cairns for for the last 30 years and they are all relatively high maintenance airplanes and that's to be expected with that fleet in Cairns.
Regards
Ramjet
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An AOC search for Barrier Aviation shows that casa renewed Barrier's AOC on the 30th November 2012.
What the hell happened that was serious enough to ground the whole company in the 22 days between 30/11/12 (when casa were happy to renew Barrier's AOC) and 23/12/12 when casa says "permitting Barrier Aviation to continue to fly poses a serious and imminent risk to air safety"?
Smelling very fishy.
Search results AOC records
Holder Name: BARRIER AVIATION PTY. LTD.
Primary Trading Name:
Town/City: STRATFORD
State: QLD
Issued: 2012/11/30
Expires: 2013/05/31
Number: N516013
Operations: Aerial Work; International Operations; Charter (Flying Training, Charter under 5700 kgs)
Type of AOC: Australian
CASA Office: Northern Region CNS
AOC Holder Country: AUSTRALIA
AOC Application Status: Issued
Holder Name: BARRIER AVIATION PTY. LTD.
Primary Trading Name:
Town/City: STRATFORD
State: QLD
Issued: 2012/11/30
Expires: 2013/05/31
Number: N516013
Operations: Aerial Work; International Operations; Charter (Flying Training, Charter under 5700 kgs)
Type of AOC: Australian
CASA Office: Northern Region CNS
AOC Holder Country: AUSTRALIA
AOC Application Status: Issued
Smelling very fishy.
Last edited by Trent 972; 27th Dec 2012 at 06:51.
Is it really theworst time of the year for CASA to suspend the AOC, I flew up there a few years back and remember it being the very quite over Xmas with all the government workers in The Far North away on holiday. As 80% of government work goes thru one broker I'm sure there is plenty of other operators now pushing flight n duty and M/Rs to get the jobs done.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AOC's are normally issued for a three year term.
A six month AOC possibly means CASA were not quite happy ...
Issued: 2012/11/30
Expires: 2013/05/31
Expires: 2013/05/31
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two_dogs, is that another way of saying casa is happy to allow "a serious and imminent risk to air safety" for 6 months but not for 3 years?
I don't think so, but maybe casa do.
If so wouldn't that make casa "a serious and imminent risk to air safety"?
I don't think so, but maybe casa do.
If so wouldn't that make casa "a serious and imminent risk to air safety"?
Last edited by Trent 972; 27th Dec 2012 at 07:07.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trent, No, just another way of saying CASA were not quite happy ...
A CASA pokesman said Barrier Aviation had been under investigation for six weeks, but more alleged maintenance problems had come to light in the "past couple of days''.
Last edited by Two_dogs; 27th Dec 2012 at 07:12. Reason: To add a quote from CASA
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see, just like "only a bit pregnant", but the obstetrician will be back in 22 days to check.
In the meantime cigarettes and alcohol will do the foetus no harm.
ok then, they decided to 'abort the foetus' even though it was only alleged.
Yes weren't they the same days casa had supposedly closed down for their Christmas break.
I think the action by casa at that time, in that manner, stinks to high hell!
In the meantime cigarettes and alcohol will do the foetus no harm.
....more alleged maintenance problems....
past couple of days
CASA offices will close from end of business Friday 21 December 2012 and will reopen on Wednesday 2 January 2013.
Last edited by Trent 972; 27th Dec 2012 at 07:42.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trent,
What is your problem?
All I said was, "CASA were not quite happy", evidenced by issue of a six month AOC. Happy enough to not put 50 people out of work until a thorough investigation was completed. CASA do not take lightly the option of shutting down an AOC and putting people out of work.
Investigation commenced: circa 11/11/12
AOC renewal 30/11/12 - CASA were not quite happy.
AOC grounded 23/12/12 - CASA are obviously less happy.
For the record, I know Dave, Cher and the crew at both Cairns and Horn Is bases and wish them the best.
For the record, I know most Cairns FOI's and AWI's and wish them ...
Oh ... by the way, conversation over.
What is your problem?
All I said was, "CASA were not quite happy", evidenced by issue of a six month AOC. Happy enough to not put 50 people out of work until a thorough investigation was completed. CASA do not take lightly the option of shutting down an AOC and putting people out of work.
Investigation commenced: circa 11/11/12
AOC renewal 30/11/12 - CASA were not quite happy.
AOC grounded 23/12/12 - CASA are obviously less happy.
For the record, I know Dave, Cher and the crew at both Cairns and Horn Is bases and wish them the best.
For the record, I know most Cairns FOI's and AWI's and wish them ...
Oh ... by the way, conversation over.