Mr F.Wit from CASA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the advice from That chinese fella and others re MA.
However my position is this if we can train a pilot to be effecient enough to fly the helicopter why can't as part of the flight test or endorsement on type incorprate something like changing the duals. Maybe some types are too tricky but the robbi is not in that category. CASA makes rule breakers out of those who try to do their best but have conflicting needs. If I have duals in and away from base and unexpectantly have a pax am I to put up with the threat to safety of his fat arse sliding over the throttle or take it out. I know there will be instances where a pilot stuffs up but so do engineers. Why does it have always to be dictictorial rulings instead of looking for a safe way to do things.
However my position is this if we can train a pilot to be effecient enough to fly the helicopter why can't as part of the flight test or endorsement on type incorprate something like changing the duals. Maybe some types are too tricky but the robbi is not in that category. CASA makes rule breakers out of those who try to do their best but have conflicting needs. If I have duals in and away from base and unexpectantly have a pax am I to put up with the threat to safety of his fat arse sliding over the throttle or take it out. I know there will be instances where a pilot stuffs up but so do engineers. Why does it have always to be dictictorial rulings instead of looking for a safe way to do things.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
helibiz has an interesting point. In the field, do you think anyone is going to get a mechanic to change out the left side in a Robbie? Okay, so now the field pilot starts a bad habit of breaking the rules, telling himself "this is stupid anyway - no big deal - no harm done." What does that attitude lead to in the future?
RDR,
You may just as well argue that a pilot may feel inclined to ignore VFR minima and depart in low vis, or take off overweight, or.....
This issue of dual control fitting is not recent, nor is the interpretation by CASA. The link that I gave to CAAP 42ZC was a summation of the regs, which have been around since Pontius was a pilot. They even allow a pilot to carry out fabric repairs, for gosh sake! The link is here, in case you missed it. It can easily be circumvented (legally) by getting an Maintenance Authority, and at the same time get the MA issued to cover all the miriad other little pilot things which come in useful in the bush, such as Authority to carry out 50 hour inspections, fit/remove cargo hooks, fit/remove camera mounts, etc.
And with the proper instruction and Authority, who can argue that the pilot wouldn't benefit from the excercise?
You may just as well argue that a pilot may feel inclined to ignore VFR minima and depart in low vis, or take off overweight, or.....
This issue of dual control fitting is not recent, nor is the interpretation by CASA. The link that I gave to CAAP 42ZC was a summation of the regs, which have been around since Pontius was a pilot. They even allow a pilot to carry out fabric repairs, for gosh sake! The link is here, in case you missed it. It can easily be circumvented (legally) by getting an Maintenance Authority, and at the same time get the MA issued to cover all the miriad other little pilot things which come in useful in the bush, such as Authority to carry out 50 hour inspections, fit/remove cargo hooks, fit/remove camera mounts, etc.
And with the proper instruction and Authority, who can argue that the pilot wouldn't benefit from the excercise?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Selfish,
I received an MA about 12 months ago for our 206. This allows me to:
* Be able to carry out a comp wash by removing and reinstalling the PC line.
* also to remove and install the cargo hook assembly, which we all agree is quite simple on a 206 setup.
I know sometimes we think "Oh come on youve got to be JOKING" but it keep the current system and rulemakers happy.
and i agree the Robi is very easy to change as you know. looks like now ive goto apply again for this sequence.
But what i was going to say is that it never cost me a cent (i know, unbeleivable). I got a letter from my engineer and faxed it to casa with a covering company letterhead and within 2 weeks i had my ticket for the 206
Cheers
I received an MA about 12 months ago for our 206. This allows me to:
* Be able to carry out a comp wash by removing and reinstalling the PC line.
* also to remove and install the cargo hook assembly, which we all agree is quite simple on a 206 setup.
I know sometimes we think "Oh come on youve got to be JOKING" but it keep the current system and rulemakers happy.
and i agree the Robi is very easy to change as you know. looks like now ive goto apply again for this sequence.
But what i was going to say is that it never cost me a cent (i know, unbeleivable). I got a letter from my engineer and faxed it to casa with a covering company letterhead and within 2 weeks i had my ticket for the 206
Cheers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John Eacott
John I have checked out CAAP 42zc-1, as you suggested, makes me think they are even more stupid than I did before
2.1 says the approved mainteneance does not include the use of specalised tooling,
2.2 says if you are using tooling that requires calibration, that it is your responsibility(the pilot) to ensure it is ok
Calibrated tooling would be somewhat specailised would it not?
10 its Ok to replace seat belts. Is this easy and safe compared to removal R22 duals ?
13 Clean and gap spark plugs Gap Plugs ?? sounds safe -- yeah sure -- someone must show you how, but not a MA in sight
23 ii re-termination of radio system plugs, sockets, disconnects
Yep no safety issues there compared to those tricky duals!!
23 iv replace radio system switches, relays etc
there are more examples but you get my drift.
I would just like to ask one thing
Why couldn't duals be part of the pilots license / endorsement training as it is such a fundamental part of his everyday work?
John I have checked out CAAP 42zc-1, as you suggested, makes me think they are even more stupid than I did before
2.1 says the approved mainteneance does not include the use of specalised tooling,
2.2 says if you are using tooling that requires calibration, that it is your responsibility(the pilot) to ensure it is ok
Calibrated tooling would be somewhat specailised would it not?
10 its Ok to replace seat belts. Is this easy and safe compared to removal R22 duals ?
13 Clean and gap spark plugs Gap Plugs ?? sounds safe -- yeah sure -- someone must show you how, but not a MA in sight
23 ii re-termination of radio system plugs, sockets, disconnects
Yep no safety issues there compared to those tricky duals!!
23 iv replace radio system switches, relays etc
there are more examples but you get my drift.
I would just like to ask one thing
Why couldn't duals be part of the pilots license / endorsement training as it is such a fundamental part of his everyday work?
Selfish,
We have the MA's mentioned, plus more, and as refered to earlier they generally cost about $A250, but with the current doubling of hourly rates for CASA charges, I expect the MA charges will also increase. The fun bit is when the pilot has to show the LAME how to fit a camera mount, so the LAME can then certify the pilot knows what he's doing....
and write to CASA to say so!!!
BT,
Amazed yours was free, but was your company invoiced for the MA? I always get the bills for MA's for my pilots, regardless of how complicated they are. And the LAME's bill for their contribution
Helibiz,
What you are asking is always sensible, but CASA now have as many lawyers as FOIs, or so it seems. Note that the CAAP allows you to carry out fabric repairs, then you'd get an idea how out of date it is.
My only thought is that dual controls are considered part of the flying controls, which are usually required to have a duplicate inspection when disturbed. Following that line of reasoning, CASA and the Airworthiness section would have to jump through hoops to allow it to be incorporated in a type endorsement without somehow bringing a LAME into the equation. How would they seperate the simple (R22 cyclic) from the complicated (Bell 206 pedals)? An incident with pedals fitted incorrectly by a pilot to a 206 about 20 years ago caused much grief at the time, and is probably not forgotten.
With the move toward all Transport Class B and Class A coming under the same system, the Class A method of approvals issued at company level by the Maintenance Controller may/should/will overcome many of these issues, but only with the oversight of Airworthiness Division. Don't forget, they (Airworthiness) are even a referral agent for the issue of AOC's, and are the ratbags responsible for the farcical division of turbine types, such that the Bell 206 now requires about 8-10 different sub classifications
And you can't have a Class A type unless you have a Maintenance System, but you can't have a Maintenance System unless you have the aircraft in the hangar: according to Airworthiness!!!!
The possibility of changing all this is in our hands: what are you doing to make your ideas known to CASA, because this is the only chance you'll get, through the current CASR committees.
We have the MA's mentioned, plus more, and as refered to earlier they generally cost about $A250, but with the current doubling of hourly rates for CASA charges, I expect the MA charges will also increase. The fun bit is when the pilot has to show the LAME how to fit a camera mount, so the LAME can then certify the pilot knows what he's doing....
and write to CASA to say so!!!BT,
Amazed yours was free, but was your company invoiced for the MA? I always get the bills for MA's for my pilots, regardless of how complicated they are. And the LAME's bill for their contribution
Helibiz,
What you are asking is always sensible, but CASA now have as many lawyers as FOIs, or so it seems. Note that the CAAP allows you to carry out fabric repairs, then you'd get an idea how out of date it is.
My only thought is that dual controls are considered part of the flying controls, which are usually required to have a duplicate inspection when disturbed. Following that line of reasoning, CASA and the Airworthiness section would have to jump through hoops to allow it to be incorporated in a type endorsement without somehow bringing a LAME into the equation. How would they seperate the simple (R22 cyclic) from the complicated (Bell 206 pedals)? An incident with pedals fitted incorrectly by a pilot to a 206 about 20 years ago caused much grief at the time, and is probably not forgotten.
With the move toward all Transport Class B and Class A coming under the same system, the Class A method of approvals issued at company level by the Maintenance Controller may/should/will overcome many of these issues, but only with the oversight of Airworthiness Division. Don't forget, they (Airworthiness) are even a referral agent for the issue of AOC's, and are the ratbags responsible for the farcical division of turbine types, such that the Bell 206 now requires about 8-10 different sub classifications
And you can't have a Class A type unless you have a Maintenance System, but you can't have a Maintenance System unless you have the aircraft in the hangar: according to Airworthiness!!!!The possibility of changing all this is in our hands: what are you doing to make your ideas known to CASA, because this is the only chance you'll get, through the current CASR committees.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as a newby (& someone who hasn't completed the Air Law module yet -it's next though, so) I'll ask the obvious
What exactly is the process (is there one) for apporaching CASA with regard to addressing new directives (that create such division & heated debate).
Surely there is a means by which CASA can keep themselves legally safe, whilst not incuring untenable conditions on operators (who are doing the right thing) to continue without winding themselves up in red-tape
additionally is there any public forum available (provided by CASA) in a similar scenario as PPRUNE, where P, C & A Pilots can all submit their opinions/viewpoints on a rule & it's workability (or not) in a view to having it amendended/changed.
or is that just wishful thinking on my part (to assume that some form of logic might be applied)
is there a public forum (other than PPRUNE) where Australian Pilots can co-operatively work to action a submission to have such directives changed (i openly admit the only place i have been really paying attention to is the Rotorheads forum)
also for those who have commented on the FOI's whom are good, what is the availablility of a 'little black book' of people at CASA whom are worth talking to?
What exactly is the process (is there one) for apporaching CASA with regard to addressing new directives (that create such division & heated debate).
Surely there is a means by which CASA can keep themselves legally safe, whilst not incuring untenable conditions on operators (who are doing the right thing) to continue without winding themselves up in red-tape
additionally is there any public forum available (provided by CASA) in a similar scenario as PPRUNE, where P, C & A Pilots can all submit their opinions/viewpoints on a rule & it's workability (or not) in a view to having it amendended/changed.
or is that just wishful thinking on my part (to assume that some form of logic might be applied)
is there a public forum (other than PPRUNE) where Australian Pilots can co-operatively work to action a submission to have such directives changed (i openly admit the only place i have been really paying attention to is the Rotorheads forum)
also for those who have commented on the FOI's whom are good, what is the availablility of a 'little black book' of people at CASA whom are worth talking to?
Well, not actually a public forum, but the Helicopter Association of Australia (HAA) tries its best to fight overly-rigid legislation. Unfortunately it is run by unpaid volunteers, who usually have their own jobs to perform and cannot devote the time needed to hit CASA as hard as is needed.
Those HAA execs work their backsides off but are limited by a couple of factors: membership money, and the lack of people willing to put up their hands to have a go.
If you are keen enough, go to the HAA website, get some contact info, and get in touch with your nearest member. It is our best chance of getting something done.
Those HAA execs work their backsides off but are limited by a couple of factors: membership money, and the lack of people willing to put up their hands to have a go.
If you are keen enough, go to the HAA website, get some contact info, and get in touch with your nearest member. It is our best chance of getting something done.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just an Industry Guy.....
Not that it is any of your business in the first instance, but no, I am a hard working ATPL Pilot working in our Industry outside the CASA umbrella.
The point that I am making, is that if you have not got off your tail and positively contributed to the many and varied requests for submissions and comment regarding the NEW CASR's, then why sprook on here?
I have made the effort and responded to a number of these requests, together with providing a solution rather than just criticism, and subsequently have received good feedback, and furthermore, I can actually see some of my initiatives in a CASR draft….so someone is listening.
I just offered to provide a conduit for those that wanted to submit data, but didn’t know how.
And John, I just renewed my seven [7] MA’s at no cost!!!.....obviously you have to much money!!
The point that I am making, is that if you have not got off your tail and positively contributed to the many and varied requests for submissions and comment regarding the NEW CASR's, then why sprook on here?
I have made the effort and responded to a number of these requests, together with providing a solution rather than just criticism, and subsequently have received good feedback, and furthermore, I can actually see some of my initiatives in a CASR draft….so someone is listening.
I just offered to provide a conduit for those that wanted to submit data, but didn’t know how.
And John, I just renewed my seven [7] MA’s at no cost!!!.....obviously you have to much money!!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: outnabout
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rootoryman
Give it a rest RM, It seems you never have anything worthwhile contributing, you only ever abuse other users......
Who cares if RW is an employee of the dreaded CASA, if he was he would be one of many..
Dont take out your problems on people in this forum (It seems like you have a few, A bit of a chip on your shoulder), If you have problems with CASA take them up with the whole organisation, not just a poor bloke that puts in some useful information, unlike your posts.
Who cares if RW is an employee of the dreaded CASA, if he was he would be one of many..
Dont take out your problems on people in this forum (It seems like you have a few, A bit of a chip on your shoulder), If you have problems with CASA take them up with the whole organisation, not just a poor bloke that puts in some useful information, unlike your posts.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SKIDBITER:
Coming from someone who has contributed a wopping (3) posts thats saying something..
It is a public forum and i am entitled to my oppinions like you! My experiences with CASA are shared by many in the Aviation Industry.. Now back on your Bike!!!
Coming from someone who has contributed a wopping (3) posts thats saying something..
It is a public forum and i am entitled to my oppinions like you! My experiences with CASA are shared by many in the Aviation Industry.. Now back on your Bike!!!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: outnabout
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not the amount of posts you have its how you use them!!!
As you say I am entitled to my opinions and I have voiced them.
Stop your whinging and bitching, Be pro active in trying to change the regs to suit the industry and dont just abuse the innocent that frequent this forum...
As you say I am entitled to my opinions and I have voiced them.
Stop your whinging and bitching, Be pro active in trying to change the regs to suit the industry and dont just abuse the innocent that frequent this forum...
Rickster....
I waited for the end before posting....and in light of all that I have read...and knowing of a personal on-going struggle with the FAA bureaucracy....I suggest you get on the band wagon and criticize the FAA every single chance you get....lest they morph into what we are discussing here. Overall, our guys do pretty good...but it is a young bureaucracy and given time to mature...."Watch Out!"!
Go to the Inspector's handbook...and read the part about obtaining a Management Waiver for a 135 operation. The part I enjoyed was where it said something to the effect that all PIC time spent in Longlining, external load work, rappelling, spraying, and fertilizing...did not count towards the experience needed to be a Chief Pilot or Director of Operations for a Part 135 Helicopter Operation.
Now I ask you....just how many helicopter operations in this country....do only passenger hauls to the complete and utter exclusion of all other helicopter work? That defies the definition of "Utility Helicopter Company" in my mind. And....the last time I checked....most helicopter companies have but one Chief Pilot and one Director of Operations....which oversee the myriad of tasks their operations perform.
No...Rickster....get yer catapault out and keep those stones flying!
Reference: FAA 8400.10 CHG 25 Page 3-42 Paragraph D.2.iii
"All acceptable, comparable experiences added together must equal the required 3 years. However, experience as a military fighter pilot flying in combat scenarios, a flight instructor, a crop duster, or a helicopter external load operator, would not be considered comparable experience. A college education or educational experience in aviation or writing manuals does not substitute for actual work experience."
But then what do I know about the helicopter business, right? 37 years and counting...oops...the Army time does not count....errrr.....33 accident/incident free years and counting.
I waited for the end before posting....and in light of all that I have read...and knowing of a personal on-going struggle with the FAA bureaucracy....I suggest you get on the band wagon and criticize the FAA every single chance you get....lest they morph into what we are discussing here. Overall, our guys do pretty good...but it is a young bureaucracy and given time to mature...."Watch Out!"!
Go to the Inspector's handbook...and read the part about obtaining a Management Waiver for a 135 operation. The part I enjoyed was where it said something to the effect that all PIC time spent in Longlining, external load work, rappelling, spraying, and fertilizing...did not count towards the experience needed to be a Chief Pilot or Director of Operations for a Part 135 Helicopter Operation.
Now I ask you....just how many helicopter operations in this country....do only passenger hauls to the complete and utter exclusion of all other helicopter work? That defies the definition of "Utility Helicopter Company" in my mind. And....the last time I checked....most helicopter companies have but one Chief Pilot and one Director of Operations....which oversee the myriad of tasks their operations perform.
No...Rickster....get yer catapault out and keep those stones flying!
Reference: FAA 8400.10 CHG 25 Page 3-42 Paragraph D.2.iii
"All acceptable, comparable experiences added together must equal the required 3 years. However, experience as a military fighter pilot flying in combat scenarios, a flight instructor, a crop duster, or a helicopter external load operator, would not be considered comparable experience. A college education or educational experience in aviation or writing manuals does not substitute for actual work experience."
But then what do I know about the helicopter business, right? 37 years and counting...oops...the Army time does not count....errrr.....33 accident/incident free years and counting.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SKIDBITER:
Your a Laugh a minute son!
You come on here as a member since March04 with 3 posts and tell me i shouldnt critisise!!! so what would you call what you are doing? Expressing an Oppinion Maybe?
Cause i thought that was what i was doing!!
If you have anything else to contribute to the discussion please by all means ! Would love to read about it..as for being proactive with regards to CASA, I have done plenty i assure you:
1) Media - Current affairs
2) Newspapers
3) local pollie
4) CASA!
You assume an awefull lot SKIDBITER! so before you come on here and critsise me or my comments i might suggest you at least do your home work first!
Your a Laugh a minute son!
You come on here as a member since March04 with 3 posts and tell me i shouldnt critisise!!! so what would you call what you are doing? Expressing an Oppinion Maybe?
Cause i thought that was what i was doing!!
If you have anything else to contribute to the discussion please by all means ! Would love to read about it..as for being proactive with regards to CASA, I have done plenty i assure you:
1) Media - Current affairs
2) Newspapers
3) local pollie
4) CASA!
You assume an awefull lot SKIDBITER! so before you come on here and critsise me or my comments i might suggest you at least do your home work first!