(02-15-2016, 05:00 AM)kharon Wrote: In post 282; I was intrigued by the stark differences between the CASA and AMSA approach to answering questions...
...The VARA exemption could have been totally justified by truth and fact. It was not; instead we have the national director becoming an embarrassment to professional industry. Watch from about the three minute mark as ignorance, folly and a natural aversion to even consider speaking the truth turn into frustration and anger. That segment, professionally managed should have provided Glen Sterle (legend) with satisfactory answers and raised his estimate of CASA. Alas, they failed to impress, yet again, dismally.
The trouble with spin-n-bulldust when you have NFI -
Totally agree "K" the difference in the professionalism & clarity of factually backed answers, by AMSA, versus the CASA default setting (which obviously continues under Skidmore) of deliberately obfuscating all their answers with spin & bollocks is quite remarkable.
The trouble for CASA is that the Senators are right onto this, perhaps best highlighted by Sterle's pea & pod example...
"..We have this every time with CASA, I tell you. You know the pea? You know when you just move those pots around? We should just get rid of the pots. Does anyone know? How do you know what happens? Dr Aleck, you have been around a long time..."
We also had it happen earlier in the session with new-comer to the committee Senator O'Sullivan, fortunately he to was right onto the attempted subterfuge through bollocks :
Quote:..Mr Skidmore : We have participated in a tear-down of an engine with the three modifications, and that was at roughly 900 flight hours.Then there was Senator 'Wacka' Williams realisation that he & his constituents had also been misled by the smooth talking charlatan DAS Skidmore:
Dr Aleck : The standard calls for 200 hours. The test would be effective if it operated for 200 hours. This aircraft had 900, so that was quite impressive.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: The engine had.
Dr Aleck : Sorry, the engine had.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: During a meeting on 14 November were you advised that there had been design developments that had been made to the Jabiru engine over recent years? You were made aware of that?
Dr Aleck : That there had been design developments to the engine over the years—yes, certainly. We were aware—
Senator O'SULLIVAN: And they submitted to you that they felt they had resolved some of these critical issues that you had used to place these limitations on them? Did they make that submission to you?
Dr Aleck : They suggested that was so. I think the—
Senator O'SULLIVAN: Thank you for that. What evaluation have you now done on the enhanced engines to see whether their performance is better, and up to an acceptable standard, versus the old engines? Gentlemen, this company is on the verge of tipping over and this has been a long-running saga. I do not have time because, obviously, we have to restrict our time amongst ourselves. If any of the facts that are being presented to me are correct in relation to how CASA has dealt with this company—how long it has taken and the manner in which the consultations occurred—then there is a problem: a serious problem. I will not have time to deal with it today, but maybe we can have a quiet audience for me to go through some of these issues with you; otherwise I will be asking my colleagues to join me to have an inquiry to have a look at how you have dealt with this.
Dr Aleck : Certainly happy to have a discussion.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: All right, I will be in touch.
Quote:Senator WILLIAMS: Mr Skidmore, at last estimates we were talking about the cost of the SIDs compliance program:
The evidence we have or the investigation that we did led to an indication that the SIDS compliance or initial test result of investigations were in the order of $15,000 to $20,000 but then, depending on that, would determine the work that needs to be done and the cost involved in that.
So, you are talking $15,000 to $20,000, okay?
Mr Skidmore : It depends on the aircraft. It depends on who is doing the maintenance, but that was the rough indication.
Senator WILLIAMS: Okay, that is what you said:
The evidence we have or the investigation… were in the order of $15,000 to $20,000, …
But then repairs if necessary.
I have a friend who has a 1972 310Q Cessna with about 5,000 hours. He received three quotes to make his SIDs compliant. All three quotes were within $5,000 of each other and the lowest quote was for $60,000. It is now parked up. It does not fly and, as you said in Armidale—I really appreciated you coming to Armidale that day—you want to see people flying. He is now parked up because three quotes were all within $5,000 of each other and the cheapest was $60,000.
CHAIR: Is it a 172?
Senator WILLIAMS: Sorry?
CHAIR: Is it a 172?
...Senator WILLIAMS: No, a 310. When you were saying at last estimates about $15,000 to $20,000, where can he get them for $15,000 to $20,000?
Mr Skidmore : It depends on the model of the aircraft. You wanted a rough sort of number with regard to the average. We have models going from the 100 series to the 200 series, and from the 300 to the 400 series. So it could vary throughout those series. I apologise if it sounds like we got it horribly wrong, but it might have been the case of a 100 series being roughly around $3,000 to $5,000, or $10,000, and anywhere up to the $60,000.
Senator WILLIAMS: That is where he is at—$60,000; hence it is parked in the shed. The value of these planes deteriorates something terrible. You received a letter from Mr Charles Koebel, from Walcha, who says:
Last year I was at Lake Hood in Alaska where there are about 600+ float planes. On walking around the lake I asked quite a few Cessna owners about SIDS. Not one of them had even heard of it.
Mr Skidmore : The FAA operates under a different regulatory system to ours...
- that is about the most honest fact stated by OST throughout the whole session
..The Cessna SIDS was put out as an airworthiness limitation. It was necessary under our schedule of maintenance to implement—
Senator WILLIAMS: By CASA?
Mr Skidmore : In accordance with our regulations.
Senator WILLIAMS: So CASA has introduced SIDS?
Mr Skidmore : No, Cessna has introduced the SIDS program.
Senator WILLIAMS: He says in this letter they have never heard of it over there. Do we know of any catastrophes in Australia because of the condition of these Cessnas—their frame, or the reason the SIDS program has to be carried out? Have we had any fall out of the sky?
Mr Skidmore : The only one I can refer to is an ATSB investigation on a Cessna 208, I think—I would have to get the details—where there was a structural failure of the elevator. That was not in flight—luckily it was found on the ground.
Senator WILLIAMS: This bloke has his plane parked in a rust free area, in Armidale—it is a long way to the coast and salt water. Vehicles do not rust there, or very little, and yet we are getting all these planes grounded. Of course if they go to sell their plane they cannot get any money for it because it has to have a SIDS inspection—time is up.
Mr Skidmore : It was a program put in place by Cessna. I have seen their limitation, I have seen the actual documentation that says it is a mandatory inspection. In accordance with our legislation we have to implement that.
CHAIR: It is called buyer beware.
Senator WILLIAMS: It is the end of second-hand Cessnas in Australia, by the sound of that.
Different dog barking but Leopard & spots comes to mind when it comes to CASA & its Iron Ring...
MTF..P2