[Kharon]

Shot down in flames: the dangers of the blame game.  (Retch - gag)..

The article – HERE – from CASA – Flight Safety makes some valid points; but it’s a bit rich – considering the CASA track record for pilot embuggerance.  Could it be the ultimate in CASA hypocrisy?  

Perhaps it’s a subtle attempt to turn down the heat CASA rightfully attracts through social media.  There really is no other way to expose the inane antics, cock-ups and pure bastardy of the CASA culture, the evidence stacking, the underhand, disingenuous methods employed, when CASA decide to go after a pilot.  There is no other avenue and when you analyse the CASA tactics you realise that there no depth they will not plumb to prove that they were right.  Reprisals, flimsy, subjective NCN parlayed into heinous crimes against safety, some companies feted and favoured, others moving targets.  Vendetta, pay-back, etc. and CASA is now all gooey eyed and PC, begging pilots not to gang up on each other, while the CASA fifth column are texting and whispering to their CASA sponsors – bollocks.

No matter – there are some valid points made – not that they will change anything, but it’s good to know – CASA cares.

Physician – heal thyself.

Bucket, quick, who had it last?

[Peetwo]

Shot down in flames: the dangers of the blame game.  (Retch - gag)..

The article – HERE – from CASA – Flight Safety makes some valid points; but it’s a bit rich – considering the CASA track record for pilot embuggerance.  Could it be the ultimate in CASA hypocrisy?  

Perhaps it’s a subtle attempt to turn down the heat CASA rightfully attracts through social media.  There really is no other way to expose the inane antics, cock-ups and pure bastardy of the CASA culture, the evidence stacking, the underhand, disingenuous methods employed, when CASA decide to go after a pilot.  There is no other avenue and when you analyse the CASA tactics you realise that there no depth they will not plumb to prove that they were right.  Reprisals, flimsy, subjective NCN parlayed into heinous crimes against safety, some companies feted and favoured, others moving targets.  Vendetta, pay-back, etc. and CASA is now all gooey eyed and PC, begging pilots not to gang up on each other, while the CASA fifth column are texting and whispering to their CASA sponsors – bollocks.

No matter – there are some valid points made – not that they will change anything, but it’s good to know – CASA cares.

Physician – heal thyself.

Bucket, quick, who had it last?

Yes "K" interesting timing for the release of that article, especially when you consider the recent media; CASA propaganda blurb (Skidmore ten commandments); and miniscule SOEs based on Forsyth review recommendation on 'Just Culture' principles:
 

From off the Embuggerance thread - 'Just Culture' & incident reporting probity?- Part II 

Aviation safety vs the “prosecutorial imperative”. Indiscriminate prosecutions erode safety culture




...The great thing about the just culture approach is not merely that it produces timely information that can save lives, but that the information is widely shared among those who can benefit from it. There are searchable online databases containing massive amounts of vitally important safety-related information. With today’s sophisticated analysis and artificial intelligence, it is possible to predict incipient dangerous conditions and remedy them well in advance of an actual system failure.

An Emerging Consensus: deficiencies are best addressed by a "just culture" approach

The value of just culture has been widely acknowledged by regulatory authorities. The FAA last June issued a new “compliance philosophy” (FAA Order 8000.373, June 26, 2015) that places new emphasis on non-punitive means of rectifying deviations from regulatory requirements when disclosed. Noting that some deviations arise from factors like flawed procedures, simple mistakes, lack of understanding, or diminished skills, the FAA believes that such deficiencies “can most effectively be corrected through root cause analysis and training, education or other appropriate improvements to procedures or training programs for regulated entities....” In other words, not through the imposition of penalties. The objective, quite clearly, is to encourage more voluntary reporting in the interest of ensuring that the safety management systems required of all airlines are working optimally.

“CASA embraces, and encourages the development throughout the aviation community of, a ‘just culture,’ in which people are not punished for actions, omissions, or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience, qualifications and training.”

Just last month Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority issued a new statement of regulatory philosophy that even more explicitly embraced the just culture approach. The agency wrote:

“CASA embraces, and encourages the development throughout the aviation community of, a ‘just culture,’ in which people are not punished for actions, omissions, or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience, qualifications and training.” 

Earlier this month, the European Commission convened a meeting in Brussels to introduce a “European Corporate Just Culture Declaration.” The Declaration said: “It is acknowledged that, in an operational aviation industry environment, individuals, despite their training, expertise, experience, abilities and good will, may be faced with situations where the limits of human performance combined with unwanted and unpredictable systemic influences may lead to an undesirable outcome.”

There’s a bumper sticker that makes the same point in fewer words. It can be paraphrased as “Stuff happens.”

The declaration then continues: “Analysis of reported occurrences by organisations should focus on system performance and contributing factors first and not on apportioning blame and/or focus on individual responsibilities....”

Very clearly, there is an emerging consensus -- among regulatory agencies and the industry -- that encouraging voluntary disclosure of safety information is in everyone’s interest, and that the best way to do so is to apply non-punitive remedies to deficiencies that are voluntarily disclosed.

ICAO and Protection at the Global Level

we have seen too many cases in recent years in which judges, prosecutors, and plaintiffs’ attorneys have sought access to this vitally important safety information.

Despite this consensus, however, we have seen too many cases in recent years in which judges, prosecutors, and plaintiffs’ attorneys have sought access to this vitally important safety information. In a growing number of instances, they have succeeded. If that trend were to continue, you can be assured that the essential flow of safety information would simply dry up.

This danger is increasingly understood and it’s now an issue that’s being tackled globally, most importantly at ICAO.

Five years ago, an ICAO High-level Safety Conference recommended the development of new guidance – what ICAO calls “Standards and Recommended Practices” or “SARPs” – to be included in a new annex to the Chicago Convention devoted to safety management. The annexes to the Convention, as you probably know, are where the high-level principles enunciated in the treaty are turned into more specific and granular guidance.

They aren’t self- executing; they have to be implemented through national laws and regulations in order to be effective, but that’s generally what happens. It happens because the quality of a government’s aviation safety oversight is measured by the extent to which it has implemented ICAO’s SARPs and other guidance.

The new SARPs envisioned five years ago were to spell out government responsibilities for the protection of safety information. The protection of information derived from accident investigations was already addressed to some extent in the accident investigation annex -- Annex 13. The new SARPs were intended to reinforce those protections and explicitly cover information reported via the safety management systems that are now a mandatory ingredient in airline operations – including, of course, the voluntary reporting I’ve been talking about. This new guidance will be included in the new safety management annex -- Annex 19. And lest there be any doubt, the protection contemplated is protection from prosecutors, judges, and yes, even trial lawyers.

Some of the most important provisions can be found listed under new “Principles of protection” proposed for Annex 19. The first principle is that “States shall ensure that safety data or safety information is not used for: a) disciplinary, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings against employees operational personnel or organizations; b) disclosure to the public; or c) any purposes other than maintaining or improving safety; unless a principle of exception applies.”


The “principles of exception” are what you would expect – cases in which the conduct in question clearly crosses the line from an honest mistake into the area of reckless endangerment, gross negligence, willful misconduct, or whatever you want to call it -- conduct that would always be subject to prosecution under applicable national laws.


But the overarching idea, simply put, is that penalizing honest mistakes merely impedes the flow of valuable safety information and thereby actually increases the risk profile of the aviation sector.

ICAO is moving towards a basis for a standard global approach by end-2016

The new provisions were circulated to governments for a final review last July in something ICAO calls a “state letter.” Any further comments from the governments were due a week ago, by October 15. The next step will be a review by ICAO’s Air Navigation Commission with the intention of presenting the language to the ICAO Council – ICAO’s governing body -- for final approval next March. Nobody expects to hear any dissent. The new provisions will then become effective in November of next year.

There is still an open question as to when the new provisions will become applicable to governments – 2018 or 2020 are the options being discussed. As I indicated earlier, nothing in an ICAO annex is self-executing; to be effective and enforceable, the guidance has to be translated into national law by governments. My guess is that a great many governments won’t wait for the new language to become effective but will start their legislative processes working even sooner.

All of this is good news for the airlines, of course, but it is even better news for their customers – including you and me. Aviation is already the safest mode of transportation, and by a wide measure. But air traffic is predicted to double over the course of the next 20 years.

That means that we have an obligation to do all we can to make the remarkable safety management systems we rely upon today even better. The changes in law that I’ve discussed will be an essential element in that improvement. 

miniscule SOE:

..8. work closely with the ATSB to ensure continued arrangements are in place, consistent with the current Safety Information Policy Statement and informed by ‘just culture’ principles, for the appropriate sharing and use of safety information by CASA and the ATSB;

Forsyth recommendation:

..17. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority publishes and demonstrates the philosophy of ‘just culture’ whereby individuals involved in a reportable event are not punished for actions, omissions or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience and training. However, actions of gross negligence, wilful violations and destructive acts should not be tolerated..

So is the FSA article a rather vain attempt by the CASA white hats to get a very real message out or just another - Oliver endorsed -  attempted spin'n'bulldust, rhetorical flourish to display artificial compliance/progress with actioning the Forsyth recommendations??

Either way the chances of a sound 'just culture' SSP (ICAO Annex 19) being successful in Australia is nugatory, while Oliver refuses to address the toxic culture of distrust that the industry continues to have with the regulator.

The heading & last paragraph of the FSA article IMO perfectly highlights the major roadblock that needs to be broached before there can be any effective reform of CASA & their massive current & proposed volumes of industry killing regulations: 

Blame, shame and safety


Each facet of bullying and public shaming has a direct impact on safety. From the ‘I would have done it differently’ culture that emerges after every accident, to the shaming of pilots who have near misses, the shame game turns often-trivial accidents into potential fatals. Do I need to spell out how?

Every time a person shames another, they’re implicitly declaring, ‘I would never be that stupid, careless or heavy handed’. How can you be so sure? Do you know and understand the factors and pressures that faced the pilot who had the incident? Can you, hand-on-heart, say you have always resisted them?

Every accident and incident in aviation provides an opportunity to learn a lesson. Blaming and shaming detracts from that opportunity. By criticising others rather than re-examining one’s own attitudes and practices, blame becomes a lesson wasted. If the industry is to promote a culture of safety and transparency, the blame game cannot go on.

     
Oliver you're despicable...

MTF....P2  

[Peetwo]

The following is a post from off the RAAA thread, which puts the IOS bullshit meter to the test on Farmer Truss's recent speech at the RAAA convention:

IOS bullshit detector test

2015 RAAA National Convention: ‘The Sky's the Limit’

Aviation Safety Regulation

I am well aware of the RAAA's concerns about the extent and nature of Australia's aviation safety regulation. 

The Government's Aviation Safety Regulation Review acknowledged Australia's excellent aviation safety record—but identified scope for improvements to maintain this record.

The Government agreed to most of the Report's 37 recommendations and action is well under way to implement the Government's response to the Report.

I have already issued new Statements of Expectations to Australia's three key aviation safety agencies—CASA, Airservices Australia, and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau.

These publicly outline the Government's expectations of these agencies over the next two years—including the timely implementation of our response to the Report.

The Government has appointed a new CASA Board, including members who bring relevant technical, operational, governance and managerial aviation experience to the Board. That includes new CASA Chair, Mr Jeff Boyd whom I'm sure you all know very well given his regional aviation background.

The Government also welcomes CASA's release of its new regulatory philosophy—which emphasises the importance of collaboration and communication between CASA and Industry.

CASA is engaging with the aviation industry on several deregulation initiatives to reduce the regulatory burden on industry. This includes looking at specific regulations, rules and procedures that impact on regional airlines.

CASA has also invited the industry to submit specific deregulation proposals.

I encourage the RAAA to continue its work through its own proposals with CASA staff and the Director of Aviation Safety, Mark Skidmore, who is speaking at this conference.

{Okay ran the BS meter over this part of the miniscule's RAAA speech and I am afraid the results were not good -



}

Conclusion
I have touched on a wide range of issues over the past few minutes—but, as you know, the breadth of issues involved in aviation is very much the nature of this industry.

The initiatives I have announced today will make an important contribution to regional aviation.

But beyond the specifics of both our new and existing measures, I can assure you that the Australian Government is thoroughly committed to the progress of regional aviation.
And we share your goal of ensuring it continues to maximise its longstanding—and outstanding—contribution to the Nation.

Thank you very much, and I am happy to take your questions.

However to be fair to the mostly inept & dopey DPM, there were parts of the speech that the BS meter wasn't totally off the scale, mainly because the rhetorical promises are still largely yet to be actioned. A good example was this part of the speech:

Aviation skills
It is clearly essential that the aviation industry's workforce has the skills and qualifications needed to meet future growth and demand without compromising safety.

The Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council has identified a range of aviation specific workforce development needs and challenges.

Globally, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, predicts that in the next 20 years airlines will need an additional 25,000 new aircraft to meet demand—it may be a good time to consider buying shares in aircraft manufacturers!

As a result, by 2026 the entire international industry will need 350,000 new pilots and 480,000 new technicians to maintain the aircraft.

There is already a particularly high demand for pilots—and, almost inevitably, poaching—stemming from strong growth in Asia and the Middle East.

These pressures are impacting on Australia and, although I note the good work Rex is doing through their Pilate Cadet Programme—there are significant difficulties in attracting people to work in regional or remote locations.

These pressures create the need to better understand the current challenges and future workforce needs of Australia's aviation industry.

This is why I am establishing an Aviation Workforce Skills Study.

The Study will help Government and industry better understand the future needs of the Australia's aviation workforce, so that we can work to meet them.

The Aviation Industry Consultative Council has advised on the parameters of the study and my Department has engaged the Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council to lead this work—with a close engagement with industry.

I expect the study to be completed in early 2016.

The Government is also finalising a new and contestable model for developing vocational education and training products.

Australian industry will take the lead in this process, because it is best-placed to know its current and future skills needs.

The move to a contestable model ensures arrangements respond to industry needs.

Skills Service Organisations will be selected through a competitive grants process. They will assist Industry Reference Committees to develop and review suitable training products—and we will shortly announce the successful Skills Service Organisations which will support the Committees.

I expect that the new arrangements will be fully operational from January 2016.

 
This is an excellent initiative and needs to be supported by industry. Hopefully under 'Malcolm in the middle' this is not a hollow initiative.

Moving on and another positive aviation industry story, involving the DPM, fresh off the Yaffa.. :

Latrobe Valley Regional Airport is home to Mahindra Aerospace, Latrobe Valley Aero Club, several aviation businesses and plays host to hundreds of visiting aircraft each year. (Steve Hitchen)



Aerospace Manufacturing Facility opened at Latrobe Valley
18 Nov 2015

A new aerospace manufacturing facility was opened at Latrobe Regional Airport today, aimed at attracting new aviation businesses to boost the local economy.

The Growing Aerospace Manufacturing facility include a 5-hectare site opposite Mahindra Aerospace (GippsAero), a 33,350 square metre new surface for the main runway, improved drainage and additional water tanks, as well as improvements to taxiways and line markings.

New LED lighting and a Precision Approach Slope Indicator (PAPI) were also part of the $4.24 million project.

Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss said the project is a major boost for the region's economy.

“This project created 107 jobs during construction and up to 200 jobs have been created in the aerospace industry since the start of this project,” he said.

“The work has involved the construction of an additional aircraft development hangar and infrastructure upgrades to support manufacturing and emergency services at the airport. It has also seen improvements to navigation aids, runway lighting, taxiways and aprons.

“What this means is a much more effective airport capable of handling growth in air traffic, a particularly important outcome for regional towns impacted by the tyranny of distance.”

Victorian Minister for Regional Development Jaala Pulford said the upgrades to the airport would benefit more than just local residents.

“The Victorian Government hosts a number of its aerial firefighting aircraft at the airport, a particularly important service we can draw on during a hot dry summer,” she said.

“I am delighted to see the upgrades complete and I am looking forward to continued investment by the Australian Government in the region. Supporting projects like these is the aim of our $500 million Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund which will support major projects, create jobs and build stronger regional communities in the Latrobe Valley.”

MTF..P2

[Peetwo]

Aviation skills
It is clearly essential that the aviation industry's workforce has the skills and qualifications needed to meet future growth and demand without compromising safety.

The Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council has identified a range of aviation specific workforce development needs and challenges.

Globally, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, predicts that in the next 20 years airlines will need an additional 25,000 new aircraft to meet demand—it may be a good time to consider buying shares in aircraft manufacturers!

As a result, by 2026 the entire international industry will need 350,000 new pilots and 480,000 new technicians to maintain the aircraft.

There is already a particularly high demand for pilots—and, almost inevitably, poaching—stemming from strong growth in Asia and the Middle East.

These pressures are impacting on Australia and, although I note the good work Rex is doing through their Pilate Cadet Programme—there are significant difficulties in attracting people to work in regional or remote locations.

These pressures create the need to better understand the current challenges and future workforce needs of Australia's aviation industry.

This is why I am establishing an Aviation Workforce Skills Study.

The Study will help Government and industry better understand the future needs of the Australia's aviation workforce, so that we can work to meet them.

The Aviation Industry Consultative Council has advised on the parameters of the study and my Department has engaged the Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council to lead this work—with a close engagement with industry.

I expect the study to be completed in early 2016.

The Government is also finalising a new and contestable model for developing vocational education and training products.

Australian industry will take the lead in this process, because it is best-placed to know its current and future skills needs.

The move to a contestable model ensures arrangements respond to industry needs.

Skills Service Organisations will be selected through a competitive grants process. They will assist Industry Reference Committees to develop and review suitable training products—and we will shortly announce the successful Skills Service Organisations which will support the Committees.

I expect that the new arrangements will be fully operational from January 2016.

 
This is an excellent initiative and needs to be supported by industry. Hopefully under 'Malcolm in the middle' this is not a hollow initiative.

Moving on and another positive aviation industry story, involving the DPM, fresh off the Yaffa.. :

Latrobe Valley Regional Airport is home to Mahindra Aerospace, Latrobe Valley Aero Club, several aviation businesses and plays host to hundreds of visiting aircraft each year. (Steve Hitchen)



Aerospace Manufacturing Facility opened at Latrobe Valley
18 Nov 2015

A new aerospace manufacturing facility was opened at Latrobe Regional Airport today, aimed at attracting new aviation businesses to boost the local economy.

The Growing Aerospace Manufacturing facility include a 5-hectare site opposite Mahindra Aerospace (GippsAero), a 33,350 square metre new surface for the main runway, improved drainage and additional water tanks, as well as improvements to taxiways and line markings.

New LED lighting and a Precision Approach Slope Indicator (PAPI) were also part of the $4.24 million project.

Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss said the project is a major boost for the region's economy.

“This project created 107 jobs during construction and up to 200 jobs have been created in the aerospace industry since the start of this project,” he said.

“The work has involved the construction of an additional aircraft development hangar and infrastructure upgrades to support manufacturing and emergency services at the airport. It has also seen improvements to navigation aids, runway lighting, taxiways and aprons.

“What this means is a much more effective airport capable of handling growth in air traffic, a particularly important outcome for regional towns impacted by the tyranny of distance.”

Victorian Minister for Regional Development Jaala Pulford said the upgrades to the airport would benefit more than just local residents.

“The Victorian Government hosts a number of its aerial firefighting aircraft at the airport, a particularly important service we can draw on during a hot dry summer,” she said.

“I am delighted to see the upgrades complete and I am looking forward to continued investment by the Australian Government in the region. Supporting projects like these is the aim of our $500 million Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund which will support major projects, create jobs and build stronger regional communities in the Latrobe Valley.”

More on this good news story (above) with the Media Release from the Ag PM/DPM...

Latrobe Valley soars with aviation upgrade

Media Release
WT378/2015
18 November 2015

Joint release with:
Jaala Pulford
Victorian Minister for Regional Development
Darren Chester
Member for Gippsland


The Latrobe Valley's economy has received a significant boost with the opening of the Growing Aerospace Manufacturing facility at Latrobe Regional Airport today.

Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss said the $4.24 million project is a major boost for the region's economy.

“This project created 107 jobs during construction and up to 200 jobs have been created in the aerospace industry since the start of this project,” Mr Truss said.

“The work has involved the construction of an additional aircraft development hangar and infrastructure upgrades to support manufacturing and emergency services at the airport. It has also seen improvements to navigation aids, runway lighting, taxiways and aprons.

“What this means is a much more effective airport capable of handling growth in air traffic, a particularly important outcome for regional towns impacted by the tyranny of distance.”

Federal Member for Gippsland Darren Chester said the extensive upgrades had been ‘class-leading’.

“Outcomes of the project included the replacement of the old incandescent lighting system with a complete LED runway and taxiway lighting system, and a Precision Approach Path Indicator, which is the largest complete LED system currently in Victoria,” Mr Chester said.

“Other works included a 33,350 square metre resurfacing of the main runway, improved drainage and additional water tanks, as well as improvements to taxiways and line markings.”

Victorian Minister for Regional Development Jaala Pulford said the upgrades to the airport held benefits for more than just local residents.

“The Victorian Government hosts a number of its aerial firefighting aircraft at the airport, a particularly important service we can draw on during a hot dry summer,” Ms Pulford said.

“I am delighted to see the upgrades complete and I am looking forward to continued investment by the Australian Government in the region. Supporting projects like these is the aim of our $500 million Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund which will support major projects, create jobs and build stronger regional communities in the Latrobe Valley.”

MTF..P2

[P7_TOM]

“I am delighted to see the upgrades complete and I am looking forward to continued investment by the Australian Government in the region. Supporting projects like these is the aim of our $500 million Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund which will support major projects, create jobs and build stronger regional communities in the Latrobe Valley.”

Amen to that, at least one government is thinking clearly.  How nice would it be to have Airvan building and exporting from the 'hub'.  Australian exports one of it's finest skills - aeronautical engineering - how I wish.

[thorn bird]

Fridays Australian, aviation section "Short Haul.

The air Vice Marshall has issued a decree.

“The Civil Aviation  Safety  Authority is conducting a survey
To determine how it is viewed by the aviation Industry.
The authority says the online survey, which will become
a biennial event, will take about 15 minutes to complete
and will cover areas such as efficiency, responsiveness,
accountability, timeliness and ease of complying with
regulations. It said the results would be used by CAsA’s
board and management to “improve CAsA’s performance,
build stronger working connections with the aviation
community and lift service delivery”. The survey starts
next week and is open until mid-November”.
www.casa.gov.au/mop

Now men this is really serious stuff, I expect everyone to
complete this important initiative from the air Vice Marshall.

Now men, stop laughing this is very important.

Silence, for goodness sake get up off the floor!!

Sergent Take that mans name!!

Silence I said!!

Oh for goodness sake, if you can't control yourselves your all on report!!

[Gobbledock]

Oh goodie oh goodie, lots of talk, now we have surveys! Where do CAsA find these tosspots? Here's my response Vice Marshall; YOU SUCK!

Now we all know that suckholes like Lookleft will happily fill in the survey, he will even be 'knocking the top off it' as his other hand punches the keyboard, but the IOS won't be giving Fort Fumble their precious time and IP address, no sir. I would rather lick one of the salty scabs on that lisping fool Truss's head than provide 'feedback' to those obsfucating twats at CAsA.

P_666

[Peetwo]

Fridays Australian, aviation section "Short Haul.

The air Vice Marshall has issued a decree.

“The Civil Aviation  Safety  Authority is conducting a survey
To determine how it is viewed by the aviation Industry.
The authority says the online survey, which will become
a biennial event, will take about 15 minutes to complete
and will cover areas such as efficiency, responsiveness,
accountability, timeliness and ease of complying with
regulations. It said the results would be used by CAsA’s
board and management to “improve CAsA’s performance,
build stronger working connections with the aviation
community and lift service delivery”. The survey starts
next week and is open until mid-November”.
www.casa.gov.au/mop

Now men this is really serious stuff, I expect everyone to
complete this important initiative from the air Vice Marshall.

Now men, stop laughing this is very important.

Silence, for goodness sake get up off the floor!!

Sergent Take that mans name!!

Silence I said!!

Oh for goodness sake, if you can't control yourselves your all on report!!

Good catch TB

Also reported here from AA:

CASA to seek industry feedback via online survey


November 20, 2015 by australianaviation.com.au Leave a Comment

Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is launching an online survey to gauge community views about its work.

The survey will open on November 23 and run until mid-December, focusing on CASA’s performance on specific areas such as efficiency, responsiveness, accountability and timeliness.

CASA said in a statement the survey would take about 15 minute to complete and be conducted by an independent market research organisation, with respondents able to remain anonymous if they desired.

“Questions cover how easy it is to comply with regulations, the development of new regulations, consistency of decision making and satisfaction with service delivery,” CASA said.

“Overall, the survey aims to determine the strengths and weaknesses of CASA’s relationship with the aviation community.”

CASA said it planned to run the online survey, which is also a response to recommendation eight in the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review, every two years. The results would be used by the board and management to improve its work and establish stronger working connections with the aviation community.

Details of the survey can be found online at www.casa.gov.au/mop from Monday, November 23.

Meanwhile, the next Flight Plan 2030 briefing will be held in Brisbane on Thursday November 26. More details can be found here.

 
..& here from Oz Flying's - Last Minute Hitch: 20 Nov 2015.

..There's a beaten-up old saying that goes "Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it." It was not that long ago that we were all screaming at CASA because they weren't consulting, so they buckled to the reasoning and have launched on a comprehensive consulting program ... so much of the industry are now wishing they'd stop! Their latest program launches on Monday, but this one is in response to Recommendation 8 of the Forsyth Report and is all about CASA, their performance, regulations, consistency, strengths, weaknesses and all that. It's very important that we take a Bex for our consultation fatigue and get stuck into this one. We asked for it; now it's here. CASA probably needs to brace themselves for a barrage of criticism that will border on abuse, but we in the aviation community need to remember that emotive language, bulldozer reasoning and mud-flinging never gets noticed; it's just too hard to understand compared with simple logic presented concisely. The link to the survey is not yet live, so you've got the weekend to plan out what you want to say...

My personal sentiments mirror pretty much those of Thorny & Gobbles..   I would add that is a bit rich for the IOS to assess CASA as per ASRR R8, when Skidmore & co have effectively done nothing but have talkfests etc; ever since Truss called for the implementation of pretty much all of the Rev Forsyth's report recommendations. Nope just another cynical attempt to assuage the miniscule direction - FFS!  

P2 proposal - That said I'm personally not concerned about revealing my IP (if they want it they can more than likely get it anyway), so I propose to regurgitate said survey on here  & we can then respond to it collectively - with additional answers/etc - take the piss and send in with a link to the 269 ASRR submissions on a PAIN email?- My proposal, other suggestions welcome.

On the subject of CASA asking for feedback and the uptake of such requests, the following is off the FF website :

Implementing future regulations





CASA’s new regulations are designed to improve aviation safety, address known risks and maintain Australia’s reputation as having one of the safest aviation industries in the world. We’re reviewing our regulation program, and we want your feedback about how we should implement future regulations.

Many new rules, such as flight crew licensing, maintenance and fatigue management, are already in place. Proposed new rules cover flight operations(External link), limited category aircraft operations(External link), aerodromes(External link) and sport aviation(External link).

We welcome your feedback on the timing of future regulations, how regulatory change affects you, alternative ways to implement new rules, and how CASA can assist you through the process.

• Forum
  

Forum
Discussions: All (3) Open (3)

• How can CASA help you when we are introducing changes to the regulations?
  2 months ago 311 views
  3 Responses
  
  
• We believe a key to the success of any new regulations is sound implementation and transition plans. What are your ideas for possible alternative ways to introduce and transition to new rules in the future?
  about 1 month ago 190 views
  7 Responses
  
  
• It’s important for us to get the implementation of future regulations right—sometimes that means taking a bit more time. What impact would that have on you? Do you have a preference for the timing of future rules?
  about 1 month ago 122 views
  1 Response
  

   P2 comment - 623 views is pretty piss poor in anyone's language but what is worse is the number of responses. 

Let's take a look at the QON 2 responses -

RIP 21 days ago



I would like CASA to change the ATPL rules in regards to ATPL simulator flight test esp for those pilots who are currently working in overseas. There are only 2 B737 CL simulators in whole Australia. And one of them I would never go there again. Why can't we allow to do ATPL flight test with JAA or FAA flight examiner ?

CASA – Admin 5 days ago

Thanks for taking the time to comment. There is a pathway for allowing ATPL flight tests to be conducted offshore. The process is rigorous to ensure Australian national licensing standards are met. The offshore examiner would need to demonstrate that they are as well-qualified and knowledgeable of the Australian regulatory environment as a person who holds an Australian flight crew licence.

An appropriately qualified Australian flight examiner (or 61.040 approval holder) may conduct ATPL flight tests in approved flight simulators internationally.

For an explanation of the process and CASA’s requirements, the applicant can contact trainandcheck@casa.gov.au(External link)


Ozppl 9 days ago


It should be very easy for CASA to identify how and where it needs to improve its processes for implementing new rules:
1. The industry is likely to be much more cooperative if CASA presents convincing evidence that there is a real safety issue and that the regulations will lead to an improvement. Statistically valid data will demonstrate that a problem exists, and that any proposed regulatory change will lead to an improvement.
The Australian fleet is relatively small so the Australian database will also be small and often not statistically significant but jurisdictions such as USA and EU have very large fleets and, therefore, large databases. They are also where the vast majority of the world’s aircraft are manufactured. They also have much larger pools of technical expertise than can be justified in Australia. Gaining access to and utilising data from these jurisdictions to supplement local data would enable CASA to develop a clear case for change.
2. Get the regulations right before starting to implement them so there is not a flurry of urgent exemptions and amendments due to unintended consequences, as has occurred with Part 61. CASA’s credibility and performance would improve considerably if there were more employees with real experience across the full spread of aviation and with a balance of airline and GA backgrounds. Since the C in CASA stands for Civil, there should be a very limited need for ex-military personnel.
Where CASA is short of resources, contract experts with practical experience from the segments of the industry to which the regulations apply, and pay them for their time. Any additional costs incurred in getting new regulations right from the start will almost certainly be more than offset by savings later by reducing the costs of implementation and reducing the number of post-implementation amendments.
CASA should also consider a different approach to the entire process of developing new regulations. The practice of using a series of separate teams for the various steps in the process is an out-dated, production line business model. A better method would be to establish a multi-skilled team to carry the process from beginning to end. Such a model would ensure that the team members all develop a clearer understanding of the impacts of their decisions throughout CASA and across the aviation industry. For example, the legal department would begin to appreciate how difficult it is for the end users to understand and implement new rules.
The consultation process also needs to be more interactive and user friendly. The consultation process would be far more effective if the industry received clearer documentation so new rules can be easily understood. A series of face to face consultations, such as have been occurring with Flight Plan 2030, would also increase both the amount and the quality industry feedback.
Before implementing any regulatory change, the changes should be field tested with organisations and individuals who will be affected. Good test cases would identify and solve many problems even before the regulations are put out for industry comment. In running the test cases, CASA should pay the organisations and individuals who contribute, at the same rate as CASA charges for its services. The cost of paying the industry participants would, almost certainly, be more than offset by savings in the subsequent implementation process.
3. Provide realistic cost benefit analyses. As an example, anecdotal evidence indicates that CASA’s estimates of the costs of the Cessna SIDs is far below the actual costs incurred by operators. There are lots of people in the industry who have at least as much expertise as CASA staff in areas such as the business and technical aspects of aviation, data analysis, and cost estimation, and who are willing to make constructive contributions if given reasonable opportunities.
Where the purpose of any change is not primarily to address a safety issue, such as situations where the reason for change is ICAO compliance, there shouldn’t be any cost to the industry, either directly through CASA charges or indirectly through the costs of implementation.
4. Make use of modern IT systems that enable the people at the coal face to easily find and understand the rules that are relevant to their own operations.
For an organisation that claims to be at the forefront of international air safety management, CASA should be embarrassed that, not only did New Zealand beat us at the rugby world cup but they also offer their pilots a credit card sized Part 61 licence.
More importantly, it would be far better for regulations to be written in plain English so the people who have to use the rules can understand them easily. To say that regulations are written for lawyers is, in my view, completely contrary to the aim of improving safety. However, everyone understands that is unlikely to change so the next best approach would be to use some modern IT systems that enable users to filter the rules to easily find those that are relevant to a particular operation. For example, a private pilot flying a single engine aircraft should not have to sort through hundreds of pages of rules that apply to an airline pilot flying a heavy jet, just in case there is something relevant to private operations.


CASA – Admin 5 days ago


Thanks for adding some new ideas to the conversation. There are some interesting suggestions which we’ll be taking into consideration. Your point about increasing the amount and quality of industry feedback is a good one and something we are already working towards. For example, we have recently established a new taskforce to address outstanding issues with the suite of flight crew licensing regulations. Importantly, we are going to be working closely with an advisory panel made up of people representing a wide range of sectors across the aviation community. The advice and guidance of this industry panel will help us to prioritise the actions and make sure that successful solutions have been found.

Thanks again for contributing your ideas.


Unhappy 24 days ago


The biggest issue is not necessarily the implementation and transition plan. It is that casa internally is so chaotic that their own people are not up to speed on what the new regulations actually say. This leads to inconsistent application and confusion as different parts of casa contradict each other.

There needs to be a way that a second opinion on any casa communication can be given. That way someone from the industry can elevate what they think is a contradiction between casa's interpretation and the actual rules. This way the internal misunderstandings within casa can be resolved.


CASA – Admin 22 days ago


Consistency is a priority for CASA and we are continually working to educate and train our people to ensure greater consistency and clarity throughout the organisation. Thanks for your comments. We are reading everything on this site and taking comments into consideration.

CASA – Admin about 1 month ago


So far we’ve been to Launceston, Sydney and Darwin, where we’ve heard ideas from a range of people in the industry. One idea that came from a GA operator is that they would be happy to help CASA ‘road test the rules’ before the rest of the industry transitions across. This would help us to iron out any problems in advance. What do you think of this idea? Would you be willing to put your hand up and get involved in something like this?

    
Hmmm..now that's embarrassing, of the 7 responses in over a month 4 of them are actually from CASA Admin - UFB! Someone likes the sound of their own keyboard


MTF...P2  

[Kharon]

The dynamics of being moribund.

Quote:
Dear Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of the Committee:

As representatives of hundreds of thousands of individuals and companies from all segments of the aviation community, including general aviation pilots, aircraft owners, operators, businesses that utilize aircraft, mechanics, manufacturers, physicians, pilot unions, and state aviation officials, we are writing to express our strong support for the Manchin substitute amendment during Committee consideration of S. 571, the Pilot’s Bill of Right 2.

General aviation has been losing an average of 6,000 pilots per year over the past 10 years. Manufacturing of new piston powered aircraft in the United States has fallen drastically, and this critically important amendment includes provisions that will help general aviation move in a positive direction and provides common sense safety protections to pilots.

The Manchin amendment includes reforms to the FAA’s Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) program, which ensure pilots receive critical safety information as part of their preflight preparation, provides protections to volunteer pilots who fly in the public interest, and reforms the cumbersome and costly third class medical process for general aviation pilots.

Third-class medical reform remains a pivotal issue for general aviation and its future. The FAA’s medical certification system has evolved into an onerous and costly one. The FAA recognized that fact more than 10 years ago when it created the Sport Pilot standard of medical certification, which allows pilots to operate certain aircraft without obtaining a third-class medical certificate. It has been utilized safely and effectively by thousands of pilots flying tens of thousands of hours.

This amendment stands to reduce barriers to medical certification in a manner that allows for the continued safe operation of general aviation aircraft while providing cost savings to both the FAA and the general aviation community. According to an FAA analysis and adjusting for inflation, today’s total average cost of obtaining a third-class medical certificate to be $241. With the common sense reforms included in the amendment, pilots could save more than $20 million dollars each year. A conservative estimate also shows an annual savings of about $2.5 million to the FAA. The money saved by reforming the third-class medical process could be used in ways that have the potential to do far more to improve safety, including increased proficiency flying, attaining additional ratings, and installing new safety equipment on aircraft.

The original Pilot’s Bill of Rights provided important protections to pilots and this amendment stands to expand on them. The rights of pilots facing FAA investigation or enforcement action are enhanced by ensuring they are accorded a fair shake throughout the process. The FAA’s NOTAM system transmits important safety of flight information to pilots, and it is crucial that the FAA continue to provide that service and information in a timely and relevant manner. Additionally, pilots who volunteer their time and aircraft to provide public benefit flights through non-profit organizations deliver valuable services to the community and the nation. Such public benefit flights provide no-cost transportation to patients receiving specialized medical treatment, deliver humanitarian aid, and assist in disaster relief efforts. The provisions in this amendment will make it easier for these organizations and pilots to continue offering these important flights.

On behalf of an industry that each year contributes $219 billion to the U.S. economy, moves 170 million passengers, and supports 1.1 million jobs, this amendment will help ensure the future sustainability of our industry and its valuable contributions to the nation’s economy and transportation system.

Sincerely,

Academy of Model Aeronautics
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
Allied Pilots Association
Commemorative Air Force
Experimental Aircraft Association
Flying Dentists Association
Flying Physicians Association
General Aviation Manufacturers Association
Helicopter Association International
International Council of Air Shows
National Agricultural Aviation Association
National Association of State Aviation Officials
National Air Transportation Association
National Business Aviation Association
NetJets Association of Shared Aircraft Pilots
Recreational Aviation Foundation
Southwest Airlines Pilots’ Association.

The glaringly obvious difference between the US of and Down-under is the performance of the FAA.  Even after some monumental tussles between NTSB and FAA, where and when required the FAA shift and things get done; same-same when ‘government speak – things happen in a timely manner.  It would be unnatural if the aviation community did not moan and groan about the regulator – operators and aircrew from every country I’ve met have a complained over an ale or two – but warts and all – the FAAA will do the things requested and required of them.

You don’t need to look far to see the difference between CASA and FAA, that stupid survey for example – not to enhance or improve, but a box ticking exercise, so they can say a Forsyth recommendation has been met.  This, for a rule they have not even rewritten (again) yet we must suggest to them how to 'improve' the way they introduce it.  Bull-pooh.  Scrap the rotten thing - introduce a good rule set and withiin a six month, industry will have it sorted. 

But as it stands right now - Senate – ignored, Minister – ignored, Rev Forsyth – ignored but now we are to believe that industry will be ‘heard’ – BOLLOCKS.  Not much has changed in the past 30 years – unless you count Strict Liability and criminal records as improvement, or part 61 as a gift from the heavens, or part 145 as the answer to a maidens prayer.
 
There may be some discussion and a bit of push and shove over the American pilots 'Bill of Rights' – but you watch; the Americans will have it done and dusted, before Skidmore and Co. have even worked out why 61 is pile of crap and worked out a way to keep it.  Disgusting.
 
Aye; it’s rum – but no matter – in another 15 years we shall have the Skidmore vision splendid.  But only the colour version, CVD need not apply, the CAD test will have weeded them out by then, if the new clerical medicals don’t get you first.  I can hardly wait.
 
Toot toot.

[Peetwo]

CAsA OBS Update - Dougy weighs in? (well sort of   )

From the Rev's thread:
[quote pid='2844' dateline='1448404525']
[quote pid='2836' dateline='1448340925']
[quote pid='2835' dateline='1448337034']
OBS?- Nurse take that man's OBS  

A bit of commentary on Oliver's Bollocks Survey:

P2 proposal - That said I'm personally not concerned about revealing my IP (if they want it they can more than likely get it anyway), so I propose to regurgitate said survey on here  & we can then respond to it collectively - with additional answers/etc. - take the piss and send in with a link to the 269 ASRR submissions on a PAIN email?- My proposal, other suggestions welcome.

My personal sentiments mirror pretty much those of Thorny & Gobbles..  I would add that is a bit rich for the IOS to assess CASA as per ASRR R8, when Skidmore & co have effectively done nothing but have talkfests etc. ever since Truss called for the implementation of pretty much all of the Rev Forsyth's report recommendations. 

Nope just another cynical attempt to assuage the miniscule direction - FFS!  

Hmmm.. Now that's embarrassing, of the 7 responses in over a month 4 of them are actually from CASA Admin.

Maybe it’s me that’s got this arse about.  Here we have a ‘safety’ regulator, caught with their pants down, paws in the cookie jar and a three decade long rap sheet.  This proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, by the Senate in Parliament, confirmed by an independent panel of experts, the results delivered to a Minister of the Crown.  All insisting on immediate, full scale, no holds barred reform of the REGULATOR - not the bloody regulations.  This reform demanded by the industry which supports the regulator.  Seems to me that in the face of overwhelming odds, the least the regulator could do is embrace the changes and attempt to pacify the paymaster.

It’s not as if it was just a mild suggestion – it was a clear directive for major, sweeping changes to the REGULATOR; - not the blasted regulation - both immediate and urgent.  Do CASA set about making the changes requested and required? – No, they do not.  Instead in typical cynical, underhand style a new coat of wax is added to the rusted mudguard – in just the same way that brought about the directive for reform.  The methodology applied is exactly the same as that which earned CASA the censure of the Senate and industry.  It’s piss-potical, dishonest and states clearly that no matter what – the regulatory leopard will not change it’s spots.

This dreadful survey is, rightfully, being boycotted for what it is – a perceived compliance with the minimum requirement – not a whole hearted attempt at reform.  The 'survey' makes several assumptions, which imply that the regulator is reformed and the new law is acceptable - neither is true.  CASA just don’t seem to get it – they are the problem – not the ducking solution. Everyman and his dog, from the Minister down can see it, the international community can see it, hells bells my giddy Aunt can see it – and yet CASA persist in the fantasy.  

Clean ‘em out Malcolm, before they return to the self righteous complacency which landed them in the crap in the first instance.  Bugger the regulations – REFORM CASA – the regulations will take care of themselves after that.

Aye, no doubt I’ve got the bull by the tits again, but if anyone else, apart from Slymore, believes that puerile, trite, little, one way, loaded survey is going to achieve anything but derision and disgust, let me know, so that I too may see the light and embrace life in a parallel universe.

Selah.

HL - "..I have the smallest shred of regret at starting this thread. Of particular regret is the choice of title.

Would "DAS IV: A new hope" have been more apt?

...but as others have said, hope springs eternal.

Let's all make sure we make a measured but consistent response to the survey they have asked us to complete. I wait for the results with interest.." 

&.. a voice of sanity from Frank - "..Yes it should be measured and consistent with the Forsyth Review.

I'm still waiting for the results to be implemented from that survey. Can't see what re-submitting anything will do except annoy them further. ."

I am of Frank's view i.e. it is all in the Forsyth review. How can we expect to give anywhere near and accurate assessment until that survey is fully implemented and compliant with the Minister of the Crown's FULL direction - FFS   
However if for no other reason but curiosity, let's have a look at the OBS -
[/quote]

There it is again, CEO and DAS. Maybe the pretentious DAS title will in time disappear.
Here is one answer posted to the survey that we are asked to fill, question being what needs changing?

"Criminal provisions for civil offenses, far too many complex, expensive and ever changing rules, extraordinary 'user pays' fees, most for services that are not required. Super expensive AOC requirements for flying training, not necessary in the US where 70% are trained outside the 'AOC' equivalent system. Extremely expensive control by AVMED when there is no safety case for aviation medicals any more than the same regime would be efficacious for car drivers. Furthermore the car driver style medical is proven successful, in the Australian context, in the low weight aircraft category. New Part 61 regs is hundreds of pages and the DAS tells us that he has 26 employees working full time to fix all the problems that they created with unworkable rules that are crushing the last life out of GA. Just four years ago Casa increased employees to around 850 on the back of increased fuel levies. Casa should take on the NZ rules in their entirety then work to ease the crazy burdens imposed on GA in this country. I have watched with dismay the wrecking of a useful General Aviation industry that used to employ many thousands. The regulator is despised universally throughout GA, there is no trust and no respect. Casa has bullied and forced hundreds out of the business of GA, blamed others for its own shortcomings and is a disgrace to the public service. Being an 'independent government business unit' since 1988 has been an experiment of government that can only be described as a disaster. Safety is compromised by loss of experienced personnel, loss of refueling points and loss of flying schools. Casa has so damaged individuals and businesses that safety reporting has reduced to negligible levels. GA is on its knees and desperately needs some immediate reforms like allowing instructors to work without our AOC system. To remove AVMED from private pilot medicals."

Although recommended that CASA make a survey every two years, following the ASSR, this survey is patently a total waste of money for the simple reason that clearly there is no point until and unless the reforms are in place, the real changes made and working to the benefit of the industry. Otherwise of course we are just going over and over the same ground. Love to know what this survey cost and who are the contractors. Any relatives or former CASA employees? Canberra people? You might say cynical but when we see the millions wasted, the mismanagement, now twenty six CASA employees working full time to correct their own regulations disaster, and having to take the time of GA operators away from their businesses, then we will probe and question. CASA and the Minister must be aware that fiddling at the edges is not acceptable. Only some real reforms to allow growth will start the long road towards cooperation and respect from GA to CASA. Independent instructors and LAMES, a moratorium on SIDs, car driver medicals for PPL, remove the 'strict liability' provisions. Reform is urgent, we demand action, attempting to fix the latest mess is not reform.

Excellent stuff Sandy, keep them coming

[/quote]
DN -

Industry is being urged to take part in a new survey to benchmark views about CASA. People are being asked for their views on CASA’s performance in specific areas such as efficiency, responsiveness, accountability and timeliness. Questions cover how easy it is to comply with regulations, the development of new regulations, consistency of decision making and satisfaction with service delivery. CASA says that the aim of the survey is to determine the strengths and weaknesses of CASA’s relationship with the aviation community. 


Now I know the Forsyth Report is more than a year old, but wouldn’t it be current enough to provide such information? - well I'll be..

There was talk of a David Forsyth-led follow up to the Report, to assess what action has so far resulted, but that seems to have disappeared.

Will there be any surprises for industry in this new survey? Seems unlikely, but one never knows.

MTF..P2
[/quote]

[thorn bird]

May interest a few out there that the CAsA resident glove puppet at the Australian Newspaper is departing the rag for his reward, an appointment with ASA no less. Well all those years of regurgitating CAsA spin had to lead somewhere.
Love to know where old Murky will go, he is on about a Mil in salary & entitlements where he is, so it would need to be a substantial reward considering all the hard work he's put into wrecking a whole industry.
Maybe he and the minuscule could collaborate on a book?
Perhaps "How to wreck industries for dummies" or maybe
"How to lick a developers ass in six easy lessons"

[P7_TOM]

This would be on account of his vast knowledge of providing ‘services’ to ASA; expertise and the like.  Just what Air services Australia needs; another clapped out sycophant.  Good call miniscule, glad to see you have a firm grip on the important things we really need to spend an outrageous amount of money on – nice one.


  FFS.- UFB.

[Peetwo]

Boyd & the 'last hope'.

“The time has come”, the Walrus said

As we skid more away from the much needed reform of the regulator, the trends noted early in the Skidmore tenure are becoming clearly defined method.  There can, on evidence, be little doubt that a full regression is in progress.  Each movement takes industry further away from Forsyth and closer to the pit.  

Ken Cannane  - "Without doubt, there has been almost unanimous support in the aviation industry for the recommendations of the ASRR(Forsyth) report," Cannane said. "The government and industry obviously support these recommendations, so when will the Department of Infrastructure and the CASA Board initiate changes to the Civil Aviation Act to implement these recommendations permanently?

Despite the rhetoric, hand holding, tear wiping, cosy chats and trite little surveys; the cynics running the CASA engine room have managed, through Skidmore, to slide around the reform of CASA and divert attention away from a solid, doughty defence of the status quo, with determination.  Skidmore leading the charge and providing top cover for the Iron ring.

You don’t need to look far or search hard for your proof:-

Medical was bad enough before, now it’s becoming even more restrictive and fiscally punitive.  An empire of clerks working from templates with the power to overturn an ‘expert’ medical opinion.  But the jewel in the crown is CVD – Skidmore fully supporting the embuggerance of CVD pilots, whittling down the numbers of CVD holding licence and preventing the gaining of licence for those who fail ‘the test’.  It’s disgraceful, but get used to it, no matter that leading aviation nations are moving away from this degree of foolishness – Avmed know best and Skidmore agrees.

Skidmore’s latest sandbag is a well groomed attack dog, using the pathetic little ‘survey’ as a whipping post and mowing down any opposition.  Opposition being anyone who dares challenge or even question the regulatory ‘reform’.  The determined defence of 61 and 145 is led by Skidmore – his 28 man ‘tiger team’ is desperately looking for way to make these lewd-icarus ‘rules’ appear to be palatable and workable, while retaining the legal monstrosities within.

 
Then, there is the Skidmore push to convince the industry that CASA is a model citizen, fully reformed and rehabilitated.  Not shred of evidence to support this fairy story, in fact his chosen minions and Casamites are all snug and cosy under his protection, to continue their fine work – uninhibited and encouraged.  It is one of the most blatant con jobs in history, and we have seen a few.

Ken Cannane  - "CASA and aviation continually have review after review with no permanent result – regulatory review has been under way since the formation of the CAA in 1988. The rest of the aviation world are modernising their requirements utilising performance based regulations and standards and utilising a risk based approach.

Skidmore has fallen into the well used mould of inquiry, review and broken promises on the back of solemn promises to behave properly.  Industry should be in open revolt, boycott the gabfests, demanding service and value for money.  

The Minister should be supporting the Board and demanding the Skidmore resignation, this would be fully supported by an industry which is weary of broken promises, endless reviews and inquiry – which all – every single solitary last one end up walking down the road to perdition to fetch up on the shores of hell and damnation.

Skidmore’s old boss is reliably reported to have said early in the piece – he can’t do the job.  That prophecy has proven to be remarkably accurate.

Handing over Mr. Boyd.

Further to the latest Skidmore bollocks missive, soon to be former CASA glove puppet at the Oz & ASA's fairy-tale teller recruit followed up with a standard, embellished, regurgitation of his own.. :

..The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is streamlining its operations into three groups in a bid to improve its regulatory services and promote better interaction with the aviation community.


Staff were told yesterday of the restructure, which comes after the authority has been under fire recently for not moving more quickly to fix regulatory changes that have upset sections of the industry. CASA has also been criticised for being slow to adopt government-endorsed recommendations from the Aviation Safety Regulation Review.

The changes are due to take place by the middle of next year and will collapse six existing operational groups into three under the broader headings of stakeholder engagement, aviation and sustainability.

The changes are designed to address recommendation 21 of the ASRR, which proposes that CASA change its organisational structure to a “client-oriented output model’’. The review panel said it was struck by the number of industry concerns about communication and specialist guidance, many of which appeared to relate to the authority’s structure.

It determined that many of these issues could be resolved with a more transparent organisational structure and management focus on specific industry sector operations.

The three main sections proposed by yesterday’s restructure will see six groups consolidated into three with legal services remaining separate.

It is understood the standards, operations and airspace/aerodrome sections will be consolidated into the aviation group. Aviation group functions will include entry control, surveillance, regulatory services and standard setting as well as regulatory development and implementation.

The stakeholder engagement group will include safety, education and promotions as well as functions now in the office of the director, such as media relations. The authority said this would join communications functions into one area to ensure the information it issued was “consistent and delivered effectively’’.

Corporate services and some functions of the industry permissions section will go into the sustainability group.

Materials released to staff said job cuts were not anticipated beyond senior management.
CASA boss Mark Skidmore said an important goal of the restructure was to reduce the time people and organisations spent dealing with the regulator.

He said he understood the way CASA interacted with the industry needed to improve “at all levels’’ and the restructure was a vital step in renewing the authority.

“CASA has been consulting widely and often over the past year and now is the time to start delivering real change,’’ he said.

“Part of this real change will be the introduction of more online services to streamline the application, processing and delivery of as many services as possible.

“The restructure will be done in stages between now and the middle of 2016 so regulatory and safety support for the aviation community is not disrupted.
“These changes will streamline CASA’s senior management and give all staff a clearer focus on CASA’s goals and their own tasks.”

Meanwhile, CASA will push ahead with controversial fatigue- management rules, despite trenchant opposition from some parts of the industry, but it confirmed a previously flagged delay to May 2017, to give operators more time to transition to the new rules. The change to Civil Aviation Order 48.1 has been supported by airline pilots but attacked by associations representing some operators.

Regional Express estimated earlier this month the changes would cost it more than $4 million annually and could make some routes unviable, while umbrella group The Australian Aviation Association Forum urged CASA to withdraw CAO 48.1.

CASA admitted this week that consultation with the aviation community found “both CASA and air operators needed more time to make a smooth and safe transition’’ to the new rules.

Operators who had completed the transition by October 31 would need to submit amended operations manuals or a fatigue risk management application by that date, it said.

  
No comment

[Sandy Reith]

“Part of this real change will be the introduction of more online services to streamline the application, processing and delivery of as many services as possible."

Yes how true, as many services as possible. The number of services have been grown to control and provide the fees from GA to satisfy the the salary appetite and Canberra standing of the mighty GBE, the CASA. No safety improvements, no innovation and a shocking activity and participation slump right across General Aviation.

How can we get the message across? This is not change. Mr. Skidmore your proposal regarding service is simply to revert to or improve what you and your staff are paid to do.

What GA is needing is simple rules, less costly procedures, in other words real reform and stop treating the industry like a bunch of half wits. Mr. Skidmore your new rules are unworkable. People are getting angry, frustrated and fed up with "changes" that are nothing more than moving the deck chairs and attempting to patch a rotten fabric.

Independent instructors and LAMES, car driver PPL medicals, SIDs moratorium; urgent real action is imperative.

[6317alan]

Sandy,
I think CAsA  are now being very pro-active, I see in todays TV programs they are proposing a new Dept.
Today on ABC3 at 6-18 there is a program called DOIP, Depatment of Imaginary Problems
subtitled SPIN - Life is like a Merry Go Round,
It lasts 2 minutes. Has to be CAsA
6317alan

[P7_TOM]

“On the Skidmore watch”.

Does that oft quoted catchall not strike you as being either cynical or sinister?  The speed at which Skidmore and his ‘tigers’ are accelerating away from anything resembling the Forsyth report is, to say the least, remarkable.  The Skidmore steadfast refusal to look backwards and correct such aberrations as Pel-Air and restore the lost faith is at least as cynical as it is foolhardy.

The sinister part is simple, by refusing to correct past wrongs and heal old wounds the intention to continue onwards, without even acknowledging that CASA created not only the bloody awful law they are attempting to repair; they are acting as if suddenly they are the fairy Godmother of aviation and all can be fixed with fireside chats.

It’s Bollocks; it’s spin, it is cynical, it is sinister, it’s counterproductive and it’s wrong.  The wheels on the Skidmore wagon are wobbling, pony-pooh will only get you so far.  The actions of CASA are at complete odds with stated wishes of the Minister, the Board and the industry; the rhetoric is spot on – but reality lurks.  Reality comes in the guise of expert observation, the solutions writ large by every aviation group in Australia.  No need for a week kneed, captive team of clapped out pussy cats or a cyber thug like Jason the Sandbag – it’s all been written by the industry CASA serve. Provided to David Forsyth, approved my the Minister, supported by the CASA board.

Skidmore need not bother to reinvent the wheel; the old one is still busted laying in the dust on the side of the road.  Repair is needed; not invention, particularly by the purblind, incompetent halfwits who bust the thing in the first place.

Well: I’m tired to death of hearing “not on Skidmore’s watch, therefore there is no problem.

BOLLOCKS.

[crankybastards]

My car is female, my boat is female, cyclones are gender alternate. Mother nature is female and my microwave is Mick which is obviously male. The TV remote is female because only males know which buttons to press, and flat batteries are always a bitch.

What gender is the civil aviation safety authority?

Think carefully here people.

[Gobbledock]

What gender is the civil aviation safety authority?

Hermaphrodite!!

[P7_TOM]

Curses – pipped by the Gobbledock.

Cranky, there can be little doubt about the gender, being both happy to give or receive and doing so regularly, as pleases.  The beauty part is that even when they are alone, full satisfaction guaranteed, every time. QED.

Synopsis of the Hermaphroditus Legend:

Aphrodite and Hermes had a son together. He grew up to become an incredibly beautiful and masculine man. One day while he was in the woods, a nymph named Salmacis saw him and became so infatuated with him that she grabbed hold of him and refused to let go. She made a prayer to the gods to make them never part, and POOF! VOILA! A hermaphrodite! A man with breasts, or alternative a woman with a penis. Either way it was the Greek way of explaining why one out of every fifty people was a hermaphrodite. Hermaphroditus later became friends with Dionysius and the two gods are considered to be the patron gods of all hermaphrodites.

Wiki - A rough estimate of the number of hermaphroditic animal species is 65,000.  Since the estimated total number of animal species is 1.2 million, the percentage of animal species that are hermaphroditic is about 5%.

.. .. ..

[Peetwo]

Up OARs - Part II   




According to Hitch in last week's weekly wrap the CASA OAR have stealthily & cynically white-anted the effective historical conduit with industry i.e the RAPACs - : The Last Minute Hitch: 27 November 2015

Who's heard of RAPACs? These are the Regional Airspace Procedures and Advisory Committees, and there is one in your state. What they do is advise the Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) on matters of airspace usage in the local areas. RAPACs are a way of getting the users heard in the OAR, but now it seems the OAR no longer wants to listen. What they've done is attempt to redefine the RAPACs to limit them to safety issues. That conveniently silences them over things like radio frequencies ... coincidentally (or not) a current topic being shuttle-cocked between Canberra and the aviation community. Happliy, CASA has announced a review of the OAR and the way it functions. Needless to say, those pesky RAPACs have made an inconvenience of themselves in their submission. If anyone in the aviation community wants to do the same, the details of the review and how to submit are on the CASA website.

Surprisingly the soon to be ASA spin-meister Creepy has more on this story; plus some heavily sceptical commentary from industry stakeholder reps, on Skidmore's latest spin & bulldust rhetoric on the CASA executive restructure etc... : 

Regional airline groups furious over CASA reforms

• Steve Creedy
  
• The Australian
  
• December 4, 2015 12:00AM
  
  

Regional members are worried that aircraft operating into uncharted airports will need to use the VHF area frequency, Picture: Mitch Bear

The aviation regulator came under renewed attack this week as members of regional airspace councils revealed they had written to Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss to express their anger at the lack of consultation by the authority’s Office of Airspace Review.

The letter, signed by the members or conveners of Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Committees (RAPACs) around Australia, came as some industry groups expressed scepticism about a restructuring announcement last week by Civil Aviation Safety Authority boss Mark Skidmore.

Noting they were members of industry’s longest established consultative forums, RAPAC representatives signing the letter said they had sent it because they did not believe a critical response submitted directly to the OAR “would ever see the light of day’’.

The RAPACs are particularly concerned about changes that mean aircraft operating into uncharted airports where there is no discrete common traffic advisory frequency must now use the VHF area frequency also used by en-route air traffic controllers to talk to airlines flying at high levels.

They worry about the potential added frequency congestion and jamming on the area VHF due to broadcasts from a large number of non-charted aerodromes underneath commercial aircraft flight paths and have also expressed concerns about procedures under the amendment.

The letter accused the OAR of attempting to frustrate attempts to discuss the issue at some state ­RAPACs and of trying to limit the influence of the consultative groups. It said the concerns of RAPAC members remained ­unaddressed.

“Over the last 18 months a serious gulf of mistrust has developed between the RAPACs and management of the OAR due firstly, to a reluctance by OAR management to consult with stakeholders and, secondly, an attempt, regarded by many as deceitful, to limit the scope of the RAPACs,’’ it said.

“Lack of consultation for at least the past 15 months the RAPACs have made many attempts to convey to CASA through the OAR, their concerns about three unintended consequences of a change in communications in G airspace via Aeronautical Information Package amendment number 75 which was made, apparently, without any stakeholder consultation.’’

The relationship further deteriorated in August when CASA was accused of trying to revise the RAPAC terms of reference without prior notice to members.

The letter said an email sent to 11 industry conveners allowed just 16 days for comment and claimed that the role of the groups would be unchanged.

“This immediately raised suspicion and, on close inspection, it was discovered that the above statement was incorrect and that proposal, in fact, had changed the RAPAC role considerably,’’ it said. “In summary therefore, it would be difficult to imagine a management less suited to an open constructive and effective stakeholder relationship than the current leadership of the OAR.’’

The RAPAC concerns come as CASA is heading towards a restructure and is grappling with rising anger about the need to fix flawed regulatory reforms. It also faces criticism about the pace at which it has adopted recommendations by the Aviation Safety Regulation Review chaired by industry veteran David Forsyth.

The restructure is due to take place by the middle of next year and will collapse six existing operational groups into three under the broader headings of stakeholder engagement, aviation and sustainability.

In addition to the restructure, Mr Skidmore recently announced the appointment of a 26-member task force to work fulltime on addressing problems with rule changes and set up an advisory panel, due to meet on December 16, representing key aviation groups.

The restructure announcement was cautiously welcomed by industry but there was criticism about the lack of detail.

Australian Helicopter Industry Association president Peter Crook said the association welcomed the restructure “subject to there being tangible and workable outcomes’’. The AHIA has told members to withdraw applications for new training credentials under the new system until problems are fixed.

“Because of the slow pace of the Regulatory Reform process, confidence in CASA is at a very low level,’’ Mr Crook said. “Over the past two years the AHIA and other Associations, individually and collectively via The Australian Aviation Associations Forum, have identified the major issues and concerns of the industry. We have given reasons why these concerns exist and offered potential solutions. Little or no action has been taken on these suggestions.’’ - Yep Pete, Skidmore is all talk no action.

Mr Crook said the Part 61 taskforce needed to act quickly and issues addressed as a matter of urgency. Another critic of CASA reform, The Aerial Application Association of Australia, also welcomed the restructure as a good idea but noted CASA’s problems continued.

“Poor execution — including Friday’s announcement that included no detail — poor planning and seeking to fix problems that don’t exist by imposing costs that can’t be afforded are not the way forward,’’ AAAA chief executive Phil Hurst said. “CASA continues to confuse words with actions.’’ - CF 4 Phil QOTW

Mr Hurst questioned how the Part 61 taskforce would differ from previous ineffectual efforts to fix the disputed rules and said the industry needed urgent exemptions before Christmas. There was also no movement on “discredited” flight and duty times rules or any effort to fix the damage caused to maintenance training in Aust­ralia, which he said had contributed to the closure of three apprenticeship training organisations.

“The great danger CASA is now facing — board, senior management and staff — is that a restructure will become code for delay and that the few Forsyth report recommendations being half-heartedly ticked off will be allowed to wither on the vine,’’ he said. “CASA needs real energy, leadership and action more now than ever before in recent years.” - CF 4 Phil for stating the obvious 

Several aviation organisations are preparing for the next federal election and Mr Truss on Wednesday released an update of the government’s response to the Forsyth review in which he urged industry to work with CASA.

A CASA spokesman said issues raised at RAPACs that did not ­directly relate to airspace or airways procedures were always directed to the relevant areas in the authority for review and approp­riate action. He said RAPACs were informed of the results but many issues were referred to other forums to get the view of the broader aviation community. - code for 'up yours'

The spokesman also signalled that Mr Skidmore would start a review of all CASA’s consultative mechanisms to ensure they were effective and efficient. - code for 'up yours'

In defence of plane spotters, a.k.a. ‘anoraks’
Ben Sandilands | Apr 24, 2010 11:46AM |


Schiphol Airport spotters, Amsterdam

Rumourmill: The following is from Dougy the former Editor of Aviation Business & now (judging from his new column title - Observation Deck) resident Planespotter  

..CASA’s Mark Skidmore has been quick off the mark to add some substance to the reorganisation of the regulator that he announced last week. Cheryl Allman has been appointed from within the organisation to head up the Stakeholder Engagement division, one of six direct reports to the DAS under the new structure...

So Oliver, with official Iron Ring & Murky Mandarin sanction, has made his first 'Captain's pick for the Magnificent Six...  

In some ways I can understand OST's appointment of Ms Allman, she is probably the only Executive member who remembers how to snap off a proper salute..

However given the current breakdown between industry stakeholders (i.e. the RAPACs) & the CASA OAR, I would have thought it is not a particularly good look to appoint the now former OAR executive manager to the Stakeholder Engagement Division - UFB but typical IR & MM cynicism..    

Also, courtesy the Yaffa (from new AvBiz Editor), Denise Mcnab's  1st weekly wrap..

Editor's Insights
03 Dec 2015

As 2015 hurtles to an end aviation initiatives are being rolled out or bedded down at a cracking pace, ensuring participants in this industry will enjoy a well-earned holiday break.

Minister of Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Trust told parliament this week that the implementation of the Aviation Safety Regulation Review to improve aviation safety regulations was on track and that the key going forwards was to ensure commitment from the whole range of industry people and organisations. He said shareholder engagement remained a critical part of the reform success.

First State Super and Altis Property Partners bought Sydney's Bankstown and Camden airports from BaAC Holdco, a consortium of companies, for $203m. They airports are located in what is viewed as growth corridor with billions being earmarked by government for infrastructure growth...

...In other news this week our Editor at Large, Doug Nancarrow shares some industry gongs for airlines and aviaiton journalists as well as keeping tabs on Waypoint.

 Denise McNabb

denisemcnabb@yaffa.com.au

 
Staying topical there was also this from Hitch in his weekly wrap:

As Warren Truss said in his speech to parliament, it has been a year since he delivered the government's response to the Aviation Safety Regulation Review. One year since we all stood up and applauded the response that accepted 32 out of 37 recommendations. It was a seminal day in the history of aviation in Australia; the day someone with some power not only listened, but also understood. In the year since passed, that optimism has taken a bit of a beating as not a lot on the ground floor has changed. There have been improvements at Aviation House, but the benefits have yet to cascade down, meaning pessimism is starting to count the numbers for a leadership challenge to oust optimism. From my point of view, I see this as a year of preparation for the changes to come. There is a lot to be done, but we need CASA to do their homework first lest they embark ad-hoc on another caper that results in more millstone regulations. But, a year should be enough. I am expecting great change in 2016, and will likely join the howling minority if, in December next year, we aren't all a happier bunch of aviators.


Both Bankstown and Camden have been operating like ants under a magnifying glass: trying to go about their business whilst simultaneously waiting for sudden oblivion. When the company holding the leases, BAC Holdco, was put on the market, there was a slimmer of hope that a new owner would reverse what has been a downward trend in the aviation operations, particularly at Bankstown. But now it has finally been sold to new owners, it looks like nothing is set to change at all. When I opened the press release, I was harbouring foolish notions that maybe a company sympathetic to aviation had taken over, which would take an aggressive approach to making tenancy, particularly at Bankstown, sustainable. Alas, the release stated that a property developer and two superannuation companies had sold the leases to ... a property developer and a superannuation company. Insanity, said Einstein, was doing the same thing and expecting the results to be different.

Stand by for Round Two of SIDs, this time starring the Beechcraft range. The Cessna Supplemental Inspection Documents was a comprehensive invasion of old airframes for the purpose of checking for corrosion and fatigue cracks. The impact on the industry was substantial because the inspection and repair costs could easily out-weigh the value of the aeroplane. Owners had some tough decisions to make. Now it's the turn of Beechcraft, but this time the inspection schedules shouldn't be as onerous. Cessna, I am told, had virtually no data on the state of their ageing fleet, but through the various Bonanza societies around the world, there is a stockpile of research and information about the effects of ageing. That should enable the manufacturers to create a more targeted SIDs program, which should be more workable than the approach taken for the Cessna program. However, we'll have to wait on our hands until the documents are ready for industry consumption.

MTF..P2