Proof that DAS Skidmore is a new broom
What is the safety risk that is mitigated by sending CASA the pieces of paper and the photograph?
You know the answer. There is no safety risk that is mitigated by sending CASA the pieces of paper and the photograph.
The licence holder goes through the process to end up precisely where s/he started (unless CASA stuffs it up).
It is therefore a completely unnecessary transaction, and demonstrates (once again) that these 'directives' are meaningless gestures.
You know the answer. There is no safety risk that is mitigated by sending CASA the pieces of paper and the photograph.
The licence holder goes through the process to end up precisely where s/he started (unless CASA stuffs it up).
It is therefore a completely unnecessary transaction, and demonstrates (once again) that these 'directives' are meaningless gestures.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not only that, when you get your new licence back, it doesn't even have your photo on it..! What was the point of going to the trouble of getting it and sending it in..?? On top of that, you get a letter saying that you must carry your licence on you at all times (nothing new there) but also photo ID to prove who you are..!! Wouldn't it have been easier to put the photo on the actual licence like the previous version had..?? 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Attn Mods
The title page for this thread says that last post was from IFEZ, but it does not show and the time of the last post keeps changing, tho the poster's id does not.
Seem there is a problem here?? Anybody else see this??
Seem there is a problem here?? Anybody else see this??
Relax triadic.
Every time someone votes in the poll it looks like there's been a recent post when there hasn't.
Every time someone votes in the poll it looks like there's been a recent post when there hasn't.
I'm sometimes amused that intelligent people take online polls seriously. (That's all of you PPRuNers, when I mention intelligent people!) For this poll, there are a mere 243 voters so far! I've abstained from voting as I don't think that it will change things one little bit.
I do agree with 'Arm out the window' that slagging off at Mr Skidmore, on this forum isn't going to achieve much.
I do agree with 'Arm out the window' that slagging off at Mr Skidmore, on this forum isn't going to achieve much.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the problem isn't skidmore. he is just a muppet placed to minimise the damage to the government.
whoever thought that "strict liability" should form the basis of aviation legislation needs 5 years in prison for perverting the course of justice and promoting a system of malicious prosecution. no parole.
...and talking of malicious prosecutions did anyone notice that the high court has just caused new south wales to compensate a victim some 2 million dollars plus costs.
I think john quadrio has a few million in compensation owed to him by CAsA.
I also think that the crew who stitched up the case against Quadrio should see prison time for perverting the course of justice and malicious prosecution.
skidmore isn't the problem and everyone acting like stockholm syndrome victims when the case people are nice guys won't solve it either.
some prison time for the miscreants would sort out aspects of the culture quick smart.
whoever thought that "strict liability" should form the basis of aviation legislation needs 5 years in prison for perverting the course of justice and promoting a system of malicious prosecution. no parole.
...and talking of malicious prosecutions did anyone notice that the high court has just caused new south wales to compensate a victim some 2 million dollars plus costs.
I think john quadrio has a few million in compensation owed to him by CAsA.
I also think that the crew who stitched up the case against Quadrio should see prison time for perverting the course of justice and malicious prosecution.
skidmore isn't the problem and everyone acting like stockholm syndrome victims when the case people are nice guys won't solve it either.
some prison time for the miscreants would sort out aspects of the culture quick smart.
the problem isn't skidmore. he is just a muppet placed to minimise the damage to the government.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should be in a position to make some changes to the status quo based on that - get stuck in any time.
obey.
obey.
how could we be wrong, we're the ex airforce, we've flown jets.
just fcuking obey all right.
since you mention that I could make changes here they are....
introduce canadian owner maintenance to the australian system.
allow for a privately owned aircraft to be de-certified and maintained on a standalone basis.
create an experimental-owner maintained category of registration for any privately owned aircraft.
see what that would do is allow the open discussion and resolution of maintenance issues for privately owned aircraft.
I know I'm boring. I've only been saying the same things for 15 years now.
...but of course I'm a legend in my own lunchbox so the fckuwits in CAsA will ignore the obvious improvements that would bring.
thats why hangars have doors that can be locked. so CAsA can't see the maintenance being done.
Dubbleyew Eight, all you're doing is insulting someone you don't know, and going on to insult me too, as an ex-serviceman. I'm not going to sway your bigoted viewpoint, but I would suggest you have a read back over what you posted:
This is your level of debate, is it? Good on you then, have fun with it.
obey.
obey.
how could we be wrong, we're the ex airforce, we've flown jets.
just fcuking obey all right.
obey.
how could we be wrong, we're the ex airforce, we've flown jets.
just fcuking obey all right.
Unfortunately I have to agree with Dubbleyew Eight and I utterly reject the notion pedalled by "Arm out the window" that anyone is entitled to respect just because they are an "ex-serviceman", speaking as one myself.
With one or Two notable exceptions, I have been underwhelmed by the performance of ex - Duntroon / Academy graduates in management and I am being polite.
They range from the "I joined the airforce to get a free engineering degree" on to "I'm suing the airforce for loss of hearing next year" upwards to absolute blockheads who believe that there is only one way to do anything and that is the Air Force way….or else!
Then of course there is the "club like" atmosphere such RAAF appointments foster - an atmosphere that is actively discouraged, even to the point of anti discrimination legislation, in business right across the country, but is somehow seen as praiseworthy in aviation., as evidenced by "Arm Out The Windows" staunch defence of a brother officer simply because he is a brother officer.
To put that another way; the Australian Airforce has done more to destroy Australian civil aviation then the Germans and Japanese ever did.
To put that yet another way; I fail to see the relevance of military aviation to civil aviation at all. Appointing an AVM. as Director of air safety makes about as much sense as appointing a Vet to run St Vincents hospital - that is, of course, if your objective is to have a thriving aviation industry, which it obviously isn't.
With one or Two notable exceptions, I have been underwhelmed by the performance of ex - Duntroon / Academy graduates in management and I am being polite.
They range from the "I joined the airforce to get a free engineering degree" on to "I'm suing the airforce for loss of hearing next year" upwards to absolute blockheads who believe that there is only one way to do anything and that is the Air Force way….or else!
Then of course there is the "club like" atmosphere such RAAF appointments foster - an atmosphere that is actively discouraged, even to the point of anti discrimination legislation, in business right across the country, but is somehow seen as praiseworthy in aviation., as evidenced by "Arm Out The Windows" staunch defence of a brother officer simply because he is a brother officer.
To put that another way; the Australian Airforce has done more to destroy Australian civil aviation then the Germans and Japanese ever did.
To put that yet another way; I fail to see the relevance of military aviation to civil aviation at all. Appointing an AVM. as Director of air safety makes about as much sense as appointing a Vet to run St Vincents hospital - that is, of course, if your objective is to have a thriving aviation industry, which it obviously isn't.
I utterly reject the notion pedalled by "Arm out the window" that anyone is entitled to respect just because they are an "ex-serviceman", speaking as one myself.
To me, it's a simple truth that you shouldn't make sweeping statements you can't back up, but it seems in this case a lot of people are happy to say 'Skidmore is this' or 'Skidmore is that' without the first clue about his capabilities, motivations or otherwise.
I'm not defending him because of some kind of ridiculous 'brother officer' code of conduct, and if you knew me you'd know I have never subscribed to any kind of elitist bull**** like that. I defend him because I first met him over 30 years ago and ever since then have been impressed by his integrity and leadership qualities. I challenge you blokes to stop making unfounded insulting statements and keep the invective out of it.
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'll say this, he is a carbon copy of the previous Directors of Aviation Safety.
All promised a clean out of the organization and failed to achieve that. All refused to listen to industry concerns but made a big noise about industry consultation.
This DAS has the benefit of a recent DPM review and Senate inquiry to use as a yardstick. The consultation is done. He hasn't acted to the extent that he may be called a reformer.
He's an average DAS.
All promised a clean out of the organization and failed to achieve that. All refused to listen to industry concerns but made a big noise about industry consultation.
This DAS has the benefit of a recent DPM review and Senate inquiry to use as a yardstick. The consultation is done. He hasn't acted to the extent that he may be called a reformer.
He's an average DAS.
AOTW, I am sure you are right and that AVM. Skidmore is a hard working man of great integrity, charm and intelligence with nothing but the best interests of the industry at heart. I do not know the man at all and I am happy to agree with your assessment.
BUT, we are talking about the office of Director of Air Safety, a public office, and Australians have a long and proud tradition of refusing to sanctify office holders and also subjecting them to robust (and unfair) criticism.
The issue is whether the DAS can implement any meaningful reform within CASA. My opinion is that he can't. This is not a personal reflexion on his character. There are some jobs that can't be done.
To put that in sporting terms; if I say "Full forward X is going to make mincemeat of full back Y" its ridiculous to respond "how dare you say that about Y? He is a good bloke."
I'm sure everyone wishes AVM. Skidmore all the best, but the chance of him doing more than scratching the teflon like surface of CASA are slim.
BUT, we are talking about the office of Director of Air Safety, a public office, and Australians have a long and proud tradition of refusing to sanctify office holders and also subjecting them to robust (and unfair) criticism.
The issue is whether the DAS can implement any meaningful reform within CASA. My opinion is that he can't. This is not a personal reflexion on his character. There are some jobs that can't be done.
To put that in sporting terms; if I say "Full forward X is going to make mincemeat of full back Y" its ridiculous to respond "how dare you say that about Y? He is a good bloke."
I'm sure everyone wishes AVM. Skidmore all the best, but the chance of him doing more than scratching the teflon like surface of CASA are slim.
I understand and partly agree with your comment, Sunfish - I'm sure anyone in the job in question would be pushing **** uphill to make significant changes, but I'm not yet at the point where I think there's no hope, and I believe Skidmore will make some positive progress.
I think rather than saying 'X is going to make mincemeat of Y' and me indignantly responding 'Y is a good bloke', it has been 'Y is an ineffectual ********' - to which I've been replying along the lines of 'You don't even know Y so what are you on about, and by the way, could you do any better?'
I shouldn't let myself get wound up by Dubbleyew Eight, and to the gent in question (who I've noticed from a search of his comments often comes in with a volley of inflammatory, over the top comment and then disappears in a cloud of 'censored' and 'vomit' icons), if you're seriously trying to make constructive comment, have a critical read over what you've written before hitting the enter key.
I think rather than saying 'X is going to make mincemeat of Y' and me indignantly responding 'Y is a good bloke', it has been 'Y is an ineffectual ********' - to which I've been replying along the lines of 'You don't even know Y so what are you on about, and by the way, could you do any better?'
I shouldn't let myself get wound up by Dubbleyew Eight, and to the gent in question (who I've noticed from a search of his comments often comes in with a volley of inflammatory, over the top comment and then disappears in a cloud of 'censored' and 'vomit' icons), if you're seriously trying to make constructive comment, have a critical read over what you've written before hitting the enter key.
Rumour from way down south in Canbera is that a few people in high places are getting nervous, to many chiefs to command very few Indians. I suggest that a few commentators here sit on their hands for a month or two then comment. The wheels are in motion for the better my sources tell me. Yesterday's public announcement of a departure of one EM is a clear indication that the knife is very sharp and could still be within hand's reach of the decision makers.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the article in Friday's Australian about CASA's new regulatory philosophy. I think it shows a subtle but significant change in focus from a regulate and enforce organisation, to one in which risk assessment and consultation are front and centre. Whilst I understand the skepticism based on past actions of CASA, looking overseas and at other safety critical industries it is not an impossible task to provide for safety without killing an industry.
From the early 90's the military aviation safety culture and processes have undergone significant change. In the early 90's accident investigations were behind closed doors and reports routinely found Pilot error as the major factor in the accident. By the late 90's the culture changed to one in which risk assessment and mitigation were centre stage, with accident investigations resulting in major organisational and procedural changes. The results have been a large, statistically significant reduction in accidents particularly in Air Force. DAS Skidmore was in leadership positions throughout this period of change and his experience of it can be seen in his public comments.
The military is not the commercial world, the pressure points are different, the equipment and roles can be vastly different, and funnily enough the commercial regulatory environment is not as flexible. However DAS Skidmore was in a good position to see sound safety culture and principles develop over time in Defence so don't rule out his background as irrelevant. Of note the previous DAS left Air Force under the old culture of "it's always the captains fault" so when he blamed the pilot in the Norfolk Island accident entirely he was reflecting a culture that produced poor results in Defence and has largely been eradicated.
Organisational change starts at the top so be skeptical and keep the pressure on but reasoned argument backed up with facts will produce better results than hurling abuse.
From the early 90's the military aviation safety culture and processes have undergone significant change. In the early 90's accident investigations were behind closed doors and reports routinely found Pilot error as the major factor in the accident. By the late 90's the culture changed to one in which risk assessment and mitigation were centre stage, with accident investigations resulting in major organisational and procedural changes. The results have been a large, statistically significant reduction in accidents particularly in Air Force. DAS Skidmore was in leadership positions throughout this period of change and his experience of it can be seen in his public comments.
The military is not the commercial world, the pressure points are different, the equipment and roles can be vastly different, and funnily enough the commercial regulatory environment is not as flexible. However DAS Skidmore was in a good position to see sound safety culture and principles develop over time in Defence so don't rule out his background as irrelevant. Of note the previous DAS left Air Force under the old culture of "it's always the captains fault" so when he blamed the pilot in the Norfolk Island accident entirely he was reflecting a culture that produced poor results in Defence and has largely been eradicated.
Organisational change starts at the top so be skeptical and keep the pressure on but reasoned argument backed up with facts will produce better results than hurling abuse.
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
QUOTE "it is not an impossible task to provide for safety without killing an industry". QUOTE
The parrot is not sleeping unfortunately, it's already dead.
The parrot is not sleeping unfortunately, it's already dead.