Proof that DAS Skidmore is a new broom
Thread Starter
Time to adopt the US rules. The EAA and SSA in the USA have NO regulatory powers at all and reject attempts to give them such powers as it would change the relationship between the organisation and its members.
It's time we had an Aviation party like Ricky Muir has the Motoring Enthusiast party.
It's time the Aviation industry mounted a public information campaign like the Unions do when their members' rights and freedoms are threatened.
It's time we had some vocal and influential representation in Canberra that can talk about more than esoteric and obscure Air Traffic Control rules.
Will the Australian GA, Recreational, Sport and Airline 'fraternity' finally band together now, before we vanish?
Having virtually killed GA, the parasite seeks new hosts. The MPC teaches nothing about a safe system of maintenance, but if your aircraft doesn't burn the coroner will find that your Maintenance release is beautifully filled out.
CASA cannot possibly add value to aviation activities at all. They remind me of my early maintenance "crusades" in the oil and then the aviation industry before I was taken aside and had some sense shaken into me...
A recommendation to ground the entire F27 fleet following a study of nose wheel vibration still makes me blush
CASA cannot possibly add value to aviation activities at all. They remind me of my early maintenance "crusades" in the oil and then the aviation industry before I was taken aside and had some sense shaken into me...
A recommendation to ground the entire F27 fleet following a study of nose wheel vibration still makes me blush
Thread Starter
I'd do it.
At least I would get to fly more than I do as CP
At least I would get to fly more than I do as CP
Thanks Triadic, everytime I logged in I found that I was the most recent poster, but with a different time/date each time - each far removed from when I made my last post! I wonder if it's related to people taking part in the poll?
From what I heard Truss say at the opening, the Government has allegedly ordered CASA to implement the Forsyth Review recommendations. However he did not mention them by name and he said that CASA had been given some sort of schedule or time limit. A video deconstruction would be needed to see if he said anything concrete at all, which I doubt. I didn't hear Skidmore so I don't know if he said anything more positive.
My take on the situation is that CASA will simply make appropriate noises and wait the government out. Delay is a powerful tool.
Once an election is called, all work (if any) on Forsyth will immediately stop. A new government is not bound to implement any of the previous governments policies and Forsyth can then be safely put in the archive to gather dust.
Another Albanese clone who hates general aviation will then be appointed and the embuggerisation of all those who had the temerity to complain to Forsyth will resume.
To put it another way: It will take more than honeyed words to convince me that the Leopard has changed his spots.
My take on the situation is that CASA will simply make appropriate noises and wait the government out. Delay is a powerful tool.
Once an election is called, all work (if any) on Forsyth will immediately stop. A new government is not bound to implement any of the previous governments policies and Forsyth can then be safely put in the archive to gather dust.
Another Albanese clone who hates general aviation will then be appointed and the embuggerisation of all those who had the temerity to complain to Forsyth will resume.
To put it another way: It will take more than honeyed words to convince me that the Leopard has changed his spots.
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
Given Skidmore started his briefing period before last Christmas I would have considered the Forsyth Report the first thing to read and act on. Some 12 months later nobody can even refer to it by name. One may ask what is the tenure of his appointment because it appears he has already wasted 30% of it. (Or 20% if a 5 year term). Can we get a refund of wages wasted?
And he's still asking for input. (I note yesterdays blurb gave Launceston 24 hours notice of the soiree. Pity it was 24 hours in arrears, 08/09/2015. CASA calls for Change Management Input
And he's still asking for input. (I note yesterdays blurb gave Launceston 24 hours notice of the soiree. Pity it was 24 hours in arrears, 08/09/2015. CASA calls for Change Management Input
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 9th Sep 2015 at 23:58. Reason: CAsA tried calandars once and they stuffed that up too.
The good news, Frank, is that you can still register for the 8 September gabfest. Indeed, it's the only one on the list on the CASA website that has a 'register now' link.
Another organisational triumph for CASA.
PS: The CASA website has now magically changed ...
Another organisational triumph for CASA.
PS: The CASA website has now magically changed ...
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 10th Sep 2015 at 04:34. Reason: Added the PS
For all those doubters out there, doubt no more. Mr Skidmore has issued a directive!
According to Australian Flying, the directive says that "aviation safety regulations must be shown to be necessary". Apparently, the directive also says: "If a regulation can be justified on safety-risk grounds, it must be made in a form that provides for the most efficient allocation of industry and CASA resources. Regulations must not impose unnecessary costs or unnecessarily hinder levels of participation in aviation and its capacity for growth."
Pure visionary genius! If only someone had thought to give directives like that in the past. Oh wait ....
I also note from the story that there are, apparently, still people in the industry who believe these directives mean something in the real world. Oh dear ...
Meanwhile, back in the letters pages, Mr Skidmore says that "suspending the new licensing regulations now would only cause confusion, cost and administrative burden for the aviation community." Since when has that stopped CASA from doing something? I can't think of much that CASA does that doesn't cause confusion, cost and administrative burden.
Mr Skidmore goes on to say: "People have asked me 'why not suspend Part 61 and go back to the old regulations'? Let me be clear, the regulations Part 61 replaced have been repealed so there are no regulations to go back to and already more than 13,000 pilots hold new Part 61 licences".
Mr Skidmore is either poorly advised or ignoring advice. It would only take a one-sentence regulation to revive the old regulations. Just as an old licence is deemed to be a Part 61 licence, so a Part 61 licence could be deemed to be a licence under the revived regulations. I'm sure they could manage a one sentence regulation, having produced over 2000 pages of regulations in the quest for "safety through simplicity".
The straps on that straightjacket are evidently tightening around Mr Skidmore.
According to Australian Flying, the directive says that "aviation safety regulations must be shown to be necessary". Apparently, the directive also says: "If a regulation can be justified on safety-risk grounds, it must be made in a form that provides for the most efficient allocation of industry and CASA resources. Regulations must not impose unnecessary costs or unnecessarily hinder levels of participation in aviation and its capacity for growth."
Pure visionary genius! If only someone had thought to give directives like that in the past. Oh wait ....
I also note from the story that there are, apparently, still people in the industry who believe these directives mean something in the real world. Oh dear ...
Meanwhile, back in the letters pages, Mr Skidmore says that "suspending the new licensing regulations now would only cause confusion, cost and administrative burden for the aviation community." Since when has that stopped CASA from doing something? I can't think of much that CASA does that doesn't cause confusion, cost and administrative burden.
Mr Skidmore goes on to say: "People have asked me 'why not suspend Part 61 and go back to the old regulations'? Let me be clear, the regulations Part 61 replaced have been repealed so there are no regulations to go back to and already more than 13,000 pilots hold new Part 61 licences".
Mr Skidmore is either poorly advised or ignoring advice. It would only take a one-sentence regulation to revive the old regulations. Just as an old licence is deemed to be a Part 61 licence, so a Part 61 licence could be deemed to be a licence under the revived regulations. I'm sure they could manage a one sentence regulation, having produced over 2000 pages of regulations in the quest for "safety through simplicity".
The straps on that straightjacket are evidently tightening around Mr Skidmore.
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
I suppose it would be simplistic to say the new DAS is a disappointment but to be fair on him today, Truss is running the joint while Abbott is away.
So things could get worse.
So things could get worse.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Mr Skidmore is either poorly advised or ignoring advice. It would only take a one-sentence regulation to revive the old regulations. Just as an old licence is deemed to be a Part 61 licence, so a Part 61 licence could be deemed to be a licence under the revived regulations".
Haven't applied for a new Part 61 licence yet, still trying to make my mind up if I want to keep going under the weight of the Crap piling up on us all.
Aviation has been my life for over fifty years, but its all becoming too hard.
I cannot see any point to it anymore, my 30,000 hour experience is meaningless to the regulator, Just a silly old fart who knows nothing.
I'm still using a licence issued in 1979, almost identical to the "New" one, strange aint it??? "everything old is new again"
Way back in 1966 as an industry, we had problems with smart ass, ex RAAF "types"...Sky Gods, if you want to anoint them as such, but my dear old Dad who won a DFC and taught me to fly, hammered into me.
"when you think you know it all...give it up and do something else"
Knowledge and expertise does not reside in CAsA it resides in the Industry,
It really is time the ex RAAF Cadre in CAsA stand aside and utilize the expertise of the industry, while there is still an industry left.
Haven't applied for a new Part 61 licence yet, still trying to make my mind up if I want to keep going under the weight of the Crap piling up on us all.
Aviation has been my life for over fifty years, but its all becoming too hard.
I cannot see any point to it anymore, my 30,000 hour experience is meaningless to the regulator, Just a silly old fart who knows nothing.
I'm still using a licence issued in 1979, almost identical to the "New" one, strange aint it??? "everything old is new again"
Way back in 1966 as an industry, we had problems with smart ass, ex RAAF "types"...Sky Gods, if you want to anoint them as such, but my dear old Dad who won a DFC and taught me to fly, hammered into me.
"when you think you know it all...give it up and do something else"
Knowledge and expertise does not reside in CAsA it resides in the Industry,
It really is time the ex RAAF Cadre in CAsA stand aside and utilize the expertise of the industry, while there is still an industry left.
But TB, you lack the necessary experience to give you the wisdom and - let's call it for what it is - sheer guts to issue a directive that says: "aviation safety regulations must be shown to be necessary".
Think of the momentous occasion that it must have been when Mr Skidmore signed a piece of paper with those words.
A piece of paper!
With those words!
And more words!
Called a directive!
Imagine all the CASA people slapping their own foreheads and gazing skywards: "If only we'd been directed to do that before! Finally we can stop making aviation safety regulations that have been shown to be unnecessary."
It cracks me up. I can just imagine the conversations that duchessed Mr Skidmore into falling for it. But he isn't the first and won't be the last.
Think of the momentous occasion that it must have been when Mr Skidmore signed a piece of paper with those words.
A piece of paper!
With those words!
And more words!
Called a directive!
Imagine all the CASA people slapping their own foreheads and gazing skywards: "If only we'd been directed to do that before! Finally we can stop making aviation safety regulations that have been shown to be unnecessary."
It cracks me up. I can just imagine the conversations that duchessed Mr Skidmore into falling for it. But he isn't the first and won't be the last.
According to Australian Flying, the directive says that "aviation safety regulations must be shown to be necessary".
I demand - no, we as an industry should, nay, must! - demand that regulations must NOT be shown to be necessary. Band together now, brothers and sisters, and rid us of the scourge of this farcical band of fools forthwith!
And that's the genius of scams: Some of the people fall for them, every time. Including Mr Skidmore in this case.
People think that CASA was busy making regulations without having to justify them as necessary, because no one had directed them not to (patent poppycock), and as a consequence of the directive things will change.
Conversation in the Office of Parliamentary Counsel:
"So, these civil aviation safety regulations you're instructing us to draft. Are they necessary?"
CASA wallah: "Nup. No ... wait ... errmmm ... I know the answer to this one ... Yes!"
OPC: "Lucky. Now that Mr Skidmore has given that directive (which is completely meaningless and irrelevant to us because we don't work for him) we're obliged not to draft unnecessary regulations. Gone are the days when we sat around drafting unnecessary regulations for ****s and giggles."
It still cracks me up.
Including Mr Skidmore in this case. People think that CASA was busy making regulations without having to justify them as necessary, because no one had directed them not to (patent poppycock), and as a consequence of the directive things will change.
Conversation in the Office of Parliamentary Counsel:
"So, these civil aviation safety regulations you're instructing us to draft. Are they necessary?"
CASA wallah: "Nup. No ... wait ... errmmm ... I know the answer to this one ... Yes!"
OPC: "Lucky. Now that Mr Skidmore has given that directive (which is completely meaningless and irrelevant to us because we don't work for him) we're obliged not to draft unnecessary regulations. Gone are the days when we sat around drafting unnecessary regulations for ****s and giggles."
It still cracks me up.
Haven't applied for a new Part 61 licence yet, still trying to make my mind up if I want to keep going under the weight of the Crap piling up on us all.