|
Ohhhh dear...Not Again!!
Now before we all get going, there are plenty of good folk at Big Brother in Cantberra and the regional offices, but really this takes the cake.
I thought Nth Qld had been sorted out by Bruce Byron.... :ugh::ugh: := This is disgraceful, even if only 10% of it is true :mad: Dad?s Army Rides Again! | Aircraft for Sale, Plane Sales, Planes for Sale - Aviation Advertiser ? - Online Magazine J |
Power corrupts .....:yuk:
I am not fully conversant with the new/proposed legislation - perhaps someone in the know could advise whether the ATSB would now (or will soon) have the authority to investigate this matter? |
I thought you could work on a plane as much as you wanted and pull bits off and on etc, but this aircraft didn't have a maintenance release which I thought made it ok as long as a LAME signs off.
Perhaps the people that I know that have been known to do this, shouldn't be! |
This type of behaviour from the regulator has been rampant for at least the last 20 years, in my experience!
BC :cool: |
In fact without a maintenance release the aircraft at best was a static exhibit.
So now we cant touch static exhibits ???? That should close all the aviation museums in Australia pretty effectively. |
Why do not just put it in a hangar and do whatever you want to it?
|
One of the names mentioned on the CASA side is a person I would happily loan my car to. Ex industry and built up his own Hangar, trained engineers in North China.
Surprised to read this; and the photo versus the statements does seem damming. I doubt we will see the other side of the story here but giving the benefit of the doubt I am sure there is one. |
Perhaps as an aircraft owner I need to be elightened here. I would have thought that an aircraft without a current maintenance release had the same status as an empty beer bottle as far as CASA was concerned and therefore I could do more or less what I liked with it, providing it was then inspected by, and signed off by. a LAME. Is this the case or not?? Certainly if the aircraft was not registered then it must surely have the beer bottle status.:confused::confused:
|
So CASA thinks that everyone who works on the production line at Beechcraft, Cessna, Boeing, airbus etc, etc, fitting parts and carrying out fabrication work on aircraft prior to their cert. and reg. is a fully qualified LAME. No wonder aircraft cost so much!
And of course an apprentice LAME working to gain their qualification in Australia has never touched an aircraft prior to gaining their lic. Another gold effort CASA, you twats. |
Good point monster...I have it on impeccable authority from several LAME mates who have visited the factories (Beech/Cessna/Piper) that these aircraft are built by min wage itinerant workers.
The C&%t$ Against Safe Aviation:ugh: |
I will bet you that any maintenance hangar in Australia has about 1 licenced engineer to every three workers in the shed that work on aircraft every single day of the year.
|
Spotlight
I would have to agree with Spotlight here, I have a feeling there is another side to this story.
|
grogmonster
I would think that 1:3 is optomistic in the extreme:sad:
|
Apteryx
You can rest assured good people, that Paul Phelan would not write such an article without doing his homework first. I sent him the Prosecution brief and my Defense papers... so I can assure you its 24 carat.
I am the horse...this is my mouth. I'll brief as possible. Make of it what you will. A CASA person makes a bad call, I tell him to Foxtrot Oscar...it was that simple.! But these people are PHDs in turning a mole hill into Mt Everest.!..never mind the costs to the taxpayer, and grief for the indivual. Its called exercising the Penile Power Muscle.! The Authority wants to punish me for my language. Since I wouldnt bite on the $550s Penalties, I upset their MO by wanting to be proved guilty or otherwise in a Court of Law. So my 'crime' needed "sexing up" somewhat, to make it sound more heinous..ie interfering with /removing a primary control surface, no less. And to make bloody sure, they had to have a good story about what occurred, and besides, according the "investigator... "there are people in CB who think they can make this stick". Get their drift? So when you get their Sworn statements, which are proveable as technically and physically impossible... I fear the poor dolts have a problem on their hands. And to further enhance their "expertise" ,illustrated with nice photos clearly showing the elevator, SINGULAR... which has NEVER been off the tailplane.! No wonder CASA has invoked Drug and Alcohol testing.! WTF were they smoking/snorting on the way to the tarmac.? Must have been something if they could see things that never occurred and an aircraft part that morphed into something else. Or perhaps they were just lying ... and thought they could get away with it.? Or too stupid to realise what they had done. Whatever. The wash up is going to "fascinating" for all concerned.! |
aroa, and anyone else that comes across press stories/first hand info on this apparently disgraceful use of position, please keep us informed on the progress of this matter.
Reminds me of the dill of an AWI that demanded I label the INSIDE of my Airtourer canopy cover "Remove Before Flight" :ugh: As Jaba said in the opening post, there are some good people in CASA but their good work is too often undone by a few misfits. tipsy :yuk:furball:yuk::yuk: |
Mr Rudd’s lawyer had told him the CASA was prepared to drop the charges if he didn’t seek costs against them. He decided not to spend any more money on the matter, but did not sign any agreement not to pursue CASA for costs. He had not been told that the case against him had been or would be dropped. It was left to him to visit the Magistrate’s court and obtain a document that recoded that “the defendant entered no plea” and “The Magistrates Court ordered STRUCK OUT.” However on Sept 14 2008 Mr Rudd filed a complaint against the various officials with CASA’s Industry Complaints Commissioner Michael Hart, alleging criminality in some of the officials’ actions. Mr Hart responded on Dec 19 2008 that he had provided a report on the matter to (then) CASA CEO Bruce Byron, with a recommendation that the matters be referred to the Australian Federal Police, and advising that the matter had in fact been handed over to the AFP. On Nov 7 2008 Mr Rudd advised Mr Byron that: “I have lodged documents with the Australian Federal Police with a view to Criminal charges being laid against CASA employees, for perjury, conspiring to pervert the course of justice and misfeasance in public office. And they were certainly negligent and failed in their duty of care towards me as CASA ‘client’” . On 19 Dec 2008 he received a letter from the AFP which explained that matters referred to the AFP often exceed that organisation’s capacity to investigate. It stated: The AFP was advised during the evaluation of this matter that your complaint has also been referred to CASA and the AFP has been advised that this matter would not be accepted for further investigation.” I'm not a 'CASA basher' , I've never had a problem with them , I even got my PC6 Porter training and endorsement from an examiner that had a few thousand hours on the PC6 (he was ex Army) who went out of his way to do it but I have heard a lot of horror stories like this on the maintenance and operations side 20 yrs ago where things get personal and professionalism goes out the window on both sides. This is a throwback to the days of no accountability for throwing around the weight and power of a large authority. If government officials are covering each other with sworn statements about things they didn't see or know to be false to prosecute an innocent citizen as payback for some bad langauge this is a serious matter and should be treated like one. Make sure you don't have a screwdriver or pocket knife in your hand when doing a pre-flight inspection ! . |
aseanaero....nooooooooooo! I'm going to have to get a new fuel drain. The Civil Aviation Stupidity Association might think I'm going to remove the entire cockpit with the screwdriver end on my fuel drain!
|
In fact without a maintenance release the aircraft at best was a static exhibit. If the aircraft is on the register, it is deemed that the registered owner has responsibilities to ensure that the law relating to the maintenance of the aircraft is complied with. If the aircraft is not registered then it is a non entity in the eyes of the law regarding the regulator. (An empty beer bottle as some one has said) Were someone to fly it, then the Police would have a case that the aircraft was flown unregistered. The tactics of the investigators is clearly dodgy to say the least but I wonder whether it should ever have got to the point it did. |
Maybe those AWI's put together the brilliant plastic calendar which we all use everyday ??
|
Ombudsman??
There must be an Ombudsman or someone who can look at this if others will not.
Maybe the press can give the latest developments some publicity. Or do we just accept that our country is corrupt? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 16:46. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.