CASA in the news Important Urgent - Insight on SBS on Thursday night
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YSBK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA in the news Important Urgent - Insight on SBS on Thursday night
On SBS this week the Insight Program 8.30 pm local time all regions there is an Expose on how CASA puts operators out of business.
PPRuNette
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: de nile...
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a repeat of the prgram on Friday afternoon at 16:00 on SBS.
A transcript will also become available from the
Insight website.
Here's the outline, as qouted from the SBS website
FLIGHT CONTROL
INSIGHT investigates serious allegations made against the bodies that control the air, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, (CASA) and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, (ATSB).
A former CASA manager and other aviation operators say the Civil Aviation Safety Authority engages in vindictive actions, which put many companies out of business. They say the vindictive action includes suspensions and cancellations for reasons which have nothing to do with public safety.
The allegations come at a time when the small aircraft industry is experiencing one of the largest economic down turns in Australia’s history. Dozens of companies have gone bust and many blame CASA.
On INSIGHT on Thursday July 17 at 8.30pm on SBS Television, Antony Balmain also investigates how CASA and the ATSB are accused of getting the major Whyalla Air investigation “very wrong”. The accusations come a week ahead of findings due to be handed down by the South Australian Coroner over the Whyalla Air disaster of May 31, 2000.
The Whyalla Air Piper Chieftain plane crashed in to the Spencer Gulf in South Australia. Eight people died, including the pilot.
It was the first Chieftain to go down in Australia’s history and after a costly investigation the ATSB, came up with a theory that the engine damage was caused by lean running, that is, using less fuel.
INSIGHT is told that leading international and Australian scientists disagree, however, with the ATSB and the scientists have evidence that the crash was caused NOT by the lean running by most probably by a faulty engine from the manufacturer.
INSIGHT reports that in February 1999, 14 months before the Whyalla crash, the US engine manufacturer, Textron Lycoming, issued the first of its warnings about crankshafts. Last year the company recalled engines due to faulty metal in its engines. The left engine of the Whyalla Air plane that crashed was among those listed for recall.
GG
A transcript will also become available from the
Insight website.
Here's the outline, as qouted from the SBS website
FLIGHT CONTROL
INSIGHT investigates serious allegations made against the bodies that control the air, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, (CASA) and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, (ATSB).
A former CASA manager and other aviation operators say the Civil Aviation Safety Authority engages in vindictive actions, which put many companies out of business. They say the vindictive action includes suspensions and cancellations for reasons which have nothing to do with public safety.
The allegations come at a time when the small aircraft industry is experiencing one of the largest economic down turns in Australia’s history. Dozens of companies have gone bust and many blame CASA.
On INSIGHT on Thursday July 17 at 8.30pm on SBS Television, Antony Balmain also investigates how CASA and the ATSB are accused of getting the major Whyalla Air investigation “very wrong”. The accusations come a week ahead of findings due to be handed down by the South Australian Coroner over the Whyalla Air disaster of May 31, 2000.
The Whyalla Air Piper Chieftain plane crashed in to the Spencer Gulf in South Australia. Eight people died, including the pilot.
It was the first Chieftain to go down in Australia’s history and after a costly investigation the ATSB, came up with a theory that the engine damage was caused by lean running, that is, using less fuel.
INSIGHT is told that leading international and Australian scientists disagree, however, with the ATSB and the scientists have evidence that the crash was caused NOT by the lean running by most probably by a faulty engine from the manufacturer.
INSIGHT reports that in February 1999, 14 months before the Whyalla crash, the US engine manufacturer, Textron Lycoming, issued the first of its warnings about crankshafts. Last year the company recalled engines due to faulty metal in its engines. The left engine of the Whyalla Air plane that crashed was among those listed for recall.
GG
PPRuNette
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: de nile...
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very well done BIK
We also picked up on this whilst the show was running. It was said as part of the story narrative.
Maybe you should email Insight and let em know they didn't quite get it right?
Then again, could you really be tossed ???
We also picked up on this whilst the show was running. It was said as part of the story narrative.
Maybe you should email Insight and let em know they didn't quite get it right?
Then again, could you really be tossed ???
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Darwin, Mostly.
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting.
Not much more info than has already been posted here and elsewhere, but gives a different slant on it all.
Still, it strengthens the case for CASA to be hamstrung more when it comes to issuing the charge as it executes the accused without the impediment of legal process.
And, interestingly, ATSB does not escape a caning as well about their arrogance.
Not much more info than has already been posted here and elsewhere, but gives a different slant on it all.
Still, it strengthens the case for CASA to be hamstrung more when it comes to issuing the charge as it executes the accused without the impediment of legal process.
And, interestingly, ATSB does not escape a caning as well about their arrogance.
I posted on another thread:
"Great program on SBS last night. No false claims, simply heaps of facts and unanswered questions.
Good onya Prundle! Very well said from a very competent aviator and ex regulator. The only time regulatory sanity prevailed in Far North Queensland was during that brief period you were regional manager!"
Pharcarnell. No one disputes the need for a strong, competent and accountable regulator, with appropriate and just legislation.
The problem is a bumbling, vindictive and incompetent regulator who sets itself up as judge, jury and executioner, and an infinitely changing regulatory reform process.
The interview with Peter Rundle reminds me that the only period a competent, just and fair regulatory process that existed in Far North Queensland during my period in that part of Australia, was when Peter was Regional Manager and fairly and impartially exercised his powers. With the exception of another rather short Cairns FOI who was a competent regulator and aviator but has since resigned from CASA, in general, those who preceded Peter have since been promoted to Canberra and Sydney, beyond their maximum level of incompetence.
"Great program on SBS last night. No false claims, simply heaps of facts and unanswered questions.
Good onya Prundle! Very well said from a very competent aviator and ex regulator. The only time regulatory sanity prevailed in Far North Queensland was during that brief period you were regional manager!"
Pharcarnell. No one disputes the need for a strong, competent and accountable regulator, with appropriate and just legislation.
The problem is a bumbling, vindictive and incompetent regulator who sets itself up as judge, jury and executioner, and an infinitely changing regulatory reform process.
The interview with Peter Rundle reminds me that the only period a competent, just and fair regulatory process that existed in Far North Queensland during my period in that part of Australia, was when Peter was Regional Manager and fairly and impartially exercised his powers. With the exception of another rather short Cairns FOI who was a competent regulator and aviator but has since resigned from CASA, in general, those who preceded Peter have since been promoted to Canberra and Sydney, beyond their maximum level of incompetence.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Oz
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty lightweight really, just skipped around the edges. As said earlier, nothing most of us didn't already know.
Maybe it's time to re-visit both the Monarch and Seaview Coronial findings and the Seaview Royal Commission and see how the Public Service's bureaucratic mind and ethics have responded to those reports. Probably the CASA we have now.
The validity of aviation accident investigation in Australia has not been enhanced by the creation of the ATSB. With a career public servant as its head what hope have professional aviation investigators got in overcoming the 'Yes Minister' syndrome.
I wonder how much public service fluff coloured/influenced the published Whyalla report!
I suppose you can't expect much more from a program (or SBS) that relies on some public servant to sign the cheque that funds them.
ding
Maybe it's time to re-visit both the Monarch and Seaview Coronial findings and the Seaview Royal Commission and see how the Public Service's bureaucratic mind and ethics have responded to those reports. Probably the CASA we have now.
The validity of aviation accident investigation in Australia has not been enhanced by the creation of the ATSB. With a career public servant as its head what hope have professional aviation investigators got in overcoming the 'Yes Minister' syndrome.
I wonder how much public service fluff coloured/influenced the published Whyalla report!
I suppose you can't expect much more from a program (or SBS) that relies on some public servant to sign the cheque that funds them.
ding
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: North son, I say go North..........
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe the first Chieftain to crash due to a double engine failure not caused by fuel starvation, not pilot error, just plain and simple wrong place worng time for a double engine failure!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Darwin, Mostly.
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torres
That is what I was attempting to allude to.
The charter to make and enforce the rules while being able to play with a loose leaf rule book and the executioners blade is way too tempting a scenario for any person much less a group of control freeks.
Ther should be more input to suspension orders than just the organisation who has proven their only consideration is to cover their collective ar**s and are NEVER wrong!
Geez, I wish I was that good.
The charter to make and enforce the rules while being able to play with a loose leaf rule book and the executioners blade is way too tempting a scenario for any person much less a group of control freeks.
Ther should be more input to suspension orders than just the organisation who has proven their only consideration is to cover their collective ar**s and are NEVER wrong!
Geez, I wish I was that good.
It looked like we were going to get a good explanation of lean of peak operation from Doug Sprigg in the C207 using the JPI EDM 700 engine analyser. Unfortunately it seemed like they cut a fair bit out of the pilot's explanation. It would have hit home the process of lean of peak operation if they showed the EGT go DOWN and the engine running cooler as the mixture was leaned past peak.
Oh well
Oh well
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torres
I think you will find that that "Rather Short FOI" is back in CASA operating out of Regulatory Services Branch. He is one of the best around.
TBT
I think you will find that that "Rather Short FOI" is back in CASA operating out of Regulatory Services Branch. He is one of the best around.
TBT
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 5 miles up
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATSB
From personal experience the only thing the ATSB ever get right is that the "heavier than air vehicle impacted the ground" the rest of there findings are usually sprinkled with as someone said ar**s covering and blaming the poor unfortunate pilot for all the wrong reasons.
Mainly because most of these professional bureaucrats don't know the difference between an aircraft and a clockwork mouse.
Just a bunch of
Mainly because most of these professional bureaucrats don't know the difference between an aircraft and a clockwork mouse.
Just a bunch of
Time Bomb Ted. Yeah, JB was a good guy. One knew where they stood with him and he didn't talk bull sh_t!
Thought he must have left CASA Cairns out of frustration, but if he's back with Regulatory Services Branch that obviously wasn't the case. If the staff haven't changed in Regulatory Services Branch in recent months, JB would have to be the sharpest pin in that cushion, as others I think are (or were) in there never were the pick of the crop in Far North Queensland!
Thought he must have left CASA Cairns out of frustration, but if he's back with Regulatory Services Branch that obviously wasn't the case. If the staff haven't changed in Regulatory Services Branch in recent months, JB would have to be the sharpest pin in that cushion, as others I think are (or were) in there never were the pick of the crop in Far North Queensland!
Hear! Hear! Dingo. The usual lightweight excuse for journalism: just play videos of someone saying something.
I had to smile when I heard what Prundle had to say. I positively guffawed when I read Torres’s spirited support above.
Prundle appears to have forgotten the allegations that were made against him by operators who said that he was vindictive. Just ask John McMillan (now Commonwealth Ombudsman), among others.
Save your keyboard Torres, I can guess: the allegations against Prundle were baseless, but any allegations against anyone you don’t like in CASA are gospel.
The people who run the country can see straight through that kind of hypocrisy and duplicity you know.
And pilots always make the best bush lawyers, don’t they? Prundle says that if CASA lets an AOC lapse, there’s no decision reviewable by the AAT. Really? I hope for Prundle’s sake he isn’t in the habit of telling operators that, or his PI insurance is paid up. Giving dud legal advice can be very costly.
No wonder nothing changes. What’s touted as in-depth analysis is shallow, easily refuted, easily discredited, pap.
I had to smile when I heard what Prundle had to say. I positively guffawed when I read Torres’s spirited support above.
Prundle appears to have forgotten the allegations that were made against him by operators who said that he was vindictive. Just ask John McMillan (now Commonwealth Ombudsman), among others.
Save your keyboard Torres, I can guess: the allegations against Prundle were baseless, but any allegations against anyone you don’t like in CASA are gospel.
The people who run the country can see straight through that kind of hypocrisy and duplicity you know.
And pilots always make the best bush lawyers, don’t they? Prundle says that if CASA lets an AOC lapse, there’s no decision reviewable by the AAT. Really? I hope for Prundle’s sake he isn’t in the habit of telling operators that, or his PI insurance is paid up. Giving dud legal advice can be very costly.
No wonder nothing changes. What’s touted as in-depth analysis is shallow, easily refuted, easily discredited, pap.
I particularly liked the bit where the guy in the 207 was going through his pre-landing checks and checked that the undercarriage was down. In a 207 I should ruddy well hope so!! 
Ah, Creamie, just when I was beginning to tolerate your presence on this forum (and even thinking of sending you a Chrissie card this year), you want to pick another argument!
This forum is not the place to comment on, or name individuals, however, I’ve been in competition with Prundle in his commercial operation days (in the 1980’s), and been subject to his regulatory management in his CASA days (late 1990’s). He was always a worthy competitor and a competent and honest regulator.
I am aware of times he made the hard “administrative decisions” in CASA and can only suggest his actions at that time appear to have been fair and justified. I have never known him to be vindictive, but of course, are not aware of every decision he made.
"Prundle appears to have forgotten the allegations that were made against him by operators who said that he was vindictive. Just ask John McMillan (now Commonwealth Ombudsman), among others."
Regarding the above, please stick to the facts, which can't be published here. In the matter you alude to, Prundle's actions were entirely appropriate, which was the Ombudsman's findings. It is not appropriate for any pilot - even an FOI - to fly an aircraft knowing two AD's were outstanding.
I found his brief period as FNQ Regional Manager was a period of concise regulatory management by an experienced professional aviator. It’s unusual to find a CASA employee so skilled in use of the words “Yes” or "No”.
I am also aware he never had a good word to say about your lot in Canberra and think he may have been justified. Perhaps this is the reason for your attitude towards him? However, he never generalised about Canberra staff, some of whom he respected for their professional qualifications, achievements and decisions.
At least he didn’t pull the engine in a C208B at 300 ft AGL on take off into rising terrain from RW 08 at Horn Island, as another FOI did! It was only the skill of the pilot that enabled that FOI to survive and still work for CASA today.
Incidentally, are you suggesting the SBS program had no merit or basis in fact?
Perhaps you and I should simply agree to disagree.
This forum is not the place to comment on, or name individuals, however, I’ve been in competition with Prundle in his commercial operation days (in the 1980’s), and been subject to his regulatory management in his CASA days (late 1990’s). He was always a worthy competitor and a competent and honest regulator.
I am aware of times he made the hard “administrative decisions” in CASA and can only suggest his actions at that time appear to have been fair and justified. I have never known him to be vindictive, but of course, are not aware of every decision he made.
"Prundle appears to have forgotten the allegations that were made against him by operators who said that he was vindictive. Just ask John McMillan (now Commonwealth Ombudsman), among others."
Regarding the above, please stick to the facts, which can't be published here. In the matter you alude to, Prundle's actions were entirely appropriate, which was the Ombudsman's findings. It is not appropriate for any pilot - even an FOI - to fly an aircraft knowing two AD's were outstanding.
I found his brief period as FNQ Regional Manager was a period of concise regulatory management by an experienced professional aviator. It’s unusual to find a CASA employee so skilled in use of the words “Yes” or "No”.
I am also aware he never had a good word to say about your lot in Canberra and think he may have been justified. Perhaps this is the reason for your attitude towards him? However, he never generalised about Canberra staff, some of whom he respected for their professional qualifications, achievements and decisions.
At least he didn’t pull the engine in a C208B at 300 ft AGL on take off into rising terrain from RW 08 at Horn Island, as another FOI did! It was only the skill of the pilot that enabled that FOI to survive and still work for CASA today.
Incidentally, are you suggesting the SBS program had no merit or basis in fact?
Perhaps you and I should simply agree to disagree.
Last edited by Torres; 18th Jul 2003 at 15:18.
Desert Flower
Personally when I was flying in GA I use to use the same pre-landing checks regardless of the aircraft I was flying from C152 up to C404. By doing this nothing was forgotten and I was never embarrassed.
Personally when I was flying in GA I use to use the same pre-landing checks regardless of the aircraft I was flying from C152 up to C404. By doing this nothing was forgotten and I was never embarrassed.
Torres: you miss my point. I share your opinion of Prundle. My response to allegations of vindictiveness against him would be in similar terms to your defence of him.
My point is this: I don’t see why the allegations of vindictiveness against CASA officers other than Prundle have any more weight or validity than those against Prundle or by Prundle.
FOIs are human and consequently make mistakes.
What about the C208B operator who didn’t make sure the engine was maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, thereby causing a real engine failure and a real forced landing that was a coin-toss away from a complete hull loss? The very same operator let a person fly the aircraft, including the conduct of a heavy landing, when the person wasn’t endorsed on the aircraft. There was even a journalist on board at the time! That’s human bordering on careless, don’t you think?
My point is this: I don’t see why the allegations of vindictiveness against CASA officers other than Prundle have any more weight or validity than those against Prundle or by Prundle.
FOIs are human and consequently make mistakes.
What about the C208B operator who didn’t make sure the engine was maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, thereby causing a real engine failure and a real forced landing that was a coin-toss away from a complete hull loss? The very same operator let a person fly the aircraft, including the conduct of a heavy landing, when the person wasn’t endorsed on the aircraft. There was even a journalist on board at the time! That’s human bordering on careless, don’t you think?
Sorry, Creamie, I was amending my post as you posted your reply. This is what I added:
"Prundle appears to have forgotten the allegations that were made against him by operators who said that he was vindictive. Just ask John McMillan (now Commonwealth Ombudsman), among others."
Regarding your statement above, please stick to the facts, which can't be published here. (I highlighted your word "allegations" as the "allegations" were not proven.) In the matter you alude to, Prundle's actions appear entirely appropriate and justified, which was the Ombudsman's findings. It is not appropriate for any pilot - even an FOI - to fly an aircraft knowing two AD's were outstanding.
Ah, yes, our Caravan engine failure and the Director of CASA flying the aircraft on another occasion.
I'm actually please you raised those points:
1 The PT6A-114A engine was being maintained totally in accordance with Pratt & Whitneys requirements to use "pottable water" for compressor washes. It wasn't until a subsequent laboratory test of the Horn Island water supply that it was found to contain totally unacceptable levels of heavy metals and silica. Yes, I'm guilty. But didn't the pilot do a great job landing at Badu! We had the first beach side Caravan park in the Torres Strait!
2 CASA investigators found the Director not guilty. It was a private flight, he occupied the right hand seat, the left hand seat was occupied by a pilot who held endorsement and training and checking approvals and for good measure, the Chief Pilot, a Grade 1 Instructor and type endorsed, sat between the two pilots. I was also in the second row, chatting to the journo. Yes, the landing was a bit of a thumper, but not classified a heavy landing. And the Director and I had a great heart to heart chat on that remote island!
Creamie, you have a great weekend. I may yet send you that card next Christmas!
"Prundle appears to have forgotten the allegations that were made against him by operators who said that he was vindictive. Just ask John McMillan (now Commonwealth Ombudsman), among others."
Regarding your statement above, please stick to the facts, which can't be published here. (I highlighted your word "allegations" as the "allegations" were not proven.) In the matter you alude to, Prundle's actions appear entirely appropriate and justified, which was the Ombudsman's findings. It is not appropriate for any pilot - even an FOI - to fly an aircraft knowing two AD's were outstanding.
Ah, yes, our Caravan engine failure and the Director of CASA flying the aircraft on another occasion.
I'm actually please you raised those points:
1 The PT6A-114A engine was being maintained totally in accordance with Pratt & Whitneys requirements to use "pottable water" for compressor washes. It wasn't until a subsequent laboratory test of the Horn Island water supply that it was found to contain totally unacceptable levels of heavy metals and silica. Yes, I'm guilty. But didn't the pilot do a great job landing at Badu! We had the first beach side Caravan park in the Torres Strait!
2 CASA investigators found the Director not guilty. It was a private flight, he occupied the right hand seat, the left hand seat was occupied by a pilot who held endorsement and training and checking approvals and for good measure, the Chief Pilot, a Grade 1 Instructor and type endorsed, sat between the two pilots. I was also in the second row, chatting to the journo. Yes, the landing was a bit of a thumper, but not classified a heavy landing. And the Director and I had a great heart to heart chat on that remote island!
Creamie, you have a great weekend. I may yet send you that card next Christmas!
Ibex
I too was going to give Desert flower a dressing down but thought I would give the kid the benefit of the doubt as his profile suggests he is a student pilot. All the same it is off the topic at hand, which is about the CASA documentary on SBS.
I too was going to give Desert flower a dressing down but thought I would give the kid the benefit of the doubt as his profile suggests he is a student pilot. All the same it is off the topic at hand, which is about the CASA documentary on SBS.