CAO 100.5 Amendment 13
CAO 100.5....
10.00pm 30/7/2013 not available on CASA website or COMLAW.
So where did it come from? Was it leaked by Julian Assange?
So it's an amendment, not an amended CAO - which means we have to have both the old 2011 (of 2012) version and the new 2013 (of 2013) version to build one usable document from, somehow? HUH?
How about issuing a whole new 100.5 CASA?
Supposed to bring everyone in line, singing from the same songbook, blah blah, HOWEVER.... RA-Aus aircraft do not comply with this CAO - they are bound by their Tech Manual Section 4.2.4-6 of July 2007 to do something else. So there goes CASA's theory of everyone's gear being tuned the same way so we don't meet in the middle of the big sky. Right or wrong, CASA requires RA-Aus flyers to do what is in their manual, not follow the CAO, so it's not the same for everyone like they claim is it! It's fundamentally flawed already, by their own CASA approvals!
Next, to harmonise with world's best practice, USA perhaps (who knows), FAR 91.411 only requires IFR aircraft instruments to be tested to the specs in Appendix E of FAR 43. VFR? Nope. Not required. Doesn't happen - according to my US contacts.
Makes a bit of a mockery to paras 1 & 2 of article 1 of the agreement on the promotion of aviation safety between the government of the united states of America and the government of Australia June 2005, don't you think?
(insert sound of pruners scampering off to go look that up...)
Next, did you all see that AD/INST/8 & 9 are now gone, as is CAO108.56.
All replaced by CAO 100.5 2011 (of 2012) and 2013 (of 2013).
Who was it said we should just switch to the New Zealand regs? Jibba Jabba? You got my vote.
Where do I sign?
10.00pm 30/7/2013 not available on CASA website or COMLAW.
So where did it come from? Was it leaked by Julian Assange?
So it's an amendment, not an amended CAO - which means we have to have both the old 2011 (of 2012) version and the new 2013 (of 2013) version to build one usable document from, somehow? HUH?
How about issuing a whole new 100.5 CASA?Supposed to bring everyone in line, singing from the same songbook, blah blah, HOWEVER.... RA-Aus aircraft do not comply with this CAO - they are bound by their Tech Manual Section 4.2.4-6 of July 2007 to do something else. So there goes CASA's theory of everyone's gear being tuned the same way so we don't meet in the middle of the big sky. Right or wrong, CASA requires RA-Aus flyers to do what is in their manual, not follow the CAO, so it's not the same for everyone like they claim is it! It's fundamentally flawed already, by their own CASA approvals!
Next, to harmonise with world's best practice, USA perhaps (who knows), FAR 91.411 only requires IFR aircraft instruments to be tested to the specs in Appendix E of FAR 43. VFR? Nope. Not required. Doesn't happen - according to my US contacts.
Makes a bit of a mockery to paras 1 & 2 of article 1 of the agreement on the promotion of aviation safety between the government of the united states of America and the government of Australia June 2005, don't you think?
(insert sound of pruners scampering off to go look that up...)
Next, did you all see that AD/INST/8 & 9 are now gone, as is CAO108.56.
All replaced by CAO 100.5 2011 (of 2012) and 2013 (of 2013).
Who was it said we should just switch to the New Zealand regs? Jibba Jabba? You got my vote.
Where do I sign?
Aaaah! "Maintenance induced failure". This is the first cousin of "infant mortality" - premature failre by stuffing up replacement with new parts.
I had a classic at Ansett many years ago. The MTBF of F27 gyros was only a few thousand hours over many years. Sunfish analysed the data - and found a classic infant mortality curve graphing failure vs time in service. What happend was that the delicate gyro bearings were being stuffed (brinelling) by ham fisted installers.
Sunfish solution: stop changing them so often, TBO increased by ten thousand hours. Problem solved
I had a classic at Ansett many years ago. The MTBF of F27 gyros was only a few thousand hours over many years. Sunfish analysed the data - and found a classic infant mortality curve graphing failure vs time in service. What happend was that the delicate gyro bearings were being stuffed (brinelling) by ham fisted installers.
Sunfish solution: stop changing them so often, TBO increased by ten thousand hours. Problem solved
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Sunny
TBirdV, I did not say switch to the NZ regs....I said we should sub contract the entire job to the NZ CAA. Big difference.
I am surprised Creamie has not pulled you up on that subtle but important point. Disband and sub-out
Owen, nothing to be sorry about, seriously. Genuine offer to help, what have you to lose?
TBirdV, I did not say switch to the NZ regs....I said we should sub contract the entire job to the NZ CAA. Big difference.
I am surprised Creamie has not pulled you up on that subtle but important point. Disband and sub-out
Owen, nothing to be sorry about, seriously. Genuine offer to help, what have you to lose?
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dark side of the moon
Age: 61
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Creampuff and Jabawocky,
With nearly 30 years experience on piston and light turbine engines fitted to both fixed wing and rotorcraft, I can only go on experience and my thoughts.
Perhaps you can baffle me with your academic prose, but my reality is that piston engines on condition leads to more trouble than I need.
As for Sunfish saying that faulty fitment causes brinelled bearings in Gyros, that is typical pilot blaming the engineers. The main cause is moving the aircraft before the gyro has fully run up or run down.
Cheers
With nearly 30 years experience on piston and light turbine engines fitted to both fixed wing and rotorcraft, I can only go on experience and my thoughts.
Perhaps you can baffle me with your academic prose, but my reality is that piston engines on condition leads to more trouble than I need.
As for Sunfish saying that faulty fitment causes brinelled bearings in Gyros, that is typical pilot blaming the engineers. The main cause is moving the aircraft before the gyro has fully run up or run down.
Cheers
It’s not academic prose.
How much time have you spent in the air behind an on-condition engine?
What is 'the trouble' to which you refer, which is caused by running an engine on condition?
Re Sunfish’s example, if it were true that the damage was caused by moving the aircraft before the gyros had fully run up/down, rather than the engineers fiddling with them, the MTBF would not have been affected by stopping the engineers fiddling with them.
How much time have you spent in the air behind an on-condition engine?
What is 'the trouble' to which you refer, which is caused by running an engine on condition?
Re Sunfish’s example, if it were true that the damage was caused by moving the aircraft before the gyros had fully run up/down, rather than the engineers fiddling with them, the MTBF would not have been affected by stopping the engineers fiddling with them.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dark side of the moon
Age: 61
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Creampuff
So many questions and so little time.
1. I don't have to fly them, just keep pilot happy in the air.
2. The trouble with OC maintenance of engines
Pilots screaming at me is the main problem
Engineers at remote localities refusing to sign engine out OC.
Pilot dumped an aircraft next door to Bum Fck nowhere and refusing to fly any further.
Different to private operations I would suggest.
3. Sunfish makes some outrageous claim about brinelling, that happens when the balls starts skipping in the race, and blames it on engineers. Get it, the bearing has to be running and under load for brinelling to occur.
Muck Fee, extended a TBO by 10000 hours, yeah sure.
Cheers
So many questions and so little time.
1. I don't have to fly them, just keep pilot happy in the air.
2. The trouble with OC maintenance of engines
Pilots screaming at me is the main problem
Engineers at remote localities refusing to sign engine out OC.
Pilot dumped an aircraft next door to Bum Fck nowhere and refusing to fly any further.
Different to private operations I would suggest.
3. Sunfish makes some outrageous claim about brinelling, that happens when the balls starts skipping in the race, and blames it on engineers. Get it, the bearing has to be running and under load for brinelling to occur.
Muck Fee, extended a TBO by 10000 hours, yeah sure.
Cheers
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sarnia, ON
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get it, the bearing has to be running and under load for brinelling to occur.
Moving on.
Leadie, is the maintenance induced failure paper the same one referred to in this article? Waddington Effect
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Owen,
I can accept a pilot or an accountant, damned even lawyers will get some sympathy from me for not knowing what Brinelling is, but not an engineer. So may I point out that you might want to take a trip back to the text books. You will find the exact opposite. I have seen and suffered the fate of this on a few occasions in my engineering business. This plane stuff is only a tiny part of what I do.
PS Brinell is spelled with a Capital B too Like Pascal and Newton and so on.
Cheers
3. Sunfish makes some outrageous claim about brinelling, that happens when the balls starts skipping in the race, and blames it on engineers. Get it, the bearing has to be running and under load for brinelling to occur.
I can accept a pilot or an accountant, damned even lawyers will get some sympathy from me for not knowing what Brinelling is, but not an engineer. So may I point out that you might want to take a trip back to the text books. You will find the exact opposite. I have seen and suffered the fate of this on a few occasions in my engineering business. This plane stuff is only a tiny part of what I do.PS Brinell is spelled with a Capital B too
Like Pascal and Newton and so on.Cheers
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Brinelling does not discriminate from heave-light or in-between.
I just checked with Mrs Jaba....her words were exactly as I expected, and concur with
A house with two mechanical engineers and one studying.....it is a sad place 
There is hope one is doing a degree in nursing.
I just checked with Mrs Jaba....her words were exactly as I expected, and concur with
Brinelling
A form of mechanical damage in which metal is displaced or upset without attrition. Permanent deformation of the bearing surfaces where the rollers (or balls) contact the races. Brinelling results from excessive load or impact on stationary bearings.
Found op Brinelling - DiracDelta Science & Engineering Encyclopedia
Brinelling
Brinelling is a material surface failure caused by contact stress that exceeds the material limit. This failure is caused by just one application of a load great enough to exceed the material limit. The result is a permanent dent or "brinell" mark. It is a common cause of roller bearing failures, a...
Found op Brinelling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A form of mechanical damage in which metal is displaced or upset without attrition. Permanent deformation of the bearing surfaces where the rollers (or balls) contact the races. Brinelling results from excessive load or impact on stationary bearings.
Found op Brinelling - DiracDelta Science & Engineering Encyclopedia
Brinelling
Brinelling is a material surface failure caused by contact stress that exceeds the material limit. This failure is caused by just one application of a load great enough to exceed the material limit. The result is a permanent dent or "brinell" mark. It is a common cause of roller bearing failures, a...
Found op Brinelling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There is hope one is doing a degree in nursing.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Actually that is the Brinell hardness test, which is where it all began. As in difference to Brinelling which is the term which came from the Brinell hardness test. Brinelling came from the indentation damage caused by a stationary load not unlike the Brinell hardness test.
Glad you brought that up T28D, I should have started with a history lesson first .....my bad.
Glad you brought that up T28D, I should have started with a history lesson first .....my bad.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
casa just do not get it!!!!!!!!!
Reading through the directions for the regulatory process, the December 2007 process calls for:
But, this is not what is happening at all:
We now have a completely useless, complicated and injurious set of regs, that are not [even after 25 - odd years] complete.
Outcome-based safety regulations
The principle behind outcome-based regulations is to allow for an outcome to be
reached via multiple or various pathways, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. The outcome-based approach contrasts with the traditional prescriptive approach to regulation, where specific process and procedures are set as requirements.
CASA is implementing an outcome-based regulatory framework comprising:
• Outcome-based Regulations;
• Technical Standards;
• Acceptable Means of Compliance; and
• Guidance Material.
Outcome-based Regulations involve the implementation of relatively simple and brief
regulations that express high-level safety outcomes.
Technical Standards include requirements that, for the purpose of clarity and effective administration, are best contained outside the regulations.
Acceptable Means of Compliance set out acceptable methods of demonstrating
compliance with outcome-based regulations. Authorisation by the regulator is assured if an industry applicant follows the relevant Acceptable Means of Compliance. The applicant retains the ability to propose alternatives for consideration should they so wish, provided those alternatives would achieve the required safety outcome.
The principle behind outcome-based regulations is to allow for an outcome to be
reached via multiple or various pathways, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. The outcome-based approach contrasts with the traditional prescriptive approach to regulation, where specific process and procedures are set as requirements.
CASA is implementing an outcome-based regulatory framework comprising:
• Outcome-based Regulations;
• Technical Standards;
• Acceptable Means of Compliance; and
• Guidance Material.
Outcome-based Regulations involve the implementation of relatively simple and brief
regulations that express high-level safety outcomes.
Technical Standards include requirements that, for the purpose of clarity and effective administration, are best contained outside the regulations.
Acceptable Means of Compliance set out acceptable methods of demonstrating
compliance with outcome-based regulations. Authorisation by the regulator is assured if an industry applicant follows the relevant Acceptable Means of Compliance. The applicant retains the ability to propose alternatives for consideration should they so wish, provided those alternatives would achieve the required safety outcome.
But, this is not what is happening at all:
We now have a completely useless, complicated and injurious set of regs, that are not [even after 25 - odd years] complete.
Authorisation by the regulator is assured if an industry applicant follows the relevant Acceptable Means of Compliance
Now who determines the "relevant Acceptable Means of Compliance" if all we have in legislation is "relatively simple and brief regulations that express high-level safety outcomes".
This of course will NOT lead to a myriad (to 10th power) of different points-of-view and different outcomes, will it?
This of course will NOT lead to a myriad (to 10th power) of different points-of-view and different outcomes, will it?
Of course not, all CASA personnel will be standardised, regularised, tenderised, sanforized and pasteurised, and all will be well with world !!
The world will flock to Australia's door to see how to do aviation properly --- didn't Mr. McCormick say we are already the envy of the world, or some such thing??
I jest, of course!!
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 1st Aug 2013 at 15:28.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let there be light.
Panic over according to Phelan – Maintenance mayday resolved – Phew; but read on, the erstwhile Cannane is still recovering CASA chestnuts – for no recompense I note. Perhaps CASA could hire him as one their "consultants" at great expense to the public purse. There's a hoot – "AMROBA experts fix the problem – again".
Bravo Ken and crew, the hand made (embossed and brinelled) chocolate frogs are being delivered as we speak......
Bravo Ken and crew, the hand made (embossed and brinelled) chocolate frogs are being delivered as we speak......