CASA Again!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-...crash/10396812
Here again is the model litigant.
Here again is the model litigant.
All sound very familiar, not much point in commenting further, because it has all been said before.
Just change the names and dates, for any number of other cases.
Tootle pip!!
Thread Starter
CASA crow about having the trust of the aviation community and then you see this, the reality is that it is all smoke and mirrors and simply the underhand business as usual.
Dont ya just love 'em.
Rest assured their phrases of choice ' not a fit and proper person' and ' an imminent threat to aviation safety' are a one way street. Sure as hell doesnt apply to any of the xxxxxxxs within CAsA..!
I feel for the guy, and sure as hell dont have any faith that the AAT will give him some justice either.
A tragedy compounded by a travesty.
Disgusting...but all in the name of "safety", of course.
Rest assured their phrases of choice ' not a fit and proper person' and ' an imminent threat to aviation safety' are a one way street. Sure as hell doesnt apply to any of the xxxxxxxs within CAsA..!
I feel for the guy, and sure as hell dont have any faith that the AAT will give him some justice either.
A tragedy compounded by a travesty.
Disgusting...but all in the name of "safety", of course.
The passengers YouTube videos of their “adrenaline” flights probably didn’t do them any favours.
You mean the ones where they're pushing negative G in a 172 with passengers on board? ?? The idiot deserved everything he got. It might not have been the result of due process, but nonetheless I'm glad they won't be sharing the skies with anyone else again. That sort of **** has no place in a responsible operation.
or
or
Last edited by KRviator; 29th Oct 2018 at 04:38. Reason: Moved the videos to the END of the text, instead of the middle
If the pilot is licenced, current and confident to conduct aerobatics / adventure flights, and the aircraft is licenced to conduct aerobatics / adventure flights, then I don't understand the drama. In the top video, I can't see whether or not the passenger in the rear on the left is wearing a seatbelt but apart from that, if the operation was licenced and current, then what regs have been broken?? I am assuming that seatbelts should be worn during aerobatics / adventure flight manouvres?
If they are not licenced to do aerobatics with passengers then that is a different kettle of fish entirely.....
NOTE - I don't have an aerobatics rating..
If they are not licenced to do aerobatics with passengers then that is a different kettle of fish entirely.....
NOTE - I don't have an aerobatics rating..
There's a bloody big difference between "adventure" flights in a Yak that is certified (or at least, designed) for it, and a scenic charter in a 172 that is restricted to the Normal category with passengers in the back seat. I reckon you'd be hard-pressed to convince CAsA a spilt-S is required, or that negative-G pushover with the coke-bottle hard against the headliner is kosher...
CASA suffers from these problems.
Not enough funding, career bureaucrats, the want of a Minister who has a relevent aviation background, a heavy reliance on ex police types as investigators and an arrogant beligerant holier than thou approach to all its dealings with the aviation industry. When the VCAT Member or similar whose only experience in aviation is a flight to London for a Contiki tour simply groans and says "If CASA says its not safe theres noting I can do" because you cant afford a QC and years in litigation, nothing can improve.
With proper professional oversight, and a willingness to work with not against those it deals with, safety would improve by leaps and bounds. As it stands, the smaller the operator, the bigger the stick.
At present, it is commercial suicide to self report, seek advice or assistance.
Flying visits by hit squads who concerntrate on wrong parts on wrong shelves, does not say much for the quality of its investigators.
By the same token, idiots in command of aeroplanes, idiots in command of flight schools, idiot mechanics, idiot student pilots, idiot planning Ministers do not make for safe flying.
When you can call CASA and make an anonymous report but can not call and ask for advice anonymously, what hope is there?
The further you go from a capital city, the worse things get from both sides. Over the last 30 years, it all just gets worse. "Pommy Backpacker" mentality reigns supreme, get em up, give em a thrill, get another load up. Mind you, if the pommy backpacker asked to see a license or a log book, no one would get up.
Most of these issues would be resolved by investment in technology that monitors maintenance, repairs, licenses, hours, weights and measures.
But that would see half of the bludgers on the public payroll made redundant overnight.
Not enough funding, career bureaucrats, the want of a Minister who has a relevent aviation background, a heavy reliance on ex police types as investigators and an arrogant beligerant holier than thou approach to all its dealings with the aviation industry. When the VCAT Member or similar whose only experience in aviation is a flight to London for a Contiki tour simply groans and says "If CASA says its not safe theres noting I can do" because you cant afford a QC and years in litigation, nothing can improve.
With proper professional oversight, and a willingness to work with not against those it deals with, safety would improve by leaps and bounds. As it stands, the smaller the operator, the bigger the stick.
At present, it is commercial suicide to self report, seek advice or assistance.
Flying visits by hit squads who concerntrate on wrong parts on wrong shelves, does not say much for the quality of its investigators.
By the same token, idiots in command of aeroplanes, idiots in command of flight schools, idiot mechanics, idiot student pilots, idiot planning Ministers do not make for safe flying.
When you can call CASA and make an anonymous report but can not call and ask for advice anonymously, what hope is there?
The further you go from a capital city, the worse things get from both sides. Over the last 30 years, it all just gets worse. "Pommy Backpacker" mentality reigns supreme, get em up, give em a thrill, get another load up. Mind you, if the pommy backpacker asked to see a license or a log book, no one would get up.
Most of these issues would be resolved by investment in technology that monitors maintenance, repairs, licenses, hours, weights and measures.
But that would see half of the bludgers on the public payroll made redundant overnight.
The phrase "an accident going somewhere to happen" (& in this case it unfortunately did) springs to mind here...
A very poor display by a supposed CPL in my opinion & some of you guys can't see why CASA does what it does from time to time...
A very poor display by a supposed CPL in my opinion & some of you guys can't see why CASA does what it does from time to time...
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or that negative-G pushover with the coke-bottle hard against the headliner is kosher..
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the key to this is in the “unconditional”:settlement provided by CASA and I didn’t see any aerobatic manoeuvres in the video.
0g and less than 60degree bank.
not sure why it crashed so badly though. Soft sand?
kaz
0g and less than 60degree bank.
not sure why it crashed so badly though. Soft sand?
kaz
Originally Posted by Rutan Around
I think a lot of pilots think they are 1g negative and freak out when actually they are at zero g and weightless. At 0g there is not much stress on the wings. Work it out.
Originally Posted by The ATSB
at about 7 minutes flight time, the engine sustained a sudden power loss and subsequently the:
- pilot turned the aircraft to the right momentarily before raising the nose and initiating a left turn with an initial bank angle of about 45°
- bank angle increased and the airspeed decreased to a point where the aircraft’s stall warning horn sounded for about 3 seconds
- aircraft rolled left and pitched nose down before impacting terrain.
- pilot turned the aircraft to the right momentarily before raising the nose and initiating a left turn with an initial bank angle of about 45°
- bank angle increased and the airspeed decreased to a point where the aircraft’s stall warning horn sounded for about 3 seconds
- aircraft rolled left and pitched nose down before impacting terrain.
If that is a C172 in the second video, then that is crazy bananas and I’m happy to hear they were grounded.
AIso, I would have thought that pulling zero or negative G in an aircraft with a gravity fed fuel system is best done at very safe altitudes.