CASA Part 91 Survey
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA Part 91 Survey
There doesn't seem to be any option to find out what the questions are before you hand your details.
https://consultation.casa.gov.au/reg.../consultation/
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the requirement to name yourself, and given CAsA's history of retaliatory action against anyone who criticises them, it would be brave person who answered truthfully, if they considered the draft was anything else but perfect.
which maybe proves the old bureaucratic rule, "never call an enquiry unless you know the result"and certainly will skew the result of their inquiry.
But a quick skim through it I thought on the surface it didn't seem too bad, although there are a lot of hangman nooses in it along with a lot of 50 penalty points for very minor offences. More detailed scrutiny is required me-thinks.
What I would dearly like to know is how much of our money they pissed up against the wall producing it.
Will it actually improve safety in any way? Would simply adopting the US or NZ rules saved us a heap of money? would adopting those rule sets produced a better outcome? Are we getting bang for our buck?
Leave it to you guys to debate.
which maybe proves the old bureaucratic rule, "never call an enquiry unless you know the result"and certainly will skew the result of their inquiry.
But a quick skim through it I thought on the surface it didn't seem too bad, although there are a lot of hangman nooses in it along with a lot of 50 penalty points for very minor offences. More detailed scrutiny is required me-thinks.
What I would dearly like to know is how much of our money they pissed up against the wall producing it.
Will it actually improve safety in any way? Would simply adopting the US or NZ rules saved us a heap of money? would adopting those rule sets produced a better outcome? Are we getting bang for our buck?
Leave it to you guys to debate.
----- on the surface it didn't seem too bad, although there are a lot of hangman nooses in it along with a lot of 50 penalty points for very minor offences
That about sums it up, in my view there is huge scope for CASA to make life even more miserable.
Just for the hell of it, I took a squizz at Part 135, that is the doozy, as far as I can see it will put light charter out of business, such is the increase in paperwork. Airfield requirements will be one hell of a problem. It is not even clear to me that I can even still use a single engine piston at all, due forced landing field requirements.
One matter on which CASA HAS NOT consulted is on 135.135, passenger lists, strict liability 50pp.
The gender of each passenger must be recorded. I trust CASA will consult widely, including with the Australian Human Right Commission, to agree a definition of an an acceptable way for the operator/pilot to determine gender to the satisfaction of CASA.
The LBTIQUASSGF community will be watching.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 29th Mar 2018 at 23:50. Reason: typo corrected
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"definition of and an acceptable way for the operator/pilot to determine gender to the satisfaction of CASA."
Thats an easy one Leadie,
How do you sex a chromosome?
Take down its genes.
I believe on Quaintasses application form they ask for your gender identity
there is a box on the list for not assigned.
Thats an easy one Leadie,
How do you sex a chromosome?
Take down its genes.
I believe on Quaintasses application form they ask for your gender identity
there is a box on the list for not assigned.
I believe on Quaintasses application form they ask for your gender identity there is a box on the list for not assigned.
On some CBA application forms, it has a list of six or so, the last one is "Prefer not to answer", how would you handle that for CASA at ~$10,800 a time, seeing as it is fully approved by the AHRC.
As harmonisation is all the go these days, CASA could harmonise with Transport Canada, which, as directed by overarching national legislation, has to recognise (as I recall) 23 genders, and in the best of CASA tradition, getting it wrong is a criminal offense.
Tootle pip!!
