CASA Directive 01/2015 – what a complete disaster
Thread Starter
CASA Directive 01/2015 – what a complete disaster
It is obvious why CASA has basically destroyed the general aviation and training industry in this country. They have a group of people with huge influence within the organisation who will do everything they can by obscuring and complicating so the simple fact that affordability is the driving limitation on the amount of money you can spend on safety.
Particularly have a look at the second page of the document (see here) under the heading “Application of aviation safety regulations.” It starts off by stating the CASA Act:
It then goes on to try to half explain that it is not the most important consideration in some circumstances – but it doesn’t properly justify this at all. What I love is the statement:
The statement itself just simply means they can keep doing what CASA has been doing for the last 15 years – a one-way ratchet of destruction on a once fantastic and viable industry.
The last dot point tries to show that an individual can ask for some type of dispensation, however it then states:
That means, if you as an operator come up with a cheaper way of doing something, your competitor could be adversely affected, so CASA of course won’t incorporate it.
I say again, we are the only country on the world that has the absolute statement:
It is a lie, because it is only complied with when it can destroy the general aviation industry. CASA allows a lower level of regulated safety for airline services to small country towns because it has clearly put the cost of the ticket as the most important consideration- in front of safety ! But they just can’t tell the truth!
Hopefully there will be some light on the horizon soon.
Particularly have a look at the second page of the document (see here) under the heading “Application of aviation safety regulations.” It starts off by stating the CASA Act:
“the safety of air navigation is the most important consideration for CASA.”
“This cannot and does not mean that CASA must demonstrate … it has adopted or will adopt a course of action involving the lowest cost to, or least adverse impact on, the person or persons affected by that action.”
The last dot point tries to show that an individual can ask for some type of dispensation, however it then states:
“No other persons would be adversely or unfairly affected by the adoption of that alternative approach.”
I say again, we are the only country on the world that has the absolute statement:
“The safety of air navigation is the most important consideration for CASA.”
Hopefully there will be some light on the horizon soon.
Well, here's a suggestion Dick.
Part 2 section 8 of the Airspace Act 2007 says the "Minister must make Australian Airspace Policy Statement" and goes on to say what it must cover and must be reviewed every three years:
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00178
The current one was made in 2015, so it is due for review this year:
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2015L01133
Have a chat to BJ about what you think it should say about supporting and fostering GA etc.
Part 2 section 8 of the Airspace Act 2007 says the "Minister must make Australian Airspace Policy Statement" and goes on to say what it must cover and must be reviewed every three years:
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00178
The current one was made in 2015, so it is due for review this year:
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2015L01133
Have a chat to BJ about what you think it should say about supporting and fostering GA etc.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,976
Received 102 Likes
on
59 Posts
Have a chat to BJ about what you think it should say about supporting and fostering GA et
I suspect it would be somewhat along the lines of..
"Now don't you worry about that!"
Moderator
"how is it then, that no "investigative" reporter has not got their teeth into this allegedly ongoing casa conduct. For yrs, i read / hear innuendos of foul play by casa."
It is water off a ducks back at CASA. A series of incompetent Ministers for Transport, disinterested in aviation (apart from their Qantas Captain's Club Membership) have failed the industry and the travelling public, particularly in rural Australia.
Dick, good luck with Barnaby. You may need it..........
Dick: They don’t care. Worse still, they wouldn’t know what to do if they did care.
The main things these stultifying mediocrities are good at are mouthing empty rhetoric and wasting taxpayers’ money at eye-wateringly high rates.
The main things these stultifying mediocrities are good at are mouthing empty rhetoric and wasting taxpayers’ money at eye-wateringly high rates.
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 22nd Jan 2018 at 09:27.
I'd say the initial CAsA comments in Dick's post #1 were written but CAsA's ultimate and well known legal acrobat, the spin Doctor.
Part of the long term problems with CAsA are these type of people who will not and never acknowledge the truth of what they do.
I have the proof of obscene and pernicious lies touted by them, all designed to keep CAsA the Shiny Bright Agency that does no wrong and keeps the world "safe'
Its an absolute fraud and a national scandal
LB is correct in every respect.
Part of the long term problems with CAsA are these type of people who will not and never acknowledge the truth of what they do.
I have the proof of obscene and pernicious lies touted by them, all designed to keep CAsA the Shiny Bright Agency that does no wrong and keeps the world "safe'
Its an absolute fraud and a national scandal
LB is correct in every respect.
The safety of air navigation is the most important consideration for CASA.”
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just this...
CRIMES ACT 1914 - SECT 70
Disclosure of information by Commonwealth officers
(1) A person who, being a Commonwealth officer, publishes or communicates, except to some person to whom he or she is authorized to publish or communicate it, any fact or document which comes to his or her knowledge, or into his or her possession, by virtue of being a Commonwealth officer, and which it is his or her duty not to disclose, commits an offence.
(2) A person who, having been a Commonwealth officer, publishes or communicates, without lawful authority or excuse (proof whereof shall lie upon him or her), any fact or document which came to his or her knowledge, or into his or her possession, by virtue of having been a Commonwealth officer, and which, at the time when he or she ceased to be a Commonwealth officer, it was his or her duty not to disclose, commits an offence.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years.
