|
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 10528506)
Country of original certification and construction...
|
Originally Posted by Cloudee
(Post 10528550)
That didn’t stop CASA from suspending 737 Max operations in Australia while it was still flying in the USA. You just never know what you’re going to get from our great regulator. 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. |
Originally Posted by Sunfish
(Post 10528508)
....then change the Aviation Act to require the public servant to weigh up commercial considerations! |
Grounding been lifted???? Gotta luv Australian way of doing things! Worlds best 3rd world practice!
|
Originally Posted by JustinHeywood
(Post 10528605)
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. |
Not having to listen to a certain "non for profit" operator on the radio for the last week has been a blessing to the ears.
|
Originally Posted by cooperplace
(Post 10528675)
Truer words have never been spoken. They are clueless.
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!! |
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. |
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. |
Originally Posted by RVDT
(Post 10523719)
Maybe the fact that no other aircraft was involved and the wing outboard of the strut broke off?
|
Originally Posted by aeromariner
(Post 10530167)
if you look at the photos it broke inboard Of the strut
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'.. |
Originally Posted by djpil
(Post 10530953)
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 .... |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 07:21. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.