In the Rear view mirror.
A wise man once said to me “don't look in the rear view mirror - you ain't going that way.” True enough and it has stood the test of time as 'sound' advice; however. I was scratching around for a piece of ancient history in Aunt Pru's now extensive library, the research took me quite a long way back; and, (as you do) my attention to 'search' was diverted to other morsels. It became a retrospective reading session, rather than a 'search for the requested/ required data. Quite a three candle night. I should get to the point about now.
Bear with me here for a while, it is difficult to frame the discussion 'properly' and relates to 'criminal' application in aviation matters. There is a notion that 'intent' matters in law, the link – HERE – explains it simply.
“Thus, a person commits a criminal act with intent when that person's conscious objective or purpose is to engage in the act which the law forbids or to bring about an unlawful result. Motive, on the other hand, is the reason why a person chooses to engage in criminal conduct”.
A retrospective dive into several CASA prosecutions leaves many unanswered questions – mostly preceded with the words -”Why?”. It is IMO a fair question and a rider to that question is “what did it achieve?” In the whole wide world, laws are written in good faith and with a specific purpose; but not one of those have prevented those with 'intent' from acting. Death penalty for murder has not brought down the number of killings. That could be applied to most serious crimes, from the most heinous to even shop lifting. Before I get lost in the topic, best I get to the point.
“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough. —Albert Einstein”
The stark differences between the 'official' responses to the Croc Egg fiasco and the Middle Beach event started this ramble. The 'intent' being the focus. It could be argued that the Croc boys knowingly and willingly flaunted the limits of 'legal' operations as per the script; high risk operation stand alone, deliberately, arguably amplified through deviance becoming normalised.
The Middle Beach event is a different matter entirely. These were 'joy-flights' A simple enough exercise, usually gifted to the most junior pilot to assist with 'experience' and hour building; not terribly demanding. There was no 'intent' to do anything else other than show the punters a good time, enjoy the day out and head home for a beer and dinner. An engine failed – why? Well that Sir, is a vexed question. The ATSB could not determine the reason; there is one, but that seems to have been 'lost' from the prosecution case. The aircraft 'crashed' (for wont of better word) – and a fatality occurred. The pilot is on trial facing criminal charges; but where was the 'intent'? An engine quit at possibly the worst time and place (Murphy's law) the experienced pilot made a judgment call within seconds of that and managed to save all but one.
I fail to understand why CASA go after the low hanging fruit; not when there are some serious cases blithely ignored. For example, the ATR with the busted tail plane – potentially lethal to a lot of innocent passengers paying for a commercial service. Of the pilot who 'bust' the tail plane - no mention, let alone prosecution; the following crews who failed to notice the tail out of true; the engineers who failed to note the back end was 'pissed'. Not even a hint of a hand slap.
Oh, there's many more examples – but any close examination of CASA 'prosecutions' over the last decade leaves many, many questions unanswered. Not, mind you that they ever will be even asked, let alone answered. No good taking it to the politicians – that is a simple waste of your time on this planet. The 'media'? – don't make me laugh.
Sandy - “Nothing new and no one is looking at the real cause which is government lacking resolve to tackle the real question which is that the independent regulator is a failure and CASA should be disbanded. The Westminster system cannot work without responsible Ministers and their Departments having the arms of government firmly in their power and grasp”.
No, we are stuck with a skewed system; if I ever get the time and the inclination in the same day; perhaps a list of prosecutions, the why and the wherefore, could be presented. Not that it would do any good; not against 'the system' it hasn't got a prayer. Enough – my coffee is stone cold; perhaps I can finesse another in DT's lair.
Toot- toot..
A wise man once said to me “don't look in the rear view mirror - you ain't going that way.” True enough and it has stood the test of time as 'sound' advice; however. I was scratching around for a piece of ancient history in Aunt Pru's now extensive library, the research took me quite a long way back; and, (as you do) my attention to 'search' was diverted to other morsels. It became a retrospective reading session, rather than a 'search for the requested/ required data. Quite a three candle night. I should get to the point about now.
Bear with me here for a while, it is difficult to frame the discussion 'properly' and relates to 'criminal' application in aviation matters. There is a notion that 'intent' matters in law, the link – HERE – explains it simply.
“Thus, a person commits a criminal act with intent when that person's conscious objective or purpose is to engage in the act which the law forbids or to bring about an unlawful result. Motive, on the other hand, is the reason why a person chooses to engage in criminal conduct”.
A retrospective dive into several CASA prosecutions leaves many unanswered questions – mostly preceded with the words -”Why?”. It is IMO a fair question and a rider to that question is “what did it achieve?” In the whole wide world, laws are written in good faith and with a specific purpose; but not one of those have prevented those with 'intent' from acting. Death penalty for murder has not brought down the number of killings. That could be applied to most serious crimes, from the most heinous to even shop lifting. Before I get lost in the topic, best I get to the point.
“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough. —Albert Einstein”
The stark differences between the 'official' responses to the Croc Egg fiasco and the Middle Beach event started this ramble. The 'intent' being the focus. It could be argued that the Croc boys knowingly and willingly flaunted the limits of 'legal' operations as per the script; high risk operation stand alone, deliberately, arguably amplified through deviance becoming normalised.
The Middle Beach event is a different matter entirely. These were 'joy-flights' A simple enough exercise, usually gifted to the most junior pilot to assist with 'experience' and hour building; not terribly demanding. There was no 'intent' to do anything else other than show the punters a good time, enjoy the day out and head home for a beer and dinner. An engine failed – why? Well that Sir, is a vexed question. The ATSB could not determine the reason; there is one, but that seems to have been 'lost' from the prosecution case. The aircraft 'crashed' (for wont of better word) – and a fatality occurred. The pilot is on trial facing criminal charges; but where was the 'intent'? An engine quit at possibly the worst time and place (Murphy's law) the experienced pilot made a judgment call within seconds of that and managed to save all but one.
I fail to understand why CASA go after the low hanging fruit; not when there are some serious cases blithely ignored. For example, the ATR with the busted tail plane – potentially lethal to a lot of innocent passengers paying for a commercial service. Of the pilot who 'bust' the tail plane - no mention, let alone prosecution; the following crews who failed to notice the tail out of true; the engineers who failed to note the back end was 'pissed'. Not even a hint of a hand slap.
Oh, there's many more examples – but any close examination of CASA 'prosecutions' over the last decade leaves many, many questions unanswered. Not, mind you that they ever will be even asked, let alone answered. No good taking it to the politicians – that is a simple waste of your time on this planet. The 'media'? – don't make me laugh.
Sandy - “Nothing new and no one is looking at the real cause which is government lacking resolve to tackle the real question which is that the independent regulator is a failure and CASA should be disbanded. The Westminster system cannot work without responsible Ministers and their Departments having the arms of government firmly in their power and grasp”.
No, we are stuck with a skewed system; if I ever get the time and the inclination in the same day; perhaps a list of prosecutions, the why and the wherefore, could be presented. Not that it would do any good; not against 'the system' it hasn't got a prayer. Enough – my coffee is stone cold; perhaps I can finesse another in DT's lair.
Toot- toot..