Gippsland GA-8’s Grounded
None dealt with in even a similar manner, All Jabiru's, B 737 MAX, C210 all, (survey mods & wing mods), All Airvans - all dealt with very different.
This will never happen. After a brief and unhappy period as a Canberra bureaucrat myself, I’m betting ‘commercial considerations’ was never a factor in decision making, nor ever likely to be, given the worldview and life experience of most of Canberra’s public service.
cooperplace,
On the contrary, they are very, very clued in on all the possible ways of minimizing any legal liability possibly accruing to CASA, regardless of the damage that decision(s) may have created for anything external to CASA.--- including any or all of the aviation industry.
CASA avoiding possible liability has been the death of many legitimate projects, over the years.
Tootle pip!!
On the contrary, they are very, very clued in on all the possible ways of minimizing any legal liability possibly accruing to CASA, regardless of the damage that decision(s) may have created for anything external to CASA.--- including any or all of the aviation industry.
CASA avoiding possible liability has been the death of many legitimate projects, over the years.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 27th Jul 2019 at 02:56. Reason: minor edit.
So what is the cost for a week of grounding for a GA8 for the operator?
1.25 pilot costs - inc employ costs = $1,560.
Aircraft repayment = $3,000
Insurance =
Parking =
Fixed maintenance costs =
Fixed operating costs =
Starts adding up fast, then have a fleet solely or predominantly of type.
1.25 pilot costs - inc employ costs = $1,560.
Aircraft repayment = $3,000
Insurance =
Parking =
Fixed maintenance costs =
Fixed operating costs =
Starts adding up fast, then have a fleet solely or predominantly of type.
For once CASA acted in a timely and responsible manner. One of their certificated designs suffers an in-flight break up on the other side of the world. It's not weather related; there's no immediate evidence to suggest sabotage, so what could it be? Initial investigation by a competent agency says wing came off. Further investigation would appear to have cleared it of a design fault, so CASA promptly un-ground the fleet.
A five day grounding would only bankrupt an operator already teetering on bankruptcy.
Imagine the fall-out if CASA did not ground the type and another one crashed in similar circumstances meantime. The FAA know all about that.
A five day grounding would only bankrupt an operator already teetering on bankruptcy.
Imagine the fall-out if CASA did not ground the type and another one crashed in similar circumstances meantime. The FAA know all about that.
Seems to me that a reasonable person would’ve thunk that the Airvan has a TC and a PC plus ICA with a good history. No reason to ground them immediately. Even spend a few more minutes thinking about the early pics and the operation. Still no reason.
Otherwise ground so many other types in recent years and they would perhaps be not just a for a few days ....
Otherwise ground so many other types in recent years and they would perhaps be not just a for a few days ....
Ref #43.. Bureaucrats do use a 'commercial consideration'...But only one .
" Commercial in Confidence" ...if you are trying to find out how much taxpayers dollars they have wasted on some failed scheme, balls up or abandoned 'project'..
" Commercial in Confidence" ...if you are trying to find out how much taxpayers dollars they have wasted on some failed scheme, balls up or abandoned 'project'..
Seems to me that a reasonable person would’ve thunk that the Airvan has a TC and a PC plus ICA with a good history. No reason to ground them immediately. Even spend a few more minutes thinking about the early pics and the operation. Still no reason.
Otherwise ground so many other types in recent years and they would perhaps be not just a for a few days ....
