Slattery Auctions - DirectAir
Rumour is that a Qantas type purchased the world's oldest Navajo and a J31.
"Interesting"!
Comp Stall, I saw some hilariously funny things but they get lost in a ruby red haze. Could you lift the Cabernet Curtain and remind me?
"Interesting"!
Comp Stall, I saw some hilariously funny things but they get lost in a ruby red haze. Could you lift the Cabernet Curtain and remind me?
Last edited by Horatio Leafblower; 27th Feb 2013 at 23:05.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 60
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When will GA re-equip with modern aircraft? When the end-users are prepared to pay the genuine costs of new airframes, career GA pilots, top-shelf engineering support and appropriate training & checking. In other words, no time soon!
Just got around to reading the verdict by Justice Murphy in the CASA vs Caper Pty Ltd (Direct Air) Appeal, handed down on 2 November 2012.
As I understand it:
Travel agent takes money from Joe Public, and charters an aircraft to fly Joe Public from Point A to Point B, have a look at some stuff, and return to Point A. Travel Agent wants to attract punters and so publishes a schedule as understandably Joe Public wants to know what he's getting before he parts with his hard-earned coin.
The aircraft operator then gets caned (and canned) for operating a Regular Passenger Transport service without being suitably certified, which departs from set locations according to a published schedule, even though the aircraft operator didn't set the schedule or advertise the service, and is only receiving payment for the flight from one entity, the travel agent.
Am I missing something? Isn't that a closed charter?
I heard recently that any guvvie department would kill to have the powers that CASA have. I didn't actually believe it until I read this judgement.
Or, does this judgement mean we are all screwed, royally?
As I understand it:
Travel agent takes money from Joe Public, and charters an aircraft to fly Joe Public from Point A to Point B, have a look at some stuff, and return to Point A. Travel Agent wants to attract punters and so publishes a schedule as understandably Joe Public wants to know what he's getting before he parts with his hard-earned coin.
The aircraft operator then gets caned (and canned) for operating a Regular Passenger Transport service without being suitably certified, which departs from set locations according to a published schedule, even though the aircraft operator didn't set the schedule or advertise the service, and is only receiving payment for the flight from one entity, the travel agent.
Am I missing something? Isn't that a closed charter?
I heard recently that any guvvie department would kill to have the powers that CASA have. I didn't actually believe it until I read this judgement.
Or, does this judgement mean we are all screwed, royally?
I'm not sure how this works but we shut part of our operation in response to it.
I discussed it with an FOI who told me that a scenic flight around Menindee Lakes is an open charter type Scenic flight, but a Scenic flight around Lake Eyre booked and "ticketed" (forgive the expression) in exactly the same way "is probably a bit far to be a scenic flight", and would be considered RPT.
I asked if there was an arm of the definition in 206 that mentioned distance and he told me that everything would be made clear in the new regs, sorry for the mess
3 less starting jobs for young fellas now.
I discussed it with an FOI who told me that a scenic flight around Menindee Lakes is an open charter type Scenic flight, but a Scenic flight around Lake Eyre booked and "ticketed" (forgive the expression) in exactly the same way "is probably a bit far to be a scenic flight", and would be considered RPT.
I asked if there was an arm of the definition in 206 that mentioned distance and he told me that everything would be made clear in the new regs, sorry for the mess
3 less starting jobs for young fellas now.
So have I got this right?
The judgement is flawed, the system is so over-regulated that it is almost impossible to make a quid, CASA (or that particular FOI at least) is aware that it is flawed, the regulations are being changed.
Maybe. In 12 months time. Or so.
In the mean time, don't do anything wrong, otherwise under the existing law, they'll pingya. Even though, in 12 months time, the law may change.
The judgement is flawed, the system is so over-regulated that it is almost impossible to make a quid, CASA (or that particular FOI at least) is aware that it is flawed, the regulations are being changed.
Maybe. In 12 months time. Or so.
In the mean time, don't do anything wrong, otherwise under the existing law, they'll pingya. Even though, in 12 months time, the law may change.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
outnabout, I believe the judgement is flawed and that President Fisk of the AAT actually got it right. In fact, it is not only flawed but it is a shocker. However, the Federal Court's decision is now precedent and to get it overturned someone will need to take a case up to the Federal Court of Appeal. That, obviously, will not be Directair so it will be up to some other poor sucker who gets the rough end of CASA. 
The problem lies in that the current regulations are such a mess that they can be made to say anything that someone thinks they should say. Whether the new regulations (that are approaching, what, 25 years old now?) will rectify anything I don't know. But, for pity's sake, should distance be a deciding factor as to whether a flight is a closed charter or not?
The problem lies in that the current regulations are such a mess that they can be made to say anything that someone thinks they should say. Whether the new regulations (that are approaching, what, 25 years old now?) will rectify anything I don't know. But, for pity's sake, should distance be a deciding factor as to whether a flight is a closed charter or not?
