Hmmm!
Just an aside really; but the way 'K' has hinted at the very real truth, and placed a very serious issue in a nutshell, typifies the 'untold' but very true ways CASA operatives can and do set about the business of 'destruction'.
I would like to have the skill to frame a question of the CASA – but it goes along these lines. Take Bruce Rhodes (RIP) case – the very first thing done is the operating certificate is 'pulled'. The operation is closed, individuals are hounded – without a positive 'safety' result of any value being achieved, despite the cost of such a thing in terms of loss of revenue, jobs, service or even a realistic approach to 'resolving' or rectifying any 'safety' issues which should have been identified – before the accident. Shutting down an operator or the 'senior' men (and women) has never; not once provided an 'increase' in safety. Not once.
The easy option is to 'shut down' an operator. "There minister – a quick, neat, surgical safety resolution: now; ain't we just bloody marvellous? "
What the Senate committee ain't seeing; because no one is showing 'em is the 'dark side' of CASA's version of safety. “Oh – you have a 'technical' breech of the regulations – BANG – no more breech.
The notion that 'operational safety' depends on 'strict compliance' with a set of rules that not even Rumpole of the Bailey could decipher is not only ducking risible, but shows a complete lack of any understanding of just how 'industry' itself sets about providing 'safety'.
For an understandable example – take Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT). It happens; now Flight Safety (USA) and the FAA developed and provided, free of charge; a 'risk matrix' which defined whether or not a flight was at an increased 'risk' level of a CFIT occurring. Maybe a 'blunt instrument but, it did highlight 'where' and 'when' the risk of CFIT was a possibility. I have only read through two operational manuals where this assessment was built into the operational approval matrix. In one instance, the CASA demanded it be removed; in the other CASA failed to assess the matrix; so it escaped execution – exists still to this day and have served the very humble purpose for which it was designed. A safety 'risk' analysis which indicated a 'higher' risk level. Flight crew alerted and aware of an increased 'risk' level.
The Bozo's running CASA 'safety' analysis have only a vague inclination that such a free of charge, adjunct to 'operational' risk analysis exists.
If
this sitting committee of the Senate are not prepared to look 'under' the blanket of bull-pooh spread over the industry, by the industry 'safety' experts; then there is little point in providing a submission to their inquiry. It is way beyond the time when a CASA 'safety' call can be considered anything else than Frog's pooh. Should the RRAT want to ensure 'public safety' – then it is to industry they must look. Anything else is pure Bollocks – repeated; nauseam, ad tedium ad nullius pretii est. Of little value whatsoever.
The Southerly change has kicked in (hallelujah) ; temperature now acceptable. I have but four cigars in my case; one for 'the Lad', a stroll in the night air and a quiet appreciation of the respect both Possum and Dog have for each other; then more Ale. BRB on Wednesday night – then, we shall see what must be done; can be done and what effect it may, or may not have on the current proceedings of a Senate Committee with a mid range batting average. 4:1 (break even money the place) on the current tote board.
![[Image: offices-meetings-businesses-mocking-deri...30_low.jpg]](https://lowres.cartooncollections.com/offices-meetings-businesses-mocking-derision-office-CX301130_low.jpg)
Just an aside really; but the way 'K' has hinted at the very real truth, and placed a very serious issue in a nutshell, typifies the 'untold' but very true ways CASA operatives can and do set about the business of 'destruction'.
I would like to have the skill to frame a question of the CASA – but it goes along these lines. Take Bruce Rhodes (RIP) case – the very first thing done is the operating certificate is 'pulled'. The operation is closed, individuals are hounded – without a positive 'safety' result of any value being achieved, despite the cost of such a thing in terms of loss of revenue, jobs, service or even a realistic approach to 'resolving' or rectifying any 'safety' issues which should have been identified – before the accident. Shutting down an operator or the 'senior' men (and women) has never; not once provided an 'increase' in safety. Not once.
The easy option is to 'shut down' an operator. "There minister – a quick, neat, surgical safety resolution: now; ain't we just bloody marvellous? "
What the Senate committee ain't seeing; because no one is showing 'em is the 'dark side' of CASA's version of safety. “Oh – you have a 'technical' breech of the regulations – BANG – no more breech.
The notion that 'operational safety' depends on 'strict compliance' with a set of rules that not even Rumpole of the Bailey could decipher is not only ducking risible, but shows a complete lack of any understanding of just how 'industry' itself sets about providing 'safety'.
For an understandable example – take Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT). It happens; now Flight Safety (USA) and the FAA developed and provided, free of charge; a 'risk matrix' which defined whether or not a flight was at an increased 'risk' level of a CFIT occurring. Maybe a 'blunt instrument but, it did highlight 'where' and 'when' the risk of CFIT was a possibility. I have only read through two operational manuals where this assessment was built into the operational approval matrix. In one instance, the CASA demanded it be removed; in the other CASA failed to assess the matrix; so it escaped execution – exists still to this day and have served the very humble purpose for which it was designed. A safety 'risk' analysis which indicated a 'higher' risk level. Flight crew alerted and aware of an increased 'risk' level.
The Bozo's running CASA 'safety' analysis have only a vague inclination that such a free of charge, adjunct to 'operational' risk analysis exists.
If
this sitting committee of the Senate are not prepared to look 'under' the blanket of bull-pooh spread over the industry, by the industry 'safety' experts; then there is little point in providing a submission to their inquiry. It is way beyond the time when a CASA 'safety' call can be considered anything else than Frog's pooh. Should the RRAT want to ensure 'public safety' – then it is to industry they must look. Anything else is pure Bollocks – repeated; nauseam, ad tedium ad nullius pretii est. Of little value whatsoever. The Southerly change has kicked in (hallelujah) ; temperature now acceptable. I have but four cigars in my case; one for 'the Lad', a stroll in the night air and a quiet appreciation of the respect both Possum and Dog have for each other; then more Ale. BRB on Wednesday night – then, we shall see what must be done; can be done and what effect it may, or may not have on the current proceedings of a Senate Committee with a mid range batting average. 4:1 (break even money the place) on the current tote board.