[Peetwo]

Comardy's last missive for 2016 -

Besides the usual motherhood (bollocks) weasel words which our aviation safety bureaucrats shamefully continue to put up as fact, the final Comardy missive for the year was surprisingly short, sharp and carried a couple of interesting notes (in bold) of further internal ructions at Aviation House... :

From acting Director of Aviation Safety and CEO, Shane Carmody

I am thoroughly enjoying my time back at CASA and I am looking forward to getting stuck into the work in 2017, assisting the aviation community to deliver the best possible safety outcomes. Since starting in October I have been looking at governance and accountability within CASA and I expect to be making some adjustments in the New Year. I have also been reviewing our performance management and training regimes and will do some fine tuning in those areas as well. I have been impressed by CASA’s strong relationships with the aviation community and encouraged by many positive messages I have received during the last two months.

I wish everyone in Australian aviation a safe and enjoyable Christmas and hope that as many people as possible can get out and go flying over the holiday period. Right across the aviation community there is a great passion for flying and the holidays are a perfect time to express this passion and share it with others. Like many organisations CASA will be taking a short break between Christmas and New Year, although we will have people on standby to meet any urgent aviation safety related requests.

Happy Christmas and best wishes for 2017 from everyone at CASA.
Shane Carmody

  
Couple that with the Gobbles revelation:

More CAsA chess moves....

Roger Weeks gone. Heading to NSW Government. Not sure if Wingnut pushed him or if he read his tea leaves.

Don't bang the door on the way out jerkoff.

To which the Ferryman replied.. :

On the first day of Christmas.

That, GD is good news. One of several semi-professional ‘pilots’’ employed by CASA relieved of duties; no matter why; what matters is he’s is gone. Anyone who ever suffered through one of the ‘Weeks’ professional development class for ATO will be glad not to have to endure more of the same. What business a pompous, jumped up, junior grade instructor ever had being involved in ‘professional' development or, Part 61 even I will never, ever, know or understand.  Thank you Mr Carmody.

Personally; (while Carmody has the axe out), I’d like to see a cull of clan Campbell happening, real soon; there are a couple of others who could be ‘done’ as part of a job lot. We may have to wait until the New Year to see that; but I can wait. We have always said that the carnage would never be seen; not by us, it simply ain’t the way things happen - for obvious reasons.

You know, if Carmody played his cards right; and, the new DAS is the ‘real-deal’ CASA could possibly attract some professionals to help with the heavy lifting; what a difference that would make and how quickly.

Aye well; I’ll tack my wishes on the bottom of my letter to Santa – you never know.

Toot – fare thee well Fuckwit – toot.

All indicate that Comardy is not hanging around and has no issues taking on such historically (30+ years) problematic cultural issues within Fort Fumble...

Verdict - the Acting DAS statement is indeed a positive sign, what will be interesting is whether SC can root out all the scurrying rats early in the New Year...  


MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

P2;

All indicate that Comardy is not hanging around and has no issues taking on such historically (30+ years) problematic cultural issues within Fort Fumble...

Agree. Wingnut's role at CAsA is only temporary. Why go from an $800k to a $500k role and take on a more volatile and no-win position such as DAS? In its current format it is a poison chalice in the extreme.
No, Wingnut is a strategist. He is a bench warmer. He is, and will, kick a few small goals while DAS, tidy up some loose ends and clear a bit of a path to the front door for the new DAS who will be in place before 30 June, 2017. But that's all. Wingnut, or should we call him Batman, will suddenly one day disappear into the darkness, only to pop again when the urgency beckons, as directed by his PMC Masters.

[Kharon]

Cat – 12 o’clock – low.

GD – “Why go from an $800k to a $500k role and” etc.”

Just talking about that recently; would he though?  If it is all to be a temporary gig – as a mandated requirement after the flash git departed – then Shirley, Carmody would not ‘temporarily’ take the pay cut.

He seems to be keeping a lid on things; its certainly quiet in Sleepy Hollow. But; maybe that just means knives not guns. I would like to think that ‘Wing nut’ was cleaning up some of the deadwood, make the place at least presentable to the new blood.

First wish for the New Year – that CASA is reformed. Honestly, I cannot see anything improving until that is done. The approach to the ‘drone’ management speaks of the same heavy handed, punitive methods. There are many things CASA could; and, IMO should be doing to ensure adequate education, training and ‘management’ of the situation.

For example; assisting local councils to determine how to define ‘no-fly’ areas within their public places. Explain the risks, dispel the myth and how the ‘rangers’ can determine what constitutes a ‘dangerous’ situation.

For example; assisting the ‘aero modelling’ fraternity to get their message and education package to the general population. Sponsor the odd training week – sell it as how to become an ‘Ace’ drone pilot; a matter of pride. Or; perhaps a competition which required those skills. Or; even an education package, little bit of aerodynamics, an explanation of why certain rules must be obeyed; general ‘safety’ thinking – that sort of thing. Hell, it would not cost much and it would bring kudos and public acknowledgement of a job well done by the ‘safety’ authority.  Taking some mutt to court over a sausage sandwich does not produce much else other than derision and temptation to those who think it funny, or see it as a challenge, to flout the rules. Send the drone out the fish and chips as a thrill or a brag - instant facebook fame.

Why the ramble? Well, I’ll tell you. That kid at the end of my street – him with the Christmas drone, now has one very scared, angry Mum with a torn stroller roof, one window, a near collision between a motor bike and a light truck to his credit. These all direct results of – wait for it– chasing the local cats with his drone.

Yes, yes, I know – back to my knitting – right.

Toot toot.

[Gobbledock]

Ferryman;

Just talking about that recently; would he though? If it is all to be a temporary gig – as a mandated requirement after the flash git departed – then Shirley, Carmody would not ‘temporarily’ take the pay cut.
My bad! Poor articulation on my behalf. No, he wouldn't take a pay cut by dropping down to DAS for a temporary stint. But if he became permanent DAS it would be very hard for even PMC to agree to allowing him to remain on $300k above the going rate which is around $500k give or minus a few taxpayer crumbs.

More Ferryman;

Why the ramble? Well, I’ll tell you. That kid at the end of my street – him with the Christmas drone, now has one very scared, angry Mum with a torn stroller roof, one window, a near collision between a motor bike and a light truck to his credit. These all direct results of – wait for it– chasing the local cats with his drone.
I couldn't agree more with the above statement mate. However, call me selfish, but my greater concern is that a 170 seat aircraft is going to be brought to ruin by one of these effing drones and that will leave a lot of grieving families. Not every aircraft accident ends with a happy ending like the Hudson.

[P7_TOM]

GD – Even so, but. What “K” was alluding to (IMO) is the lack of control at the ‘grass roots’ and lack of ‘edumacation’. I have actually sat and watched the mentioned kids with the ‘groan toy’.  (“K” actually had the Purdey ‘close and handy’ “come to Poppa” was the mantra). The parents have NFI of the associated risks and, in todays PC society, no one is prepared to (a) say a word, (b) try to help or talk to the kids (lest we be dubbed ‘molesters’ © the parents would not thank you and (d) you would have a shed load of grief if you dared to tell ‘em off for being bloody silly, cruel and a dangerous. It is a numbers game.  One must – somehow – manage to eradicate as much of the ‘accidental’ risk, created through ignorance as is possible. That only leaves those who will take a laser, fit it to a drone and set out to deliberately place an aircraft at risk.

An aircraft is terribly venerable when ‘low and slow’ i.e. below 400 feet, during a take off or landing – which is, coincidentally, the height band for unrestricted drone operations.  A nut bar with a laser mounted onto a drone, operating from the ‘Crispy Cream’ car park could have a field day. These are the danger to aircraft – flash – flash move to the KFC car park, could go on all night. Hard to prevent; but if, through education, 99% of the ignorance risk could be removed, then it would, I imagine, be easier for the whollopers to find those who mean to create havoc.

CASA may be legally obliged to mitigate risk; but, is there not a moral obligation to keep the community safe also? Problems are always best solved ‘nipped-in-the-bud’.

I do like the notion of assisting councils to define the ‘high risk’ areas; I like the notion of educating the users – beyond the instruction manual of how to do it; and, I very much like the idea of CASA using it’s ‘authoritative’ image to deliver the assistance and education needed.  Short of that – Purdey rules the skies over the Houseboat – suitably choked for ‘live birds’.

[Peetwo]

Joining dots on Comardy & the Iron Ring bluff??

First at the end of 2016 we had this from Wingnut:

Comardy's last missive for 2016 -

Besides the usual motherhood (bollocks) weasel words which our aviation safety bureaucrats shamefully continue to put up as fact, the final Comardy missive for the year was surprisingly short, sharp and carried a couple of interesting notes (in bold) of further internal ructions at Aviation House... :

From acting Director of Aviation Safety and CEO, Shane Carmody

I am thoroughly enjoying my time back at CASA and I am looking forward to getting stuck into the work in 2017, assisting the aviation community to deliver the best possible safety outcomes. Since starting in October I have been looking at governance and accountability within CASA and I expect to be making some adjustments in the New Year. I have also been reviewing our performance management and training regimes and will do some fine tuning in those areas as well. I have been impressed by CASA’s strong relationships with the aviation community and encouraged by many positive messages I have received during the last two months.

I wish everyone in Australian aviation a safe and enjoyable Christmas and hope that as many people as possible can get out and go flying over the holiday period. Right across the aviation community there is a great passion for flying and the holidays are a perfect time to express this passion and share it with others. Like many organisations CASA will be taking a short break between Christmas and New Year, although we will have people on standby to meet any urgent aviation safety related requests.

Happy Christmas and best wishes for 2017 from everyone at CASA.
Shane Carmody

  
Couple that with the Gobbles revelation:

More CAsA chess moves....

Roger Weeks gone. Heading to NSW Government. Not sure if Wingnut pushed him or if he read his tea leaves.

Don't bang the door on the way out jerkoff.

To which the Ferryman replied.. :

On the first day of Christmas.

That, GD is good news. One of several semi-professional ‘pilots’’ employed by CASA relieved of duties; no matter why; what matters is he’s is gone. Anyone who ever suffered through one of the ‘Weeks’ professional development class for ATO will be glad not to have to endure more of the same. What business a pompous, jumped up, junior grade instructor ever had being involved in ‘professional' development or, Part 61 even I will never, ever, know or understand.  Thank you Mr Carmody.

Personally; (while Carmody has the axe out), I’d like to see a cull of clan Campbell happening, real soon; there are a couple of others who could be ‘done’ as part of a job lot. We may have to wait until the New Year to see that; but I can wait. We have always said that the carnage would never be seen; not by us, it simply ain’t the way things happen - for obvious reasons.

You know, if Carmody played his cards right; and, the new DAS is the ‘real-deal’ CASA could possibly attract some professionals to help with the heavy lifting; what a difference that would make and how quickly.

Aye well; I’ll tack my wishes on the bottom of my letter to Santa – you never know.

Toot – fare thee well Fuckwit – toot.

All indicate that Comardy is not hanging around and has no issues taking on such historically (30+ years) problematic cultural issues within Fort Fumble...

Verdict - the Acting DAS statement is indeed a positive sign, what will be interesting is whether SC can root out all the scurrying rats early in the New Year...   

Slight retraction from those end of year statements I made... - Why? Well it would appear that SC has hit a roadblock that he is not prepared to sacrifice his future career prospects for...

Reference Three Guinea Pigs thread:

Short, sweet and predictable.

The DAS has courteously, in a short, timely letter responded to the GP3 request for an informal ‘chat’.  For those who wrote the almost letter perfect ‘predictive’ responses, the response was sweet; Choc Frogs all around. There were two which were so close to the actual wording that anything less than a Tim Tam award would be a travesty; well done.

The acting DAS has taken refuge behind the AAT rulings and flat denial; quite rightly mentioning that those decisions have been handed down and CASA is well satisfied with those decisions. The point being completely ‘missed’ is that the complaints which need examination are related directly to the actions of CASA field officers and management decisions made before the AAT hearings; as in the quality of ‘facts and circumstances’ produced as evidence; and, importantly, actions taken subsequent to the hearings. These are the matters which must be tested, not the AAT decisions made on the CASA statements. No matter, the DAS has suggested that the CASA Board is the next stop for the GP3 bus. So be it.

The CASA escape route, defence strategy and party line has been clearly and neatly set out by the DAS for us; those wee holes will be narrowed and the Board contacted.  It is a little early yet to determine a pattern; but, the competition entries to draft the Board response will now be assessed against a tighter rule set. There is after all a gold star and a key to the Tim Tam box at stake.

That’s it, for today at least.

Toot toot.

&..from DDDD_MNFI Chester's thread:

From the Ferryman's latest (above) off the 3 Guinea Pigs thread, in comparison to the Qantas 'bolt' hiccup with it's Q400 fleet, we get a perfect example of the CASA entrenched dichotomy/duplicity/double standards that obviously still exist despite the 'trust' quotient findings of the Forsyth (ASRR) review.

So Comardy's statement in his last missive for 2016...

"..Since starting in October I have been looking at governance and accountability within CASA and I expect to be making some adjustments in the New Year. I have also been reviewing our performance management and training regimes and will do some fine tuning in those areas as well.."

...were obviously either typical bureaucratic obfuscating weasel words  ; or he has realised that the job of taking on the historical record of 'Iron Ring' embuggerances for the better part of 3 decades, is simply too fraught with potential (liability) issues that could prove to be too fiscally and politically 'messy'...

Well if we needed any further evidence that Comardy has been 'gazumped' by the IRON RING, courtesy of an Airmed & Rescue blog, here is the latest propaganda poohtube vid by Dr Aleck to come out of Fort Fumble (Warning: BYOB will be required ):

CASA discusses regulatory philosophy

18 January 2017


The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has released a video outlining its regulatory philosophy. General manager of legal affairs Jonathan Aleck explains in the video how CASA operates. He comments: “If we don’t demonstrate by example what it means to be a responsible regulator, it’s going to be that bit more difficult for us to expect that operators are going to demonstrate by example what it means to be a safe operator.”

Please God help our industry


MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

WANKERS!!

[Peetwo]

Joining dots on Comardy & the Iron Ring bluff - Part II

...Well if we needed any further evidence that Comardy has been 'gazumped' by the IRON RING, courtesy of an Airmed & Rescue blog, here is the latest propaganda poohtube vid by Dr Aleck to come out of Fort Fumble (Warning: BYOB will be required   ):

CASA discusses regulatory philosophy

18 January 2017


The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has released a video outlining its regulatory philosophy. General manager of legal affairs Jonathan Aleck explains in the video how CASA operates. He comments: “If we don’t demonstrate by example what it means to be a responsible regulator, it’s going to be that bit more difficult for us to expect that operators are going to demonstrate by example what it means to be a safe operator.”

In a follow up to the Dr Hoodoo Voodoo's spin & bollocks regulatory philosophy video, I note the 'nail in the coffin' comment from Mark Newton which recalls an excellent example of an AAT attempted CASA embuggerance case from 2015... :

Mark Newton1 day ago

Can you do another video to describe precisely what has changed within CASA since the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found in 2015 that you had been vindictively prejudicial in your enforcement action taken against Mr. Nagid Fadlalla in Perth? Like now, CASA claimed to be proponents of a "just culture." But the AAT found scant evidence of that, castigating CASA for denial of procedural fairness, disregarding evidence, and for behaving as if it had a vendetta against its target. The AAT decision is here, in case anyone wants to contrast CASA's promotional materials about "just culture" with their actual behaviour. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/A...5/331.html

Restating my original question: What, in detail, has CASA changed about its behavior as a result of losing that AAT case? It's all very well to SAY these things, but what are you actually DOING, and why should your stakeholders trust you? 

Luv it Mark and the chocfrog voucher is in the mail...

For those interested Aunty Pru also covered the Fadlalla case:

"..M'lord this is a clear case of attempted embuggerance.." - Fadlalla v CASA AATA 331 (15 May 2015) 

From the above decision by Egon Fice , Senior Member of the AAT, it is becoming apparent that the jig is up when it comes to CASA attempting to persecute individuals that have genuinely made an honest mistake/contravention of the regs. This case is also a classic for it shows how CASA manipulates a situation to suit it's own purpose with a dodgy investigation, with little to no factual evidence (sounds familiar hey?? ) and by using underhanded, morally corrupt tactics in an attempt to discredit the applicant.

SM E Fice at paragraph 101..

"..We were concerned by the use of Mr Fadlalla’s personal files by CASA and RACWA/WAAC to discredit his character. None of those matters have anything to do with flight safety or the operation of an aircraft during flight time. They are concerned with issues that RACWA/WAAC had with a customer in a commercial context. Those matters are simply not relevant in determining whether Mr Fadlalla is a fit and proper person to hold a pilot licence. Furthermore, we should say that we were appalled by the way in which CASA/RACWA/WAAC regarded as a fact that Mr Fadlalla was dishonest and had stolen an iPad. No such theft was proved against Mr Fadlalla and he has, from the outset, strenuously denied having stolen that device. There was no evidence of a police investigation or conviction. Yet CASA, in its Show Cause Notice and in its Notice of Cancellation has treated that as a fact..." 

This matter is also interesting because CASA LSD tried unsuccessfully to make this the first case of pilot embuggerance under the new Part61 - fortunately for the applicant, Senior Member Fice would not have a bar of it...

6. We should also briefly mention that at the time Mr Fadlalla’s PPL and SPL were cancelled in June 2014 the new provisions dealing with flight crew licensing now found in Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) had not come into effect. The Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment Regulation 2013 (No.1) removed the flight crew licensing provisions from Part 5 of the CAR (sch. 2) and was to commence on 4 December 2013 (Reg 2). However, that Regulation was itself amended by the Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Flight Crew Licensing Suite) Regulation 2013 by omitting 4 December 2013 as the start date and substituting 1 September 2014 (sch. 1 pt. 1). That new commencement date was also the date on which the Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 40.1.0 was repealed (Civil Aviation Order (Flight Crew Licensing) Repeal and Amendment Instrument 2014 (No. 1) reg 30, sch 27 pt 1). Because the matters before us concern events which took place in the first half of 2014, Part 5 of the CAR dealing with qualifications of flight crew and CAO 40.1.0 dealing with the issue of special design feature endorsements are the relevant legislative provisions.

   
{Reference: Read paragraph 105 below}
 
Phew..imagine the many, many more means of persecution at CASA LSD's disposal  if they had of been able to use Part61, mate the poor bugger would be hung, strung & quartered and on the next flight home to the Sudan by tea time at the cricket...

Anyway the following is the conclusion to the Fice decision - but I suggest the full decision is worthy of a read...

CONCLUSIONS

93.CASA exercised its discretion to cancel Mr Fadlalla’s PPL and SPL because it found:

• • (a) Mr Fadlalla had failed in his duty in a matter affecting the safe operational navigation of an aircraft; and
    
  • (b) Mr Fadlalla was not a fit and proper person to be the holder of the relevant licences.
    

94. Regarding (a) above, this finding was based on the actions Mr Fadlalla took in the course of a flight on 19 February 2014 in an M20J aircraft. CASA claimed Mr Fadlalla:

1. • © was not trained or qualified to fly at night;
     
   • (d) was not qualified to fly the M20J aeroplane;
     
   • (e) was not qualified to fly from the right-hand seat of the aeroplane;
     
   • (f) was not authorised to fly to the aerodrome in Geraldton; and
     
   • (g) had three passengers on board the aeroplane whose lives were put at risk.
     

95.We have found that Mr Fadlalla was not qualified to fly at night because he did not hold a night VFR rating as required by CAR 174C. He did not deliberately set out to fly at night but did so nonetheless due to delays in departure from Geraldton; an extended flight time which Mr Fadlalla claimed was due to headwinds; and failure to determine prior to embarking on that flight the time when official last light would occur.

96.We do not agree with CASA that Mr Fadlalla was not qualified to fly the M20J aircraft. He undertook and completed the appropriate flying training for a special design endorsement required for that aircraft. He also satisfied a Grade 1 QFI who conducted an endorsement test flight that he was safe to fly that aeroplane as pilot in command. Although CASA claimed that the endorsement had to be entered in to Mr Fadlalla’s personal log book before he could lawfully operate that aircraft as pilot in command, that action was outside of his control. In fact, having met the flying training requirements and having passed the flight test for the endorsement, CASA was bound to make the endorsement in his personal log book. CASA gave no explanation for the delay in endorsing his log book.

97. CASA has not explained what qualification is required for a pilot in command to fly an aircraft with dual controls from the right-hand seat. We are unable to locate any such regulatory requirement. While we accept that is the convention and is sometimes necessary in certain aircraft, in an aircraft such as the M20J, operating under the VFR, we do not see that as being significant as far as flight safety is concerned.

98. We do not agree with CASA that Mr Fadlalla was not authorised to fly to Geraldton. While that flight may not have counted for his flying training with RACWA/WAAC for his CPL, an Authorising Instructor signed the hire authorisation form after checking that Mr Fadlalla had completed and was carrying all appropriate documentation. He held a valid PPL and was authorised to fly the M20J aircraft as pilot in command.

99. CASA is correct in stating that there were three passengers on board on the flight undertaken by Mr Fadlalla on 19 February 2014 and that their lives were put at risk because Mr Fadlalla appeared not to have taken into account the time when official last light occurred on that day and that caused him significant problems in locating Jandakot airfield and performing a safe landing. He did so with the assistance of ATC. Although he did not inform ATC that he did not hold a night VFR rating, that is understandable in the circumstances and the pressure which Mr Fadlalla must have been under when attempting to land. We also take account of the fact that Mr Fadlalla’s flight experience levels at that time were low.

100. Nevertheless, we are satisfied that the significance of the danger in which he put himself and his passengers has been absorbed by Mr Fadlalla and that he is not at risk of repeating such a flight. Nor do we find that his actions taken on that flight are indicative of his attitude to the safety of air navigation or his inability to recognise and manage threats. We had no evidence from any of his flying instructors to that effect and the few flight test reports we had in evidence make no mention whatsoever of such inability. In fact, they record a satisfactory performance on those measures.

101. We were concerned by the use of Mr Fadlalla’s personal files by CASA and RACWA/WAAC to discredit his character. None of those matters have anything to do with flight safety or the operation of an aircraft during flight time. They are concerned with issues that RACWA/WAAC had with a customer in a commercial context. Those matters are simply not relevant in determining whether Mr Fadlalla is a fit and proper person to hold a pilot licence. Furthermore, we should say that we were appalled by the way in which CASA/RACWA/WAAC regarded as a fact that Mr Fadlalla was dishonest and had stolen an iPad. No such theft was proved against Mr Fadlalla and he has, from the outset, strenuously denied having stolen that device. There was no evidence of a police investigation or conviction. Yet CASA, in its Show Cause Notice and in its Notice of Cancellation has treated that as a fact.

102. We were similarly concerned with allegations that Mr Fadlalla lied to CASA officers in the course of his interview with them on 7 March 2014. It appears that no account was taken of Mr Fadlalla’s ethnicity and background let alone his imperfect command of the English language. To cap it off, CASA was unable or unwilling to make good those allegations by evidence from persons who were present at the meeting. We should also express concern about the lack of evidence from persons directly involved in Mr Fadlalla’s flight training. It disappoints us that CASA did not insist on obtaining such evidence despite Mr Currey being unwilling to allow those persons to give evidence following Mr Fadlalla’s request that they do so. We should not have to remind CASA of its obligations under s. 33(1AA) of the AAT Act.

103.We find that Mr Fadlalla is a fit and proper person to have the responsibilities and to exercise and perform the functions and duties of a holder of a pilot licence.

104. It follows that we find CASA’s decision to cancel Mr Fadlalla’s PPL and SPL was not the preferable decision. We set aside that decision. The effect of our decision is that Mr Fadlalla’s PPL and SPL remain valid and must be treated as never having been cancelled.

105. Although Mr Carter in his closing submissions suggested there would be no utility to set aside the cancellation of Mr Fadlalla’s SPL because of changes made to the regulatory framework by the commencement of Part 61 of the CASR which effectively substituted a recreational pilot licence (RPL) for the SPL, respectfully, we do not agree. That is because s. 43(6) of the AAT Act provides:

A decision of a person as varied by the Tribunal, or a decision made by the Tribunal in substitution for the decision of a person, shall, for all purposes (other than the purposes of applications to the Tribunal for a review or of appeals in accordance with section 44), be deemed to be a decision of that person and, upon the coming into operation of the decision of the Tribunal, unless the Tribunal otherwise orders, has effect, or shall be deemed to have had effect, on and from the day on which the decision under review has or had effect.

106. Accordingly, the effect of our decision is that Mr Fadlalla’s aviation record needs to be corrected so that no cancellation of either the PPL or SPL is recorded.

107. By way of a postscript to our decision, for Mr Fadlalla to complete his flying training for the CPL, he should enrol with an approved flying training organisation other than RACWA/WAAC. His flight training records from RACWA/WAAC should be transferred to the new training organisation in accordance with reg 141.280(2) of the CASR.

 My estimation of Senior Member Fice is heading for the stratosphere...

Just Culture within CASA - Yeah right Skates and pigs fly!

Couple the Fadlalla case with the more recent Bellamy AAT decision (reference AP post: Attempted embuggerance & a Leopard's spots); add in the stilted progress of the "Guinea pigs three." and you begin to see why members of the IOS and industry like Mark are suspicious and distrusting of fluffy propaganda videos laced with weasel words from Dr A...
  
Restating my original question: What, in detail, has CASA changed about its behaviour as a result of losing that AAT case? It's all very well to SAY these things, but what are you actually DOING, and why should your stakeholders trust you?   


MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

The money shot;

Restating my original question: What, in detail, has CASA changed about its behaviour as a result of losing that AAT case? It's all very well to SAY these things, but what are you actually DOING, and why should your stakeholders trust you?

The only thing that has changed is that Dr Voodoo and his 'padwan' Flyingfiend are two years older!

The Witchdoctor has spent the good part of 20+ years indulging in his sociopathic lust. He has ensured that his loyal disciple Flyingfiend has also received decades of personal hands-on training and programming in 'pineapple methodology'. The perfect bully to replace an older bully when or if the bearded bully decides to go. These individuals are part of a grotesque collective of vindictive, proud sociopaths. It's the makeup of politicians and senior bureaucrats. A small sample;

CAsA = never wrong
Prime Ministers = never wrong
Ministers = never wrong
Tax office = never wrong
Social security = never wrong
Police = never wrong

See where I'm coming from? CAsA wiLL NEVER change while people like Dr Voodoo and Flyingfiend are there. They are the fabric of how the organisation works. Those two when combined with the Screaming Skull, Terry Fuckwitson, Chambers, Bald Boyd, Campbell cup of soup, all under the umbrella of Pumpkin Head. They are a lethal and formidable wrecking ball. Although most of them have gone, but not all of them, it gives you a picture of the type of organisation the Government wants CAsA to be. But in reality doesn't it make sense? Why would a Government organisation be nice, just, transparent and god help us, helpful?? They see that as weakness, a loss of power, status and control. Nope, divide and conquer, bully and control - that's the Government way. There is nothing a Government fears more than the people.

TICK TOCK

[Kharon]

Effrontery – of the bare faced variety.

When P2 posted the latest CASA video message, delivered once again by the voice of whispering death, I and many others freely admit to ignoring its very existence, this supported by a steely determination to never waste any part of my life on such things. The latest produced not being for industry benefit; do not make the mistake of believing it is. It is purely and simply for the benefit of politicians; in particular for the most inutile miniscule for transport in the history of this wide brown land. The fabrication is part of a campaign to convince the world that ‘reform’ is the watchword and CASA are moving heaven and earth to achieve this essential, if mythical state.  Bollocks.

Newton – “Can you do another video to describe precisely what has changed within CASA since the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found in 2015 that you had been vindictively prejudicial in your enforcement action taken against Mr. Nagid Fadlalla in Perth? Like now, CASA claimed to be proponents of a "just culture." But the AAT found scant evidence of that, castigating CASA for denial of procedural fairness, disregarding evidence, and for behaving as if it had a vendetta against its target. The AAT decision is here, in case anyone wants to contrast CASA's promotional materials about "just culture" with their actual behaviour.”

P2 – “From the above decision by Egon Fice, Senior Member of the AAT, it is becoming apparent that the jig is up when it comes to CASA attempting to persecute individuals that have genuinely made an honest mistake/contravention of the regs. This case is also a classic for it shows how CASA manipulates a situation to suit it's own purpose with a dodgy investigation, with little to no factual evidence (sounds familiar hey?? ) and by using underhanded, morally corrupt tactics in an attempt to discredit the applicant.”

The manipulation of ‘fact’, the spinning of ‘circumstance' and the destruction of the intended victims are the stuff of legend; and, it is safe to say that, for once, legend can be proven through unimpeachable fact. The big problem of course is that the only realistic ‘court of appeal’ is the CASA organization itself. Oh, you can talk of taking legal action and fighting it out in a courtroom; sometime in the future; even go so far as to seek legal advice. Then, should you be willing to spend at least three years of your life and somewhere in the region of $300,000 to get into a court, then another two years and similar sum of money again, fighting the appeal, you may or may not walk out of court with pyric victory in the battle; but you will have lost ‘the war’.  Through the PAIN network it has been possible to source invaluable ‘top deck’ advice which simply states that in reality, the only real winners are the legal counsel you employ and that the mark of the beast will be on you; for ever.

Trying to change this is the purpose of the GP3 experiment. The case cited above is, in many ways a classic – only because the AAT president managed to see past the CASA case; and, that only because there is a debt to pay and a bad conscience to sooth. Fice knows this for fact, just as I and many, many others do.

For the GP3 test, Carmody has taken a line which, IMO, reflects the true nature of the risible ‘reform’ mantra being whispered through ‘video’ presentation. You see, boys and girls, once the ‘facts and circumstances’ have passed through the ‘system’ and a ruling handed down, CASA have the perfect defence case against any and all complaint. That their cases are built on outright fabrication, manipulated to a fare-thee-well, exaggerated as needed, shrunk where required, awkward parts buried and oaths sworn in vain makes a mockery of system, is of absolutely no concern to them, whatsoever. There is no appeal, to the gods or mankind, which can shame CASA into admitting ‘they lied’. CASA are totally convinced they are above the law, even have it in writing. CASA believe there is no power on this planet which can bring them to confess their crimes. This has been proven so many times now that it has become the normalized deviance an industry simply accepts; result, living in fear has become the norm.

How can true ‘reform’ ever take place when the Director chooses, of his own volition, not to examine the radical causes which necessitate that reform? How can trust and faith ever be restored when trust is constantly abused and faith, not only in ‘the law’ but in the system is viewed so cynically by those in whom industry should be able to hold in absolute trust?

Aye; it is a sad state of affairs, the nails in the ASRR coffin being driven home now through ‘media’ releases which go unchallenged; produced at our expense to cover the ministerial arse. Risible? Yes, but the irony is on the industry, which sits back and watches the fight while protecting it’s own rice bowl. I am not certain where the blame lays; but industry has had a big part to play in allowing the current situation to develop, perhaps it is time industry got off its collective beam ends and shouted one simple word – Enough.

Selah.

[Peetwo]

Comardy Capers:  Fort Fumble in hypocritical, duplicitous disarray -

Off the CASA meets the Press thread yesterday:

 

Update: Via Brissie Times...

January 25 2017 - 6:32PM

Queensland pilot Josh Hoch granted bail once he supplies surety

Chris Burns

The Mount Isa charter pilot alleged to have put glass beads in his rivals' planes is to be granted bail from the Mount Isa Magistrates Court. 

However, Josh Hoch will likely be in the Mount Isa Police Station watch house on Australia Day. Part of his conditions set by Magistrate Stephen Guttridge is that Mr Hoch supply $50,000 surety before release. 
  
Josh Hoch's solicitor Michael Spearman leaves the Mount Isa Police Station watch house on Wednesday afternoon. Photo: Chris Burns

The Mount Isa Court House had not received the surety or approved the paperwork by its closing time of 4.30pm, Wednesday. The court opens again at 8.30am on Friday. Thursday is the Australia Day public holiday.  

Mr Hoch is to appear again before the Mount Isa Magistrates Court on February 22. He is charged with 342 offences. 

Police prosecutor Sergeant Vaughan Cooper opposed bail and said five of the charges had a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, Mt Isa's North West Star reported today.
 
"He is at risk of flight, quite literally," Sergeant Cooper said. 

"His capacity not just to leave Queensland, but Australia." 

Sergeant Cooper said one of the charges related to a Piper Chieftain plane that lost power flying from the Northern Territory to Mount Isa. There were three people on board.

Sergeant Cooper alleged that an inspection of the plane revealed glass beads in the oil filter. 

Sergeant Cooper alleged also that oil had been removed from a Cessna plane kept at the Mount Isa Airport. This was discovered during a daily inspection on August 18, 2016. 

On September, 2016, a Piper Chieftain about to fly from Mount Isa to Burketown experienced loss of oil pressure, the court heard. The flight was aborted. An oil sample allegedly showed glass beads, metals and dirt mixed in with it, Sergeant Cooper said.
 
On October 6 to 7 a Cessna belonging to the Northern Territory Air Services, travelling between Alice Springs and Mount Isa, experienced low pressure. Glass beads were allegedly found in the engines, Sergeant Cooper said. 

On October 18 a pilot on another plane noticed a drop in pressure. The plane arrived in Mount Isa safely. It is alleged that an inspection found paste in the oil system. 

Sergeant Cooper said other offences included fraud. Mr Hoch is alleged to have supplied two fraudulent insurance claims. 

Mr Hoch did not have proper accreditation of an aircraft, the prosecutor alleges. 

The court heard that Mr Hoch has flown Federal Member for Kennedy Bob Katter and Katters Australian Party State MPs Rob Katter and Shane Knuth through his charter service. The Federal MP has paid $275,000 in total to Mr Hoch for his charter services. 

The prosecutor alleges further that the defendant has flown an aircraft to hide it from police. 

Mr Hoch's solicitor Michael Spearman, Resolute Legal's principal lawyer,  said the charges were "quite circumstantial" and said many of the charges "doubled-up". 

Mr Spearman said that Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has known of Mr Hoch's flights since 2013. They could have grounded him immediately if they had concerns with the pilot and audited the company, he said. "Despite knowing of the allegations for months they could have grounded him." 

Mr Hoch has already suffered a "trial by jury" and it has affected his business. He also has two young children and a long-term partner. 

"There are significant stresses in the family right at this point," Mr Spearman said. 
Other bail conditions is that Mr Hoch not apply for a passport. If he has one he must surrender it. 

Mr Hoch cannot pilot a plane or enter an airport. He must also report to the Mount Isa Police Station on specific days twice a week. He also must not contact witnesses. 
For more Mt Isa news see the North West Star. 

  

First to join the dots to 'where the hell was CASA' (in bold above), was Planetalking... :

CASA's belated approval of 'rogue' bush pilot called into question
Jan 25, 20173 Comments

A lower court case in Queensland has heard gravely serious allegations made against a bush pilot following a major police operation

Then today Dick Smith comes out swinging, via the Townsville Bulletin:

Dick Smith at a hangar in Bankstown Airport, Bankstown. Picture: Melvyn Knipe

Entrepreneur Dick Smith blasts CASA after it holds back on any commitment to internal review
[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/article/5125623aff287fc9a5f106519d2b18e1?esi=true&t_template=s3/chronicle-tg_tlc_storyheader/index&t_product=TownsvilleBulletin&td_device=desktop[/img]KIERAN ROONEY AND CHRIS MCMAHON, Townsville Bulletin
January 25, 2017 8:27pm

THE Civil Aviation Safety Authority has been plunged into chaos, labelled as “dysfunctional” in the wake of claims it knew about concerns over Mount Isa pilot Josh Hoch as early as 2013.

Lawyer Michael Spear told a court at Mr Hoch’s bail appearance that CASA had known about conduct related to the 342 charges police had laid.

“(The flights) have happened since 2013, CASA has known about these flights since 2013,” he said.

“Now if CASA had any concern about a pilot it can invoke provisions of section 30DC of the Civil Aviation Act instantly grounding a pilot if there is a serious and imminent risk to air safety.

“Now CASA has not done so, despite knowing of the allegations for months, these started back in October (2016) and certainly those charges from back in 2013.

“CASA conducted an audit for Mr Hoch and his company and reissued his AOC (Air Operators Certificate) earlier last year.

“If CASA hasn’t grounded him, they don’t consider him to be a serious risk to the public and I would submit that CASA would be far more cognisant of safety in aviation than the police service.”

Entrepreneur Dick Smith, a former Civil Aviation Authority chairman and advocate for reform, said it did not surprise him to hear the authority had known about accusations but not acted.

“CASA is a totally dysfunctional organisation and because of that I would believe anything,” he said.

“This seems to be an ongoing problem. It tends to concentrate on the good players and the rogue ones are too hard I think. It’s basically very weak.

“Some of these alleged acts also seem to involve oversight at the local airports, I wonder if people have known about this bloke and done nothing.”

Mr Smith said CASA did not aggressively pursue rule breakers.

“As chairman I introduced an administrative fines system. Instead of writing continuous letters to noncompliers they would be fined.

“After the Seaview disaster we discovered the regulator knew what was going on but just kept writing letters.”

But the organisation has held back on any pledge to conduct an internal review, with a spokeswoman committing to read the current police investigation.

“CASA personnel have been working closely with Queensland Police in Operation Oscar-Demotic since October 2016, culminating in Mr Hoch’s arrest,” she said.

“Our role involved the provision of specialist aviation-related technical advice.

“CASA is actively reviewing information arising out of the Queensland Police investigation and will take such further action as necessary.”

The department did not answer questions about whether CASA had received complaints about Mr Hoch in previous years or whether it would conduct its own research into how he received his licences

“It would be inappropriate to comment further on those matters at this point due to ongoing investigations,” she said.

“It is important to note that the vast majority of commercial aircraft operators in Australia are professional, responsible pilots who put safety as their number one priority and comply with all relevant safety regulations.”

Now compare that to the above posts starting from here - Joining dots on Comardy & the Iron Ring bluff - Part II - &/or read some of the disturbing tales of embuggerance - HERE.  You begin to get a perspective on why aviation luminaries like Dick Smith, David Forsyth and industry advocate groups like the RAAA, AMROBA or the AAAA's, are so concerned with the toxic, dysfunctional culture, that despite the ASRR recommendations, still remains within Aviation House...  


UDB!!! TICK TOCK Comardy & DDDD_MNFI, TICK bloody TOCK -  


MTF...P2  

[Kharon]

Now may we have an open inquiry?– Please.

We called a no confidence on CASA back in 2012. We have suffered through a Senate inquiry and the Forsyth inquiry and had any hopes of CASA reform dashed, obfuscated and cynically manipulated. Result: Mt Isa.  Clearly visible in the difference between the police case work and the CASA no work in the Mt Isa case.  The Qld police may rightfully claim all the credit and kudos. Had CASA been the prime mover, then they would be the first to crow and beat their chests, the incumbent minister leading the chorus. Ineffectual does not cover the gap, neither does ‘unfortunate’; neither does claiming to help, after the fact.

The reasons for the ongoing lack of confidence, faith and trust are as simple and clear now as when they first emerged.  The case of the Guinea Pigs was, though no longer, a perfect opportunity for CASA to recover at least some of their credibility and reputation.  There can be no serious reform or sensible action taken in a case like the Mt Isa debacle which would not produce a cynical response from industry. The Qld police investigation would be viewed ‘straight’ and carry the credibility of a ‘true’ impartial (just the facts) investigation. Had CASA done it – very few would believe it, any of it – in fact, many would say and support the notion that it was just another ‘fit up’.

Why? Well it has in the past been a rigged game, so often, played so many times that it is perfectly natural to assume CASA were ‘under orders’ to nail, at any price an operator or a person.

Why? Well, the GP3 case presents evidence, untested to be sure, but nonetheless supporting claims of ‘embuggerance’. Until this type of complaint is examined – properly – and corrective action taken – publicly, then there is no hope of probity in any CASA investigation, let alone the presentation of ‘facts and circumstances’, the ‘hay-stacking’ and the willingness to swear, under oath to calumny. Simply put – very few would believe a single word CASA said; that’s why.

How could ‘we’, the industry rely on CASA to investigate the Mt Isa case in a fair and impartial manner while their track record is less than adequate, their probity questionable and their motives beneath contempt. Until CASA is prepared to take a very long, very hard look at their past actions and address those issues, openly, honestly and publicly, there can be no trust. Must we now rely solely on the police services to investigate. It has reached a point where industry needs to rely, very heavily, on the RAT Senators to mount a general inquiry, with public submissions into the actions and behaviour of what is laughingly referred to as ‘the’ Civil Aviation Safety Authority’.    

The list is long Senators, the CASA defences are strong – and they have been dodging ‘official’ bullets for a long, long while now. When a thing like the Forsyth report is passed off as ‘an opinion’ it is time for some serious accounting. I believe the results of that accounting will shock even the well informed RAT committee; as it has many ‘independent’ public figures.  

That the management of ‘matters aeronautical’ can be left in the hands of a deeply flawed operation, like the CASA will, soon or late, become a matter of national interest. The ramifications of prevarication will tarnish any government which had many an opportunity to act in the public interest, but failed to do so.

Selah.

[Peetwo]

Comardy capers...Part ?- A repeat..

Possibly in abject futility, here is an exercise that IMO clearly highlights the bizarre dichotomy between the reality of aviation safety in the Australian aviation industry, versus the detached unreality and self-serving obfuscation of our aviation safety bureaucracy...

First from PT, via the CASA meets the Press thread: 

Rogue pilot revelations show CASA tolerated his activities for years
Ben Sandilands Jan 26, 2017

Details of the rogue pilot police operation reflect very poorly on air safety regulator CASA

CASA has given information to the Townsville Bulletin about the rogue bush pilot Josh Hoch which confirms its utter contempt for the safety of the flying public and its inability to effectively regulate air safety in Australia.

A Queensland police investigation has this week led to Hoch being charged on 342 counts concerning 14 alleged offences involving among other matters the claimed sabotaging of aircraft flown by rival general aviation or small regional operations out of Mt Isa airport.

Two of the aircraft Hoch allegedly tampered with by putting plastic beads and other contaminants into their fuel talks had crash landed without loss of life.

Three aircraft are alleged to have been interfered with, risking potential loss of life, on four separate occasions by Hoch in 2016 alone.

Hoch has also been reportedly charged over several alleged cases of insurance fraud involving aircraft.

However in the Townsville Bulletin story, a CASA spokesperson confirms that the safety regulator knew about claims about Hoch’s activities since 2013, and had worked closely with the police investigation since last October.

What happened in relation to Hoch’s activities between 2013, or possibly ever further back, and a very large police operation toward the end of last year, has yet to be laid out for public scrutiny.

But Plane Talking has a copy of a CASA document showing that Hoch and his company didn’t receive a charter approval and air operator certificate until December 8 last year, by which time the safety regulator on its own admission had participated in the police inquiries for two months.

If as this implies Hoch’s operations were unlicensed and unapproved by CASA for all or part of the time they were taking place up until December 8 last year the safety regulator is in obvious and quite possibly criminally negligent breaches of a number of acts.

How CASA could claim to have conducted a satisfactory audit of Hoch’s operations given the brief published by Queensland police and extensively reported in the Townsville Bulletin is a vitally important question.

CASA is on its record an organisation totally indifferent to the blood on its hands from recent blatant failures to carry out it duties. It doesn’t recognise its guilt or its incompetence, and it has made fools of the aviation ministers responsible for its activities for at least as far back as the Seaview disaster of 1994.

The safety regulator also knew of the lethal potential of the operation and principal operative of Transair long before it flew a small turboprop into a hillside when attempting to land at Lockhart River in 2005, killing all 15 people on board.

CASA failed to act on the unfavourable results of an audit of the operations of the Pel-Air fleet of Westwind corporate jets before one of them ditched in stormy seas off Norfolk Island in 2009. It subsequently attempted to suppress that audit with the co-operation of the ATSB, the accident investigator, but was found out by a highly critical all party Senate committee hearing into what remains an unfinished saga. The ATSB was forced to withdraw its first accident report into the Pel-Air crash, which was a shamefully inadequate investigation, and its new inquiry, which was supposed to report more than a year ago, is understood to have run into a number of ‘difficulties’.

The actions of CASA in relation to a pilot who may have been unlicensed for the purposes of his operations for a prolonged period of activity during which police allege he could have killed the occupants of planes which he had sabotaged require very close scrutiny by the Minister for Infrastructure, Darren Chester.

Not scrutiny passed off to his discredited civil servants who have apparently talked nonsense to him since he took up the portfolio last year.  Real scrutiny, by the Minister, of the performance of what many see as a rogue organisation that has a culture of tolerating known unsafe operations.

Will the Hoch scandal be a turning point in the restoration of effective air safety regulation in Australia, or is it just another ‘nothing-to-see-here-media-beatup’ along a pathway to future catastrophe?

Then consider the latest missive from Acting CASA DAS Wingnut Comardy:

From acting Director of Aviation Safety and CEO, Shane Carmody

It seems every year in aviation is packed with issues to grapple with and challenges to meet and 2017 looks no different. For CASA the ongoing challenges are to strike the appropriate balance in our regulatory work, be clear and consistent, understand the impact of our decisions and be willing to consider alternative ways to achieve required safety outcomes. A lot of work continues within CASA to embed our regulatory philosophy in all aspects of our operations and decision making. This philosophy underpins all aspects of CASA’s work – making and implementing regulations, working with individuals and operators, developing safety education and support and communicating with the aviation community. I have made it very clear to everyone in CASA, not just operational staff, that the regulatory philosophy must drive everything we do.

I am pleased CASA has recently delivered on two ongoing commitments, with the release of the medical certification discussion paper in December and the first steps taken to conduct an independent review of the new fatigue rules. Both matters have been contentious, with a wide range of views expressed by people and organisations. The medical certification discussion paper covers a lot of territory. I thank the many people who have already commented and I encourage as many people as possible to read the paper and have their say. CASA will look dispassionately at the submissions and undertake an open process in determining what changes may be appropriate. We have gone to tender for the conduct of the fatigue review and will look to have the selection process finalised by March 2017 and a report delivered in the second half of the year. Finally on 2 February 2017 another longstanding initiative will have reached a milestone, with the implementation of the automatic dependent surveillance - broadcast mandate, a major improvement to Australia’s aviation safety system.

Best wishes

Shane Carmody

 
Q/ In light of the historically referenced post from Planetalking, what it is the 1st descriptive word that comes into your head when you read Wingnut's missive  ...
(Shh..don't say it out loud you might embarrass the miniscule 4D.. )
MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

Mt Isa airport is also a security controlled airport so I wonder what OTS are thinking about what has occurred at the hands of this fruitcake Josh Cock?

And from Big Ears missive;

"CASA will look dispassionately at the submissions and undertake an open process in determining what changes may be appropriate".

Ha ha, yeah right, sure they will. There is as much chance of that as there is of NFI Chester knowing the front end of a plane from the back end!

[Peetwo]

Fort Fumble under siege on CAO 48.1 -  

Slight change of tack but more evidence that the shambolic, duplicitous regulator is sliding into a completely dysfunctional rabble...

First there was this from Wingnut in the latest CASA bollocks missive:

..I am pleased CASA has recently delivered on two ongoing commitments, with the release of the medical certification discussion paper in December and the first steps taken to conduct an independent review of the new fatigue rules....

...We have gone to tender for the conduct of the fatigue review and will look to have the selection process finalised by March 2017 and a report delivered in the second half of the year...

---

& in more detail:

First step in fatigue rules review


In October 2016, CASA and its Board decided an independent review would be conducted of the latest fatigue rules for air operators and pilots. These rules are in Civil Aviation Order 48.1 Instrument 2013. In January 2017, CASA issued a tender to engage the services of a suitably qualified independent specialist, or team of specialists, to undertake the fatigue review. This independent review will provide CASA with an informed basis on which to finalise reform of the fatigue rules. The review has four objectives - determining if the new rules are necessary, evaluating the research and evidence used in developing the rules, evaluating how research and evidence takes into account the Australian operating environment and evaluating the extent to which the latest fatigue rules are consistent with the principles in CASA’s regulatory philosophy and the directive about the development of new regulations. The review will consider a range of issues including the standards and recommended practices of the International Civil Aviation Organization, along with the current and proposed fatigue rules of the European Aviation Safety Agency, New Zealand, the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Other issues to be considered include the results of investigations into fatigue related accidents and incidents and the approach to fatigue regulation by other transport regulators. The terms of reference were approved by the CASA Board.

Visit the fatigue review web page on the CASA website.

 
Next from Joseph Wheeler in the Oz:

Taxpayers foot bill for CASA
12:00amJOSEPH WHEELER
Taxpayers should not pay for CASA’s lack of self-confidence on fatigue laws.

Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for CASA’s lack of self-confidence on fatigue laws.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s fatigue rules regulating pilots, CAO 48.1, were a welcome initiative aimed at improving safety in aviation.

On these pages last year, I described the fact that certain elements of the fatigue laws were less than ideal, because they allowed some subtle and not so subtle pressures on pilots to work when not necessarily safe. That issue aside, overall the rules were a positive step, and professional pilots eagerly awaited their protections.

But three months after the new rules were unveiled, CASA announced it would not only extend the transition period for the new rules by a further year, but that it would conduct an independent review into the entire set of rules.

Given that the industry had been consulted on the rules since before 2013, why would CASA need to delay this safety measure by adding a further review to an already delayed implementation schedule?

It seems that the move to fatigue management principles — a move backed by the international air safety regulator ICAO — is still considered controversial in some corners of the Australian aviation industry.

A delay would be justified only if operators required the extra time and education to better understand the principles, incorporate them into operations manuals, or prepare new fatigue risk management systems.

But some quarters would argue the commercial cost of implementing a risk-based system accounts for a measure of the criticism, and indirectly led to the delay and impending review. The delays also seem to show a lack of faith by CASA in its own efforts on getting the rules made, or at very least a disturbing hesitance to stand by its finished product in the face of criticism.

To confound matters more, the selection process for an expert to conduct the independent review is now going to add to the uncertainty.

On January 9, CASA tendered for specialists to undertake the review. Does the unexpected expense to taxpayers that comes with reviewing this largely uncontroversial set of safety rules warrant that rule set being examined by the highest bidder? When it comes to pilots’ duty times, being “within the maximum” doesn’t always mean “safe”, and never has. But in the context of pilot fatigue mitigation measures, even getting close to the limits of existing prescriptive duty time rules can result in tragedy. This is why the new fatigue rules in CAO 48.1 must be implemented: so we can move to the modern and science-based principles that fall under the umbrella of FRMS.

Perhaps I am being too cynical and CASA is simply trying to get the regulatory mix right. That is an admirable goal. But in the face of limited resources, the swath of reviews being undertaken by CASA on topics as far ranging as medical certification processes to drones, would suggest that perhaps CASA ought to listen less, and assertively direct more.

Attaining perfection in law is impossible, but getting an outcome and moving forward is always possible if agencies like CASA demonstrate faith in the processes they have employed and stop the second guessing.

---

And finally the CAO 48.1 clusterf**k creates another bad look for 4D on the rising tide of "A"-Word issues..

CASA delays new rules
12:00amPAUL CLEARY

Transport Minister Darren Chester says lobbying by airlines has led CASA to delay and review pilot fatigue rules.

‘Profit before safety’ claim as CASA delays new rules

Transport Minister Darren Chester has confirmed that lobbying by regional airlines, among other stakeholders, has led CASA to delay and review the proposed rules for pilot fatigue management.

The comment has reinforced concerns among pilots that CASA’s delay in implementing the new rules means that the regime may be “derailed”, and that regional operators may be putting “profit ahead of safety”.

But regional operators contend that there is no evidence of fatigue problems in their sector and they welcomed the review.

This week, CASA announced the terms of reference for the expert review in the pilot fatigue rule known as CAO 48.1 Instrument. CASA has launched an open tender process to conduct the review, which is to be completed by September this year.

Mr Chester, a Nationals MP from Gippsland in regional Victoria, confirmed that the government had received numerous representations against all or part of the proposed rules.

“Several stakeholder groups, including regional airlines, general aviation and pilot unions, have lobbied against all or part of new rules. CASA has agreed to delay and review the rules to ensure they are appropriate and effective across all sectors of the commercial aviation industry,” a spokesman for the minister said.

The terms of reference ask the review panel to look at fatigue rules and practices in Europe, New Zealand, the US, Britain and Canada.

The Australian and International Pilots Association, which mainly represents pilots with the major carriers, says Australia is ahead of other countries on introducing this regime, but it is fearful that the policy agenda has been hijacked.

Shane Loney, a Qantas A380 pilot and director of safety and technical at AIPA, said the second delay in introducing the fatigue rules seemed ominous.

“The original instrument was announced in 2013 and it’s been delayed twice now,” he said.

“The last time was ostensibly for this review. It’s been going on for a long time.

“The problem appears to be ­elements within industry who have taken a long time to put effort into the strategic management systems and what 48.1 would require. They’ve come to the conclusion it will cost them money meaning they may be putting profit ahead of safety.

“It is very clear to us this is all about putting costs a long way ahead of safety. As pilots we see safety as very important. We know there’s been plenty of pressure on CASA over a period of time.”

Mike Higgins, the chief executive of the Regional Aviation ­Association of Australia, said there was “no evidence of any ­fatigue that is unmitigated by the safety management systems of the regional operators”.

The RAAA had made four freedom-of-information requests to CASA on this issue and had not found any evidence that there was a fatigue problem.

Mr Higgins said he “really ­appreciated” the role of the CASA board in announcing the review, along with the acting CASA chief executive Shane Carmody and the minister.

However, Mr Loney said AIPA was also concerned about the time frame for the review, which may not give the panel time to come to a reasonable conclusion. “We are concerned that ... the tenderer may be an individual rather than ‘a team of suitably qualified specialists’,” Mr Loney said.

“The most considered and therefore accurate review is likely to come from a team rather than individual approach. There’s plenty of science to support the need for change. CASA has to make sure those chosen are qualified and experienced. There’s not a lot of time for these people to go through all the things CASA has specified. There’s not a lot of time to deliver a full, reasoned review.”

 

MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

More to the point; QF and VA have sooked about the new fatigue requirements as it means that they will have to cut some pilot hours and rosters and add additional manpower to cover the gaps. We all know the airlines like to flog their pilots to the point of failure, to save money and costs. And CAsA has bent over for the airline executives as it always does.

CAsA all about safety? Bollocks. CAsA is all about appeasing big business and keeping the Minister looking Squeeky clean.

Safety, what safety?

Tick Tock

[Peetwo]

Comardy style consultation; or shambolic cluster-duck??

WTD is wing-nut Comardy and his dwindling Fort Fumble executive team playing at...

Today CAAP 166-1 dealing with ops in the vicinity of non-controlled/OCTA aerodromes was updated:

CAAP 166-01

Description: Operations in the vicinity of non-controlled aerodromes, aerodromes

Download 166-1.pdf (879.55 KB)

Date modified: 27/04/2017

     
Oz Flying points out why the timing of the release of this CAAP update is quite bizarre and have the CASA cynics crying foul...

Australia has hundreds of airfields that are not marked on aeronautical charts. (Steve Hitchen)

New CAAP retains Area VHF Advice
27 April 2017

A new Civil Aviation Advisory Publication (CAAP) on operations at non-controlled aerodromes has retained the advice that pilots should broadcast on the area frequency rather than Multicom 126.7 if the airfield is not marked on charts, even though the issue is still subject to consultation through a CASA discussion paper.

CASA released CAAP 166-1 Operations in the Vicinty of Non-controlled Aerodromes yesterday, but the frequency issue is the subject of DP1610AS, which has a submission deadline of 28 April'

Retaining the area VHF advice in the CAAP and releasing it ahead of the DP1610AS deadline has led some in the aviation community to question if CASA has already decided without taking industry feedback into account.

According to the status table in the CAAP, the April 2017 revision was all about a radio requirement rather than the appropriate frequency.

"There was only a minor amendment to the CAAP adding some explanation around when an aerodrome operator can require use of radio at their airport. It was already stated in the diagram but it needed some explanatory text.

"A definition of MULTICOM was added because the term is used in the CAAP."

So far, CASA has not been able to answer why the CAAP was bought out before the frequency was settled, which may require another version to be released within months.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...x4VMLQT.99

UDB? Nah pretty normal really...

next..

Latest Comardy missive - true or false?

Also today I note the latest CASA briefing was released:

Current issue - April 2017

I also note that the latest weasel worded confection from the Ag DAS/CEO Comardy includes one word which would seem to indicate an admission that the veracity of his statement was indeed false...

Copied verbatim from the FF website:

From acting CEO and Director of Aviation Safety Shane Carmody

The Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Darren Chester, has issued a new Statement of Expectations to the CASA Board. This is an important document that sets out the strategic directions the Government expects CASA to head in between now and mid-2019. It also sets out how CASA is meant to perform its functions. As a notice provided under the Civil Aviation Act, the Minister’s Statement of Expectations guides the CASA Board’s strategic deliberations and decision making. CASA’s next Corporate Plan will reflect the strategic directions in the Statement. The Minister has made it clear that CASA’s regulatory activity should be pragmatic, practical and proportional. Mr Chester has said a pragmatic, practical and proportional approach to regulatory activity is intended to help support aviation growth, particularly in the general aviation sector. It is important to understand the Statement of Expectations builds on the work CASA has been undertaking in recent years to lift our performance in a range of key areas. These include CASA’s approach to safety regulation, the development of new regulations and stakeholder engagement. The Statement of Expectations also reinforces CASA’s commitment to our Regulatory Philosophy. Of course it should not be forgotten that the Statement of Expectations makes it clear CASA will continue to ensure the highest priority is given to aviation safety. - Oh yes Shane we can't forget CASA need to justify their existence by ducking behind the Act and the consequential mystique of aviation safety - FDS...

The Minister also recently announced the appointment of Ms Cheryl Cartwright to the CASA Board. I welcome Cheryl’s appointment as she will add more diversity of experience to the Board and lift the gender balance close to 50 per cent, which is great for our organisation. Cheryl has a background in government relations, strategic planning and communications. This appointment is consistent with CASA’s governing legislation, which stresses the importance of an appropriate balance of professional expertise on the Board to complement the aviation experience of current Board members.

Best wishes

Shane Carmody

false - Yep Shane the BRB vote overwhelmingly that your above weasel-worded confection is indeed FALSE -  

 


MTF...P2

[Kharon]

Whimsy? Most certainly M’luds’.

Always enjoy Macbeth; not too often though, it is indeed more lifelike than Hamlet; even the three witches can be found in their covens about the place. The bloodshed can be paralleled to modern times, deceit, betrayal, madness. Quite a tale; strange and wonderful, well worthy of consideration. And so, the lights dim, the curtain swirls and begins it’s rise: Act 1, scene 1 begins, the play progresses.

Act 1, scene 7 arrives:-

Macbeth: We will proceed no further in this business.
He hath honored me of late, and I have bought
Golden opinions from all sorts of people,
Which would be worn now in their newest gloss,
Not cast aside so soon.

Lady Macbeth:     Was the hope drunk
Wherein you dressed yourself? Hath it slept since?
And wakes it now, to look so green and pale
At what it did so freely? From this time
Such I account thy love. Art thou afeard
To be the same in thine own act and valor
As thou art in desire? Wouldst thou have that
Which thou esteem’st the ornament of life,
And live a coward in thine own esteem,
Letting “I dare not” wait upon “I would, ”
Like the poor cat i' th' adage?

Shakespeare understood the true nature of the world and the ambitions which drive irredeemable acts; those of betrayal, deceit, cowardice, avarice, corruption and power. He also understood the true nature those who seek, for whatever the true motive, to conceal their deeds and yet be held honourable. Smiling behind the mask at those foolish enough to honour them.

In a nook by the stable chimney, there is a very, very old bottle containing a wonderful liquid, equally as old. It is rarely troubled and slumbers quietly in it’s quiet dark place. I believe I shall awaken it, steal a small amount and sit quietly in the workshop doorway, have a last smoke and watch the sky and river; accompanied by the dogs and the evening air, redolent with the smell of fresh, clean timber for company; just for a while.

Selah.

[Peetwo]

Comardy/Boyd to KC - "Up yours mate!"


Reference post via Mount NCN thread:

 KC & AMROBA on ASRR R21 & R22.

Somewhat related I note that KC put out a paper that confronts the lack of progress on ASRR R21 & R22, while putting forward a suggested model that embraces the concepts and principles of an ICAO civil aviation system organisational structure:

---

---

---

       

I note that in Oz Flying today, Hitch draws attention to the fact that Boyd and presumably the majority of the board, including Comardy, have categorically rejected COO and ASRR recommendations 21 & 22... : 

CASA says it can deliver better value from a more agile approach rather than establishing small regional offices. (CASA)

CASA rejects Regional Offices Recommendation
12 May 2017

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has said that it won't establish small regional offices as recommended in the Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR).

Recommendation 22 of the ASRR stated that CASA should consider establishing small offices at specific industry centres to "improve monitoring, service quality, communications and collaborative relationships."

In its response to the ASRR, the Federal Government noted the recommendation, but did not agree with it, referring it to CASA instead.

"CASA has been reviewing the value of small regional offices," a CASA spokesperson told Australian Flying. "We are aware that industry wants CASA to be efficient and consistent in the delivery of our regulatory services and that these services are provided without increased costs.

"We believe we can deliver a better outcome for less cost. This includes adopting a risk based approach rather than increasing our office footprint. 

"We are exploring adopting a more agile approach where we will deploy staff short term to work with industry wherever they are required on an operational and safety needs basis."

The government ASRR response linked the recommendation to Recommendation 21, which suggested that CASA needed to change its structure to a "client-oriented output model", something that CASA says it has done through establishing the Stakeholder Engagement Group and the Industry Relations Branch within that group, and the Client Services Centre within the Sustainability Group.

However, the regulator has not at this stage ruled out establishing a general aviation unit under any future re-structure, a concept raised by the government response and not included in the original ASRR recommendation.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...VSMR8JR.99

  
So once again our unelected, self-serving aviation safety bureaucracy goes against the wishes of the industry, the Alphabets and indeed their 'elected' political masters err Muppets...

Yet another example of where CASA obfuscate their responsibility of truly addressing the industry 'trust' issues that were highlighted in many of the recommendations in the ASRR...

Remember the weasel worded regulatory philosophy - https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/standar...philosophy - but then we are still yet to see the deletion of former DAS McComic signed Enforcement Manual foreword, that contains his 'black letter' embuggerance dispensation:     

Embuggerance according to Carmody..Oliver..err McComic

Without prejudice; (or even a dog in the fight).

P2 – “Interesting that Comardy is sitting in the position of the decision maker?

It is to hoped that the position ‘decision maker’ (Hoods old job) is vacant; if so, it will one of the very best decisions Carmody ever made; if not ‘the’ best.

P2 – “Will this now be SOP for all 'show cause' enforcement actions or has Carmody sacked anyone else who can make such decisions?”

Dunno mate; but for Carmody’s sake, lets hope he is not basing his decisions on the ‘Enforcement manual’; unless of course he has signed it and now owns it as his very own. I wonder how a serious legal challenge would fare against any ‘action’ taken against a person based on that dreadful ‘McConvict’ drafted section. I reckon that would be ‘interesting’.

Seventeen days after the crash, CASA acting chief executive Shane Carmody wrote to Mr Rhoades to say his air operator’s certificate was suspended immediately because, as chief pilot and business owner, he had allowed flying that “contributes to or results in a serious and imminent risk to air safety”.

All a bit too ‘subjective’ for my taste. I’d expect most reading here have operated in ‘turbulent’ conditions, most have probably operated passenger flights in aircraft without a cockpit door; done ‘joy flights’ and ‘scenic flights’ or even back in the day, ‘commuter’ flights. How would you like a beer in the fridge for every time you’d heard a passenger ‘scream’ or similar when you hit the bumpy bits; or when you level off and come back to cruise power, or ‘crank it over a bit’ so folk can see what they came to see? It is, IMO perfectly understandable that folk are ‘nervous’ when confronted with a tiny, one engine aircraft, a stranger for a pilot and all ‘crammed’ into the small area allotted. The noises (engine and airflow) all perfectly acceptable to the ‘pilot’ heighten sensitivity, and any ‘abrupt’ change of ‘state’ increases the tension level. It is a fair bet that at least one of three passengers in a C172 just did not want to be there anyway. In defence of this pilot, it would be reasonable to argue that unless one of the passengers was an accredited pilot, capable of ‘judging’ the manner in which the flight was handled; then hearsay evidence from passengers is not only worthless, but prejudicial. If this fellah has been ‘acting the goat’; then by all means, string him up, after proof beyond reasonable is accepted by the court.  

"The flight, including the wail of the stall warning horn, is recorded in a video taken by a passenger and recovered by police."

These Qld CASA chaps do seem to like their ‘video’ evidence; the Quadrio matter is not forgotten and there may be a line of defence in those ‘images’ and recordings of ‘passengers squealing’.

Mr Carmody wrote that the video showed Mr Woodall flying at 150-200 feet; risky, because if something went wrong such as engine failure, “he would have only minimal altitude, and therefore (minimal) time, to safely manage the upset”.

Precautionary search? Seems like a very ‘safe’ precaution to landing ‘on the beach’. I would say that not to do so was certainly a risk. The procedure should be cast in stone in the company operations manual; that would be mandatory. Accepted or ‘approved’ by CASA is academic as CASA approve the Air Operators Certificate and by extension – the operations as writ. Had this fellah not done a PS and had an event on the ‘strip’ then crucifixion would be in order. Again the intent to be unsafe can be discredited, a saving of an additional five or perhaps six minutes operating costs could be avoided by ‘skipping’ the PS. So it comes back to just what is ‘unsafe’ and who is making the judgement.

Mr Carmody criticised what he called “aerobatic manoeuvres”, saying the recording “includes an audible ‘squeal’ from a passenger at the beginning of the abrupt pitch inputs”. The CASA chief said Mr Woodall should have kept up his airspeed after the engine failed, not risked a stall by banking hard, and landed on water if necessary. He alleged the plane’s fuel supply might have been contaminated by debris.

Try to define ‘aerobatic’ in this context. Provided the aircraft was not operated outside of the specified envelope, then a steep turn, or whatever is quite legal. A badly executed ‘manoeuvre’ may demonstrate a lack of skill and/or judgement; but can it be considered ‘dangerous’ without the benefit of a 'G' meter record? It is all very well to say Mr Woodall ‘should’ have done this or that after the event, indeed most pilots who have been involved in any sort of ‘event’ can recount exactly what they ‘should’ have done; and would do, if it ever happens again. I wonder if CASA ever mandated a training requirement, specific to that beach area, dedicated to establishing ‘best practice’ in the event of an engine failure, at low level on the go-around after the precautionary search? If not why not, surely that would be ‘proper’ oversight of the safety of the operations approved by CASA.

Perhaps this was a cowboy operation; perhaps not. But consider all the evidence, before pronouncing a sentence.

When we teach someone to fly – what is the noise heard during the flare and touch down? What is the purpose of that noise? Is it absolutely safe to slow the aircraft down to stall warning speed? What does the pilot have at his ready disposal to maintain the speed at which the warning occurs?

Nope, no quarrel with CASA shutting down a rogue, non at all; provided they have got all the ducks lined up and back ‘em up with proof, beyond reasonable doubt; and, perhaps adjust their thinking toward ‘prevention’ rather than prosecution.

My two bob for its worth.

Toot toot.

Ps Embuggerance manual tracking update: Download preface.pdf

It would appear that J Mac is still the real DAS/CEO at Aviation House - UDB!

"..plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.."  - Alphonse Karr


MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Comardy/Boyd to KC - "Up yours mate!"


Reference post via Mount NCN thread:

 KC & AMROBA on ASRR R21 & R22.

Somewhat related I note that KC put out a paper that confronts the lack of progress on ASRR R21 & R22, while putting forward a suggested model that embraces the concepts and principles of an ICAO civil aviation system organisational structure:

---

---

---

       

I note that in Oz Flying today, Hitch draws attention to the fact that Boyd and presumably the majority of the board, including Comardy, have categorically rejected COO and ASRR recommendations 21 & 22... : 

CASA says it can deliver better value from a more agile approach rather than establishing small regional offices. (CASA)

CASA rejects Regional Offices Recommendation
12 May 2017

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has said that it won't establish small regional offices as recommended in the Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR).

Recommendation 22 of the ASRR stated that CASA should consider establishing small offices at specific industry centres to "improve monitoring, service quality, communications and collaborative relationships."

In its response to the ASRR, the Federal Government noted the recommendation, but did not agree with it, referring it to CASA instead.

"CASA has been reviewing the value of small regional offices," a CASA spokesperson told Australian Flying. "We are aware that industry wants CASA to be efficient and consistent in the delivery of our regulatory services and that these services are provided without increased costs.

"We believe we can deliver a better outcome for less cost. This includes adopting a risk based approach rather than increasing our office footprint. 

"We are exploring adopting a more agile approach where we will deploy staff short term to work with industry wherever they are required on an operational and safety needs basis."

The government ASRR response linked the recommendation to Recommendation 21, which suggested that CASA needed to change its structure to a "client-oriented output model", something that CASA says it has done through establishing the Stakeholder Engagement Group and the Industry Relations Branch within that group, and the Client Services Centre within the Sustainability Group.

However, the regulator has not at this stage ruled out establishing a general aviation unit under any future re-structure, a concept raised by the government response and not included in the original ASRR recommendation.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...VSMR8JR.99

  
So once again our unelected, self-serving aviation safety bureaucracy goes against the wishes of the industry, the Alphabets and indeed their 'elected' political masters err Muppets...

Yet another example of where CASA obfuscate their responsibility of truly addressing the industry 'trust' issues that were highlighted in many of the recommendations in the ASRR...

Remember the weasel worded regulatory philosophy - https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/standar...philosophy - but then we are still yet to see the deletion of former DAS McComic signed Enforcement Manual foreword, that contains his 'black letter' embuggerance dispensation:     

Embuggerance according to Carmody..Oliver..err McComic

Ps Embuggerance manual tracking update: Download preface.pdf

It would appear that J Mac is still the real DAS/CEO at Aviation House - UDB!

"..plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.."  - Alphonse Karr


MTF...P2

Ps Additional comment from Hitch in this week's LMH...

...This week I decided to chase up a largely forgotten recommendation from 2014's Forsyth Report. Recommendation 22 has been left to sleep in the corner as the party went on around it; I suspect because it wasn't actually agreed to in the government response. It calls on CASA to establish smaller offices in regional centres to help improve levels of efficiency and the relationship with the aviation community. Personally, I didn't identify this as being a recommendation central to the recovery of general aviation, but it would have gone a long way toward getting CASA out of the ivory towers and into the bricks and mortar of the streets. CASA has now rejected the recommendation, saying in summary that the idea is not cost-effective. That may be true from their point of view, but burying themselves deep in the labyrinths of capital cities to oversee an industry that exists largely on airports (rarely situated in capital city labyrinths) isolates them from the very industry they are trying to be a part of. CASA has promised to be more agile and flexible instead, but given the traditional inertia of government bureaucracies, the reality is that the industry is likely to end up with neither. Good thing that recommendation wasn't agreed to.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...Y42aP1q.99