[Peetwo]

Su_Spence WALOB?? - 

(Bucket will be required - )

TB said:

If Auntie Pru is not giddy by now I have no doubt that by the time she's read the latest email confection from mother goose Spence her head will be spinning like a top. I tried to copy it to this forum without success, beyond my feeble IT skills.
Where's P2 when you need him. WARNING: Make sure you have a bucket handy when you read it.

Sorry mate a bit slow on the uptake, as it seems I am no longer on the mailing list?? It would also seem that the Su_Spence weasel worded Xmas missive is not available for general consumption and/or it is just totally impenetrable on the new CASA website??

However I have now tracked down a web version of the seriously intellectually insulting Su_Spence WALOB..

 

[

Thank you and what's in store for 2022

As 2021 slips behind us, I am writing to you to both say thank you for your ongoing focus on safety and also to outline important initiatives in the pipeline for the year ahead. CASA has quietly begun working on a wide range of reforms that will benefit many people and organisations across the aviation community, particularly in the general aviation sector. These align with the commitments made by the Australian Government today in their Aviation Recovery Framework. You will see concrete outcomes in the course of 2022 and beyond.

Your COVID achievements

Firstly, I would like to pay tribute to everyone in the Australian aviation community for the way you have managed the pressures and challenges imposed by the COVID pandemic. Many people lost work or had hours cut, many businesses were shut during lockdowns and restrictions meant even flying for fun was curtailed. CASA did as much as we could to ease regulatory burdens through a special package of measures and I hope this did indeed help many people. We'll continue to review and adjust as we have been and as issues arise.

Despite the challenges posed by COVID we have all continued our strong commitment to maintaining safety. Everyone in aviation should feel proud that we've continued to operate safely. This is aviation at its best - responding to a fresh challenge, identifying risks and professionally managing those risks for the best possible safety outcomes.

Regulatory change

This last year saw the introduction of the new flight operations suite and the new fatigue requirements amongst other changes that have literally been decades in the making. These have modernised, consolidated and improved key safety obligations for just about everyone in the industry. We know regulatory change places additional workload on many people and organisations and we have been doing our best to keep these demands to a minimum. I want to personally thank everyone who has been devoting time and resources to the transition to these regulations and rules and assure you we will continue to provide support and guidance as the transition phases are completed.

Many of the significant safety improvements to come from these new regulations are still ahead of us - whether it's checking and training or safety management systems. While we have deferred the requirements for these, they are the things that will make a difference to our safety record and to safety culture. Please consider transitioning to those earlier if you can, being mindful of the safety benefits that they bring. I also want to assure you that these reforms signal the start of continuing efforts by CASA to reduce unnecessary industry burdens while improving safety If any issues arise, I encourage you to reach out to us to discuss.

What's next

As we look ahead to 2022, there are reforms in train that are focused on delivering tangible benefits on addressing longstanding issues raised with us by the GA community. Work is underway to make regulatory changes that will assist private pilots, general aviation maintenance, maintenance training, flying training, aerial work, aerial application and sport and recreational flying. We are developing a general aviation work plan for 2022 and this body of work will build a consolidated picture of all the activity we already have underway. We're also continuing to look at what improvements and changes we need to make that will benefit other sectors in the industry.

The aim is to cut through regulatory red tape as much as is possible while not jeopardising appropriate and necessary safety standards. We need change to get the balance right between the regulations that are required to deliver the safety outcomes expected by the Australian public, without imposing unfair burdens on day-to-day operations.

Key initiatives include:

• Reducing maintenance costs for industry: to support private and aerial work operators we are considering the mandatory applicability of the Cessna SIDs program, introducing new general aviation maintenance regulations and considering new rules for aircraft maintenance
  
• Supporting flight training: we are looking at how we expand privileges for some flight instructors to improve flight testing, revisiting how we administer the Flight Examiner Rating, and looking at how we can work with industry to prioritise other initiatives
  
• Supporting regional and remote areas: we are looking at ways to improve access to training and reviewing the fatigue rules for aerial application operators
  
• Encouraging growth of the sector: we are considering a new small aircraft maintenance licence to address training limitations impacting the GA sector, putting in place a weight increase for aircraft administered by Recreation Aviation Australia, reviewing the associated stall speed and reviewing aviation medical standards for private operations (including a potential 'self-declared' medical).
  

Safe festive season

The year past has been fraught with difficulties and while we may not be totally out of the COVID 'woods' yet, I think we can look ahead with optimism. I can assure you CASA will be working in 2022 to make meaningful reforms that protect our hard-won reputation for world-leading aviation safety, while striving to ease the regulatory and red tape burden. Can I wish you and your family all the best for the festive season and I hope you have a safe and productive 2022.


All the best
Pip

Pip Spence
Chief Executive Officer/ Director of Aviation Safety

Other than being a work of bureaucratic comedic relief in the lead up to Xmas, I am simply staggered that Su_Spence has the temerity to front up with this unbelievable weasel worded work of fiction (ie. WALOB)? Especially after her last performance in the McDolittle GA inquiry - here's a reminder:

Ref:GA Inquiry witnesses rating - From Gold Star (chocfrog) to WOFTAM??  & Angel Flight submission back up unaltered??

       
UDB??  Time for Su_Spence to walk the plank me thinks...


MTF...P2 

[Wombat]

Every one of those action items is so qualified as to be utterly meaningless.

“The aim is to cut through regulatory red tape as much as is possible while not jeopardising appropriate and necessary safety standards. We need change to get the balance right between the regulations that are required to deliver the safety outcomes expected by the Australian public, without imposing unfair burdens on day-to-day operations.”

The rest? Considering, prioritizing, reviewing everything else presumably to make it appropriate, proportionate and impactful on the General Aviation space. Rubbish!

Ms. Spence, I know you mean well but you are building on sand. Until the Act is rewritten you are wasting your time because the lawyers hamstring each and every initiative, leaving you with the impression you have succeeded while delivering nothing of any value.

Here’s a hint; compare the marine and aviation Acts. Notice anything? Look at the duties of the regulators; AMSA (?) and CASA. The Marine Act specifies these as”‘AMSA must issue provided that… ….”. The Aviation Act: “CASA must not issue unless it is satisfied that..”.You must have been taught that the latter form is a direct and open invitation to official corruption.

Look at how the Marine Act spells out the requirements for certificates and ratings in black and white while CASA hides behind “appropriate, sufficient” and of course “acceptable”. Coupled with “must not” this is an impassable road block to common sense.

Look at how the duties of Captains, staff etc. in the Marine Act are spelled out and qualified by the word “reasonable” wherever there is room for interpretation. CASAS DICTIONARY DOES NOT CONTAIN THE WORD “REASONABLE”!

And finally look how the use of “Strict Liability” is limited to only the most serious offences in the Marine Act instead of being sprayed around like graffiti by the Aviation Vandals of CASA that now work for you.

Merry Christmas and good luck for 2022.

[Sandy Reith]

Where to start?

Wombat certainly has set the tone and pointed to where rational rules serve in the marine area, good information. We know that other aviation countries are doing way better than ourselves where, like the USA, there’s a reasonable environment for General Aviation to exist and prosper.

Apart from meaning well, and many good reforms intentioned, as usual, Ms. Spence’s ‘tea and sympathy’ offering has to be the most extraordinarily hedged piece of bureaucratised Can’tberra speak I’ve ever had to read.

This part says it all:-

“I also want to assure you that these reforms signal the start of continuing efforts by CASA ..”

So the continuing efforts have been started? What was that date please?

It’s all so ridiculous and would be April Fool’s laughable if this wasn’t coming from a senior government official receiving in excess of $600,000 per annum.

This is all a real shame, that Ms. Spence is lacking control of her remit was starkly shown during the Senate RRAT hearings when her underlings threw her under the bus as she floundered around under the withering fire from Angel Flight’s Marjorie Pagani. I’ve never seen the like before, it’s all there on UTube. Look at that and wonder if she has been wounded beyond saving. She obviously had not been briefed, or taken the trouble herself, to understand the excruciating details of CASA’s punishment of AF. Similarly she’s not had the will to look into the Glen Buckley disaster of CASA’s making, instead hand balled this hot potato back to the Ombudsman, again.

Where does this leave us? What hope? Alan Jones and or the like, it’s election time and only political action can hope to make a difference.

[thorn bird]

Its like picking at a scab.

Quote:

"Thank you and what's in store for 2022"

are you thanking us and the Australian Taxpayers for the fact that you and your cohorts have been drawing your hundreds of million in salaries while the industry has been going down the drain. While Industry people have lost their livelihoods, businesses, homes and left destitute, is Ms Spence saying in reality, "We are all right Jack, stuff you".

Very insensitive Ms Spence, but we hope you and your cohorts have a very merry Christmas on US, but please keep in mind there are many hard working people in industry who would be perfectly happy to earn what you pay in tax. To be frank we hope you choke on it.

Quote:

"CASA has quietly begun working on a wide range of reforms that will benefit many people and organisations across the aviation community, particularly in the general aviation sector."

Can Ms Spence PLEASE EXPLAIN anything that CAsA has done in the past thirty years that has benefited anyone in the general aviation community, anything, anything at all? In truth nothing, zip, nada. But in that time CAsA has grown exponentially.

Even worse, can Ms Spence PLEASE EXPLAIN anything CAsA has done in the past thirty years that has improved SAFETY, their prime directive, other than so reduce participation that the loose marbles guy can crow "Yes minister, the number of accidents have declined as a result of our world leading regulation"

Quote:

"CASA did as much as we could to ease regulatory burdens through a special package of measures and I hope this did indeed help many people. We'll continue to review and adjust as we have been and as issues arise."

Ms Spence with due respect, your prime directive is Safety, at any cost. If you magnanimously eased burdens, are you admitting you deliberately reduced safety? If not, then why were these "burdens" there in the first place?

Quote:

"Despite the challenges posed by COVID we have all continued our strong commitment to maintaining safety. Everyone in aviation should feel proud that we've continued to operate safely. This is aviation at its best - responding to a fresh challenge, identifying risks and professionally managing those risks for the best possible safety outcomes."

This is perhaps the most insulting statement ever made by any Mandarin. Ms Spence are you suggesting that the aviation community is NOT committed to safety? Feel Proud???, Madam you are an idiot. Aviation is and will remain the safest form of transport, NOT because of anything you or the halfwits you employ do, but because by and large the Industry manages safety everyday very efficiently, its in their interests, nobody wants an accident, find someone to explain to you why that is so. Hint: its bad for business, ie reputation, ie earning money, ie staying in business. Consider Quaintass, the safest airline in the world, I would say the luckiest airline in the world, but they make tremendous efforts to maintain that image. Incidentally madam, just how much "expertise" you employ to oversee Quaintass" is there anyone in your organisation that could question anything they do? Do they have sufficient political influence and a robust legal department and funds where you wouldn't dare endeavour to oversee them? They don't bother you, you don't bother them, they do their thing, without interference, economy of scale ensures they don't object too much to your corporations impositions, a few bucks on the ticket price to cover your bullshit regulatory impositions is neither here nor there. Not so the general aviation industry.

Quote:

"Many of the significant safety improvements to come from these new regulations are still ahead of us - whether it's checking and training or safety management systems. While we have deferred the requirements for these, they are the things that will make a difference to our safety record and to safety culture. Please consider transitioning to those earlier if you can, being mindful of the safety benefits that they bring. I also want to assure you that these reforms signal the start of continuing efforts by CASA to reduce unnecessary industry burdens while improving safety If any issues arise, I encourage you to reach out to us to discuss."

Can you actually annunciate what safety improvements these new regulations will generate? If they don't, what do you do then?

Can you annunciate and quantify exactly what difference to our safety and safety culture your abysmal new regulations will bring to our abysmal safety record or to our already robust safety culture,(Robust because of industry, nothing you or your cohorts do), other than cost the industry considerable financial penalties with no improvement in your prime directive "Safety"

Quote:

"As we look ahead to 2022, there are reforms in train..."

With due respect there have been reforms in train for over thirty years, what improvements in Safety can you clearly annunciate?

Quote:

Key initiatives include:

"Reducing maintenance costs for industry: to support private and aerial work operators we are considering the mandatory applicability of the Cessna SIDs program, introducing new general aviation maintenance regulations and considering new rules for aircraft maintenance
Supporting flight training: we are looking at how we expand privileges for some flight instructors to improve flight testing, revisiting how we administer the Flight Examiner Rating, and looking at how we can work with industry to prioritise other initiatives
Supporting regional and remote areas: we are looking at ways to improve access to training and reviewing the fatigue rules for aerial application operators
Encouraging growth of the sector: we are considering a new small aircraft maintenance licence to address training limitations impacting the GA sector, putting in place a weight increase for aircraft administered by Recreation Aviation Australia, reviewing the associated stall speed and reviewing aviation medical standards for private operations (including a potential 'self-declared' medical)."

Nearly all these issues have been directly caused by CAsA, now they are suggesting they fix what they have caused by imposing even more regulations?

What did Einstein say was the definition of insanity?

"To continue to do the same thing in the hope of a different result"

Of course there is a very simple answer to all this angst. Simple, easy, quick and logical.

We either continue to squander the resources of the Australian taxpayers to achieve absolutely nothing.
Or we adopt the most proven and safest system in the world, the US FAR's.

[Wombat]

Horror story plot: Third world country decides they know more about aviation that the USA and decides to write a suite of internationally compatible aviation regulations that are better than the U.S. regulations.

....$300 million and thirty years later they are still trying. Meanwhile:

1) The big end of town (Qantas,etc.) ignores CASA and does what Boeing and Airbus tell them.

2) The rag and stick, hang glider and light  sport aircraft crowd sneak out from the party and do their own thing.

3) Poor GA can't escape and is now on life support after having been bled dry.

Choc frog post Wombat.

[Kharon]

I only managed to get this far /.

"Many people lost work or had hours cut, many businesses were shut during lock-downs and restrictions meant even flying for fun was curtailed. CASA did as much as we could to ease regulatory burdens through a special package of measures and I hope this did indeed help many people. We'll continue to review and adjust as we have been and as issues arise."

/ before reaching for the bucket. However, as requested and required, I read through the missive, twice. Once to get a 'feel' for it; second time to read 'through' it. Had a coffee then went back for round three, just to make certain that my reaction to it was as sanguine as possible (considering).

Read 1: P2 nailed it - on an intellectual and professional basis the latest WOLOB from Spence is grossly insulting; and IMO, demands a published apology. It beggars belief that a DAS who was so completely blind sided by her own crew during the last McDolittle pantomime is thick skinned enough to dare publish such a load of deceitful, placatory BOLLOCKS and expect to be believed. The limited political intellect and control of her portfolio and crew on display in the Hansard video demands not only her resignation, but that of all CASA top brass on display. Clearly Spence had NDI that Pagani was about to drop a bombshell; she should have - but even so - a smart, competent DAS could have simply asked for a recess, had a short sharp discussion with those who had caused the embarrassment and then returned later with an offer to fully investigate the apparent contempt of either the Senate or the Court; for clearly there were questions which demand answers. But, no; clearly panicked she forced herself to read the prepared embarrassing statement, digging the hole deeper. Is this the right person to be 'master of matters aeronautical'?

Read 2: Paragraph 1 defines the smoke and mirrors - a confection of half truths and pony-pooh baked in smoke and mirrors. For starters there was very little 'activity' and the work which was being done required no special input from CASA - there was some latitude in medicals but little else of intrinsic or practical value on offer; the fleets were essentially grounded. "Your covid achievements" Bollocks - 'Nuff said.

Read 3: Regulatory change - IMO - at face value, it seems to light a small candle of hope don't it though. It is not; it is just CASA resetting for another decade of easy living while they continue to con-volute, manipulate and expand the massive amount of rubbish within what is arguably the worst rule set on the planet, the most dangerous to operators and aircrew and the greatest incentive to get out of the aviation industry and buy a pub. A simple statement from Spence stating that we will be adopting the gold standard ICAO compliant FAR would have been the best news industry has had in the last thirty odd years. 

But, for me the really disturbing element of the Spence missive is the soft, soppy language used; as if she thinks we are all small children in need of motherhood reassurance. Time someone assured Spence that we are not; someone might also mention that we are neither dopey, gullible or naive and have forgotten more about aviation 'safety' than she will ever know. Resignation and apology would be a great way to kick off the New Year.

Toot - toot.

[Wombat]

Let’s start looking at a solution to this mess.

We need Cabinet to authorize the Minister to overhaul Australian civil aviation regulation starting with a new Aviation Act and concomitant restructure of responsibilities for implementation of said Act.

Comment: This may include changes to CASA responsibilities including but not limited to restructure.

PM & C supervise the recruitment of a high level and small “tiger team “ with the objective to draft a new Act having regard to free market principles, fostering the industry, worlds best practice aviation regulation and Common law best practice.

Comment: Probably no one from the current CASA.

- Legislation written as affirmative (“shall issue” as opposed to “must not issue unless”), plain english based on the various Marine Acts. Removal of “ strict liability” and criminal sanctions for all but the most serious offences and the addition of the test of reasonableness for all offences, most of which will be misdemeanors. Removal of weasel words like acceptable, appropriate, satisfactory, etc to be replaced by hard requirements.

- A requirement to foster industry development.

- A requirement to apply risk management methodology best practice to justify ANY regulation.

- A requirement to synchronize with the US FAR as much as practicable with a view to all Australian qualifications and approvals being internationally accepted. ie: “having regard to…..”

- The requirement to physically and administratively separate regulatory development, surveillance and enforcement.

- the requirement that the ATSB be subject to a separate Act (the ATSB Act) and precluded from making MOU’S with anyone.

- TBA.

The Tiger team to report to the Minister in four weeks with a final draft Act for consideration by Cabinet.

P. S. None of this will happen. An election prevents it. CASA is instead going to implode under the weight of its own regulations, taking a lot of the remaining Australian General Aviation with it and covering the Department and Minister with a thick layer of ordure.

[Sandy Reith]

After thirty three years of the experimental administration of Australia’s aviation, that is removing political oversight, the one major policy change must be to restore Ministerial responsibility and govern through a traditional Department of government.

The illogical, debilitating and continual denigration of politicians has resulted in the promotion of the ‘independent’ regulator, and any number of ‘Ombudsman’ and independent Commisioners.

This barrage of negativity has even some politicians believing the narrative, for example Albo as Minister in 2009 said as he shoved the ATSB out of his Ministry, it should not be subject to politics. Raise your eyes to the heavens, but you’ll find no solace there.

This has occurred in the naive belief that a Can’tberra cohort, unhitched from Ministerial oversight, will selflessly, altruistically and efficiently administer at minimal cost. Seriously?

It’s too bad that slinging off and personal attacks, in place of pointed and rational criticism and a continual, working at it, engagement with our MPs and media people, has become the norm.

While the toxic nature of criticism is very understandable and in some individual cases like that of Glen Buckley, there are certainly instances of justification, but facts are we get the government we deserve.

[Kharon]

The Shell Game.

Wiki has it that the game dates back to at least ancient Greece, even back to Egyptian  times. The reason I mention it maybe due to a large dollop of wishful thinking or one coffee too many - dunno. But maybe, perhaps, possibly it is because in order to keep my shirt (and dignity) I need to study the form before setting the odds on my various Tote boards.

Lately, as you can imagine, the CASA board has given me some serious thinking to do; the background to the new SoE, the shocking revelations of the Angel Flight Estimates session and several 'other' off centre events demand it. The latest head-scratch is detailed - HERE - . Like the SoE the subtle nuances within the report, with the possibility of some heavy duty Mandarin backing provides just a hint of smoke on the breeze, even if its not visible; just hidden between the lines.

I wonder if the 'untouchables' within the iron ring have grasped the notion that they have become involved in a Shell game? It sure looks that way from an outside view. The man at the back of the room could be forgiven for having a small wager at reasonable odds that the CASA elite are on a hiding to nothing. Have a coffee, read though the SSC.DLM, couple that with the SoE (and instructions), Taylor steering, Spence riding strictly to orders, Biskin integrity backed by the DPM, alongside the other bits and pieces floating about and see what you come up with.

For those with Choc frogs to spare - today one choc frog will return four (the win).

Toot - toot...

[Peetwo]

Su_Spence finally acknowledges BJ SOE??

Via the Feb '22 CASA Briefing:

Director of Aviation Safety, Pip Spence

We've all come to expect the unexpected from COVID-19 and the start to 2022 has been no exception.

Once more our resilience is being tested but as indications emerge that the latest wave of Omicron infections may be peaking, at CASA we are focusing on our plans to work with industry on a safe recovery.

It was so good to see so many of you engaging with our flexible approach to transitioning to the flight operations regulations when we hit our critical 2 December milestone.

We also invited you to get ahead of the international curve with our new digital licences and to try out our refreshed website.

The website has improved search and navigation functionality from both mobile devices and desktops, and we have listened to your feedback.

We remain committed to helping you recover from the ravages of the coronavirus epidemic with plans to remove regulatory bottlenecks and assist the general aviation sector to operate efficiently and safely.

This aligns with commitments made by the federal government in its Aviation Recovery Framework which, according to the reports I have read, has been generally well-received by industry.


Initiatives in the framework include a targeted review of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 aimed at resolving regulatory chokepoints, improving consultation, and encouraging risk-based and outcomes-focused industry regulation.

The framework and the Statement of Expectations issued recently to CASA by Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce aim to encourage innovation and the removal of barriers to general aviation export opportunities while building a sustainable pipeline for workforce skills in the future.

New technology will be a key to this expansion and an emerging aviation technology partnerships fund aims to accelerate innovations in areas such as drones and aerial taxis.

I believe these advances will be a boon to the industry and CASA is committed to supporting safe and beneficial change.

On a more immediate note, the recovery framework offers rebates worth more than $30 million to support the installation of safety-enhancing Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) equipment.

The ADS-B scheme covers 50% of the cost of installing ADS-b up to maximum $5000 rebate. This means systems costing up to $10,000 will be installed at half-price while those costing more will attract the $5000 rebate.

All of this is good news in what can seem to be the everlasting grind of the COVID pandemic.

It signals an intent to deliver significant benefits to the aviation industry over the coming years and we are committed to having a meaningful role in in delivering those gains.

I look forward to talking and meeting with more of you as we work together in 2022 and beyond. 

All the best

Pip

Hmm...passing strange the CASA SOE published/link is still not updated on the CASA website?

Our minister

Our minister is the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development. The minister appoints the CASA Board and provides them with a statement of expectations.

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

Mindless musings of a muddled Mummy.

Secret footage from the Gin and Cool Aid fuelled meeting -

[thorn bird]

Round and round and round she goes, where she stops nobody knows.

Words and more words and even more words on top of more words, all meaningless and futile.

All the while we keep being fed mother goose statements by our political elite and our regulator
that they really care about our industry and are working their butts off to head off its final demise,
shrouded in the esoteric prime directive of another word called "Safety".

Is Australia the safest country in the world to commit aviation? Statistics would suggest we are no better
and arguably worse in the safety stakes than other developed countries. One thing is absolutely undeniable,
we are without doubt the most expensive.
Cost is the biggest driver of participation in any undertaking, from the thrill seekers to the hobbyists,
to the commercial entrepreneurs.
There are plenty of things to do out there to satisfy the interests of all of the above to throw their money at than aviation.

From a sheer size comparison the United States has the largest and most successful aviation industry
on the planet, the vast majority of the aircraft we buy, the parts and equipment we need to maintain them, and the technology we need to install to make them even safer.

To me it beggars belief that Australia attempted to go it alone with regulation allegedly modelled on EASA rules, which history shows wiped out their GA industry and did little if anything to improve safety.

The world contributes to ICAO, who produce what are called SARPS to guide regulatory and operational oversight, yet we largely ignore them, so why do we bother to participate, if we are not bothering to follow their advice why are we wasting money contributing to the ICAO?

We never hear mention of US rules other than whispers and avoiding the subject whenever they are brought up, why is CASA so averse to even discussing US FAR's as a template for Australian regulation?

Under the US FAR's safety statistics are equal or better than ours, aligning with them one would imagine, is just plain common sense as New Zealand so successfully did, their regulations now adopted across most of the Pacific.

Aside from the massive cost burden our unique unaligned regulations impose on our industry, the cost of producing them is absolutely staggering. New Zealand reformed their regulation to align with the US FAR's for around five million dollars and it only took a couple of years. Australia has been playing the reform game for over thirty years, spent almost half a billion dollars, achieved little in the way of improved safety outcomes and decimated a whole industry that used to be a healthy and viable contributor to the countries GDP.

Same, same, with airports privatisation, gifted to big banks and property developers to make billions, quietly shuffled to offshore tax havens, resulting in the most expensive airports in the world.

And they call Australia the lucky country, lucky for some, just plain dumb for others.

[P7_TOM]

Ayup - Like the man said:-

Mindless musings of a muddled Mummy.

Secret footage from the Gin and Cool Aid fuelled meeting -

[Kharon]

Is there no end to the dribble and distraction?

When Karma turns to Trumps -

What then? There you are sat on the roof of the homestead - bush fire circling; wind howling; smoke embers and ash to breath and a humble one engine chopper turns up "Hop in" says the bleary eyed pilot. "Oh no, we can't risk out family in an aircraft with just one engine - we are a 'safety' conscious mob; we'll wait for the CASA approved 'safe' rescue".

What then? There's a fire breakout - jumped the containment lines - heading for the township. The fire crew on standby to jump in and cut new breaks - "Sorry boys - the Army have a Blackhawk available (one of 30 odd) but CASA says it is too dangerous for you blokes to fly in it" - sorry too much." Fire 1 - Village 0.

When cyclone Tracy paid a visit to Darwin - suddenly it seems if its good enough to fly troops into battle; its OK for the civilians to crowd on - HERE -.

There are no gold plated guarantees in this life; non - never was; nor likely to be.


“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.”

[thorn bird]

For sure K,

I recall many, many years ago, sitting on the ground at Launceston Airport Aeroclub waiting for passengers. Word came through that an aircraft had ditched off Wilsons promentary and the pilot was in the water waving at a Folker circling overhead. the water was extremely cold, life expectancy limited in that environment. I was operating a piper Navajo, I had a life raft on board as part of our companies requirement for overwater flights. I called the SAR people to advise I was twenty minutes away and capable of dropping a life raft to the pilot in the water.

The rub was this particular chieftain in our fleet did not have a "supplement" in its flight manual to operate with the rear door removed to facilitate the dropping of the raft, all other Navajo's in our fleet had that supplement.

The sar people advised without that supplement I could not "legally" do the drop.

Haunts me to this day, I almost decided stuff it and went anyway, but I had a business to protect, and employees to consider.

[Peetwo]

Dear Senator McDonald...L&Ks WJR

Via the AP email chains:

Dear Senator McDonald,

I watched the whole CASA performance, particularly , in my opinion, the obfuscating rubbish talked by Monahan. I feel sorry for the CASA CEO, whom I have known since she joined the Commonwealth Public Service.

The CASA evidence was largely hogwash.

In 1998, the way the CASR rules were put in place, firefighters travelling in a Restricted Cat (CASR 21) aircraft were NOT PASSENGERS.

They were classified as "informed participants", just as persons having a "warbirds" flight are NOT travelling as passengers, but informed participants.

A "passenger" is somebody travelling as a passenger in an aircraft operating under a Charter or RPT (to use old but well understood terminology) AOC covering the carriage of said passengers.

An informed participant is a person over 18 who has been briefed in advance of the fact that the aircraft involved does not meet civil Certificate of Airworthiness standards, and is still prepared to voluntarily travel on the Blackhawk or whatever.

Monahan was further talking bulldust about FAA rules, firefighters and similar do travel in Restricted Cat. aircraft, we established the same operational result here by a different and far more simple legal route -- namely, the concept of an "informed participant".

This situation has been entirely created by CASA, by insisting firefighters are "passengers".

In short, the reformed regulations put in place by the Howard Government, under Ministers John Sharp and Mark Vaile in 1997-1998, (the policy doc. was "Soaring into Tomorrow) enable the use of ex-military aircraft for a wide range of purposes.

Including carrying firefighters in then ex-US army UH-1 helos, Hueys.

CASA and the manufacturers hated the idea, of course buying a Huey for $1.00 from the US Army, instead of fundamentally the same aircraft, but with a civil Certificate of Airworthiness, from Bell for (then) $4.5m was not popular with Bell.

Bottom line --- the present situation has been deliberately created by CASA knowingly subverting Cth. Government policy.

The immediate solution, enforce Liberal/National policy as reflected in CASR 21 and related legislative documents in 1998, and fire any CASA person who tries to prevent same.

And brook no confected legal obfuscation from CASA.

Yours sincerely,

William J Hamilton, FRAeS, MAIAA.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Su_Spence gilds the lily on Part 149?? 

Referencing the latest Su_Spence spin and bollocks, Hitch came out with this summary...

CASA addresses Part 149

2 March 2022

CASA Director of Aviation Safety and CEO Pip Spence has encouraged Approved Self-administering Aviation Organisations (ASAO) to complete the transition to CASR Part 149 approval by the beginning of December.

Speaking in the Mar 2022 CASA Briefing newsletter published today, Spence said that she had attended a conference of the Air Sport Australia Confederation (ASAC) last week and urged ASAOs to get the transition done before a fee waiver cuts out.
Industry concerns surround the implementation of CASRs Part 103 – Sport and Recreational Aircraft, Part 105 – Parachuting from Aircraft and Part 131 – Balloons and Hot Air Airships.

"We listened to the concerns that were raised and made sure that these sectors would continue operating as normal while we worked with the technical working groups to address any issues," she said. "There are several reasons why I am strongly urging ASAOs to complete the transition to part 149 by the extended fee-waiver deadline of December this year.

"We are committed to making the transition to Part 149 comprehensible and workable, and I encourage ASAOs to engage with our sports aviation team.

Spence said that CASA acknowledged the valuable role of ASAOs in Australian aviation, and that Part 149 would change the relationship between CASA and ASAOs.

"Until now, the regulatory relationship has generally been between CASA, a pilot, and an aircraft. "The role of most ASAOs has been to administer an operations manual that is approved by CASA, but they have not held a certificate that authorises and recognises the good work that they do.

"Part 149 can be compared in some ways to seeking ISO 9001 certification for quality management assurance or a kind of governance certification that helps directors and boards with their accountabilities.

"It is a move to better manage governance and risk as well as to provide assurance that essential processes and procedures are standardised and consistent across ASAOs."

Spence said that Part 149 would also increase flexibility to permit ASAOs to make minor changes to manuals and expositions, and add the certainty and protection that comes with holding a CASA authorisation.

She also noted that the freedom that comes with Part 149 approval carried with it some new responsibilities for ASAOs.

The Part 149 transition fee waiver ends on 2 December 2022.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Su_Spence gilds the lily on Part 149?? - Part II 

Referencing the latest Su_Spence spin and bollocks, Hitch came out with this summary...

CASA addresses Part 149

2 March 2022

CASA Director of Aviation Safety and CEO Pip Spence has encouraged Approved Self-administering Aviation Organisations (ASAO) to complete the transition to CASR Part 149 approval by the beginning of December.

Speaking in the Mar 2022 CASA Briefing newsletter published today, Spence said that she had attended a conference of the Air Sport Australia Confederation (ASAC) last week and urged ASAOs to get the transition done before a fee waiver cuts out.
Industry concerns surround the implementation of CASRs Part 103 – Sport and Recreational Aircraft, Part 105 – Parachuting from Aircraft and Part 131 – Balloons and Hot Air Airships.

"We listened to the concerns that were raised and made sure that these sectors would continue operating as normal while we worked with the technical working groups to address any issues," she said. "There are several reasons why I am strongly urging ASAOs to complete the transition to part 149 by the extended fee-waiver deadline of December this year.

"We are committed to making the transition to Part 149 comprehensible and workable, and I encourage ASAOs to engage with our sports aviation team.

Spence said that CASA acknowledged the valuable role of ASAOs in Australian aviation, and that Part 149 would change the relationship between CASA and ASAOs.

"Until now, the regulatory relationship has generally been between CASA, a pilot, and an aircraft. "The role of most ASAOs has been to administer an operations manual that is approved by CASA, but they have not held a certificate that authorises and recognises the good work that they do.

"Part 149 can be compared in some ways to seeking ISO 9001 certification for quality management assurance or a kind of governance certification that helps directors and boards with their accountabilities.

"It is a move to better manage governance and risk as well as to provide assurance that essential processes and procedures are standardised and consistent across ASAOs."

Spence said that Part 149 would also increase flexibility to permit ASAOs to make minor changes to manuals and expositions, and add the certainty and protection that comes with holding a CASA authorisation.

She also noted that the freedom that comes with Part 149 approval carried with it some new responsibilities for ASAOs.

The Part 149 transition fee waiver ends on 2 December 2022.

Plus from this week's LMH: 

CASR Part 149, which is the legislation that enables approved self-administering aviation organisations (ASAO) to exists with a CASA approval rather than a operate under a litany of exemptions, has proven itself to be very contentious within the GA community. There is still a weight of opinion that believes CASA should take back administration of everything that flies, which means death for organisations like RAAus, the Gliding Federation of Australia and your friendly neighbourhood skydivers. CASA is not of that opinion; they effectively invented the ASAO idea and is pursuing it vigorously as CEO Pip Spence revealed during the week. One of the reasons why CASA is pushing the ASAOs to get Part 149 is to make life easier for CASA. Internal sources have regularly told me that CASA wouldn't have the ability to deal with recreational aviation with the flexibility it needs to grow and flourish. If CASA was to take it all back, they'd apply the usual heavy-handedness with which they traditionally have dealt with GA. So what they are saying is the ASAO concept–be it under Part 149 or ongoing exemptions–is the only way recreational aviation can flourish. Could it be that the lack of an ASAO is one of the reasons why GA is not flourishing? That's probably a cheeky thought, but one worth airing on a Friday.

Ahh...yes the old Duck 149, majority rejected by the GA Alphabets in 2019, brought out for an attempted snow job by the current incumbent and incompetent million dollar DAS Su_Spence...  

From the AP archives, via Youtube:

References: REX set to embarrass the miniscule [/font][/color]https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread... & Duck 149 a catalyst perhaps? https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread...

---

Reference: https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=116&pid=10438#pid10438


Anyone visiting their social media accounts over the past week will have seen a considerable body of discussion and debate all focused on Part 149 Self-Administration and the impact it will have on our general aviation industry.


Whilst there are a range of opinions being offered, including some misguided personal attacks and insults, it is clear that aircraft owners and pilots have been afforded little to no information by CASA and are rightly concerned for where their industry is headed if forced to transition to a full user-pay Part 149 self-administration.


From my perspective, I honestly do not understand why any sector of our industry would desire Part 149, which simply duplicates the costs of aviation regulation, creating dual-standards that will only serve to add complexity, confusion and ultimately higher costs to the end user.


What industry needs right now is genuine reform, simplification and unification – not segregation via privatisation and certainly not the empowerment of self-interest.


During the past 20 years of CASA’s management of our aviation industry we have all watched on as they have slowly divided us into competing interest groups, and today we now have multiple pilot training and licensing standards, multiple aircraft registration standards, multiple medical standards and a host of other dual-standards that have nothing to do with safety, but instead on how much money you are paying to whom.


Never has Australia’s aviation ecosystem been so disjointed and unworkable than it is today.


CASA have fostered the rise of powerful self-interest which in turn has lobbied for regulatory disparity, arguing a right to maintain advantages, that have corrupted the integrity and impartiality of the regulator and its core function of safety.


No better example can be found than the issue of recreational and private pilot medicals, where CASA have entangled themselves in questionable approvals that benefit some self-administrations, permitting their pilots to fly powered aircraft in Australian airspace on a self-certification medical certificate.


Yet, in the same breath, CASA have outright refused to provide the same privileges to recreational and private pilots under their direct management and regulatory responsibility, citing safety concerns.  A decision that CASA is thoroughly unable to justify or adequately explain to either government or industry.


Where’s the Minister for Transport on all of this?  Either in absentia or conveniently looking the other direction, hoping no one notices him.


Now CASA is seeking to reinforce the segregations and disparity by establishing Part 149 Self Administrations for each sector within our aviation industry, creating powerful monopolies that will own our access to aviation.


Think about that… a Part 149 Self-Administration for model aircraft, one for uav/drones, one for ballooning, one for parachuting, one for gliding, one for rotorcraft, one for recreational, one for sport experimental, one for warbirds and maybe even one for private general aviation.

The possibilities for Part 149, according to CASA, are apparently endless and so will be the bill that aircraft owners and pilots will have to pay to participate.  Just assume that the average annual membership fee to each is $300 – that’s $3,000 per annum just to be a member.

Nowhere in the world would this Part 149 madness be accepted or allowed – and CASA knows this.

Our aviation industry, and the broader Australian public, are already funding CASA to the tune of approximately $300 million per-annum, so why should we pay a second time around?

Importantly, what can’t we do today under the government managed regulatory framework, that under Part 149 Self Administration we suddenly could, that it would justify forever surrendering ourselves to a never-ending world of increasing membership fees, costs and charges?

The answer is that there is nothing to justify a transition to Part 149, but CASA already know that.  Incredibly, so does the industry associations who are right now beating down CASA’s door to become their first approved legislated co-regulators.

CASA is fully aware and cognisant of the fact that Part 149 will create powerful sector monopolies that will drive up the cost of access to aviation, and they simply do not care.  Part 149 is not about industry, it’s about CASA and their desire to offload their costs and liability.

Simply, CASA is helping themselves at our expense.

To drive the transition to Part 149 CASA has now communicated a 2021 deadline, whereby they will withdraw all existing regulatory exemptions that permit the various sport and recreational aviation sectors to exist.

As of this week, six of the industry’s nine sport aviation bodies have expressed significant concerns with Part 149, lamenting that what CASA has delivered is unworkable.

Staggeringly, the actual stakeholders, that is aircraft owners and pilots – have been kept in the dark as to the full impact and scope of Part 149.  If you ask the average aircraft owner or pilot to explain what Part 149 is and how industry will benefit, don’t be shocked by the vague stare and silence that you receive in return.  it’s deafening.

Despite this fact, CASA continues to argue that they have adequately consulted with industry and have relied on the respective industry associations to inform and educate those impacted by the introduction of Part 149, which is a clear conflict of interest.

In fact, in last year’s Senate RRAT inquiry into Dual Medical Standards, CASA defiantly argued that AOPA Australia and others had given them a full endorsement of Part 149, only to be pulled up by the Senators who recognised their misrepresentation of the facts.  Several days later, CASA sought to withdraw their claims, confirming that no such endorsement was ever given and that they had attempted to front a meeting attendance sheet as a signed endorsement agreement.

Over the past five years CASA has invested the majority of their ‘consultative resources’ courting and cajoling industry associations, offering them the opportunity to guarantee their futures and incomes by becoming an approved Part 149 Self-Administering Organisation, a virtual CASA Pty Ltd.  As an approved Part 149, they become responsible for doing CASA’s job, accepting all the liability and risk, and most importantly, they sanctioned by the regulator to demand whatever fees and charges necessary from their customers for access to their respective sectors – pay for play.

Everything that is wrong with CASA is personified in its development and delivery of Part 149, is has been laid bare for all to see.

It is a clear demonstration of the corruption of the regulators integrity, highlighting the powerful forces within CASA that are conspiring against the freedoms and success of our general aviation industry.

In broad daylight, CASA have breached the trust of those they regulate and have abused their powers so manifestly in manipulating the introduction of regulations, that clearly are instrument of privatisation that seek to gift material financial gain to private business, at the cost and to the detriment of the rights of Australians to hold an aviation medical, a pilot license and aircraft registration.

Just as we now look back at the destruction caused by airport privatisation on our general aviation industry, we too will look back in the years to come at the moment in time that saw Part 149 introduced with great shame and deep regret.

The only winners will be CASA and the businesses who will own your rights, and for everyone else we will simply have empty pockets

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Su_Spence gilds the lily on Part 149?? - Part II  

Referencing the latest Su_Spence spin and bollocks, Hitch came out with this summary...

CASA addresses Part 149

2 March 2022

CASA Director of Aviation Safety and CEO Pip Spence has encouraged Approved Self-administering Aviation Organisations (ASAO) to complete the transition to CASR Part 149 approval by the beginning of December.

Speaking in the Mar 2022 CASA Briefing newsletter published today, Spence said that she had attended a conference of the Air Sport Australia Confederation (ASAC) last week and urged ASAOs to get the transition done before a fee waiver cuts out.
Industry concerns surround the implementation of CASRs Part 103 – Sport and Recreational Aircraft, Part 105 – Parachuting from Aircraft and Part 131 – Balloons and Hot Air Airships.

"We listened to the concerns that were raised and made sure that these sectors would continue operating as normal while we worked with the technical working groups to address any issues," she said. "There are several reasons why I am strongly urging ASAOs to complete the transition to part 149 by the extended fee-waiver deadline of December this year.

"We are committed to making the transition to Part 149 comprehensible and workable, and I encourage ASAOs to engage with our sports aviation team.

Spence said that CASA acknowledged the valuable role of ASAOs in Australian aviation, and that Part 149 would change the relationship between CASA and ASAOs.

"Until now, the regulatory relationship has generally been between CASA, a pilot, and an aircraft. "The role of most ASAOs has been to administer an operations manual that is approved by CASA, but they have not held a certificate that authorises and recognises the good work that they do.

"Part 149 can be compared in some ways to seeking ISO 9001 certification for quality management assurance or a kind of governance certification that helps directors and boards with their accountabilities.

"It is a move to better manage governance and risk as well as to provide assurance that essential processes and procedures are standardised and consistent across ASAOs."

Spence said that Part 149 would also increase flexibility to permit ASAOs to make minor changes to manuals and expositions, and add the certainty and protection that comes with holding a CASA authorisation.

She also noted that the freedom that comes with Part 149 approval carried with it some new responsibilities for ASAOs.

The Part 149 transition fee waiver ends on 2 December 2022.

Plus from this week's LMH: 

CASR Part 149, which is the legislation that enables approved self-administering aviation organisations (ASAO) to exists with a CASA approval rather than a operate under a litany of exemptions, has proven itself to be very contentious within the GA community. There is still a weight of opinion that believes CASA should take back administration of everything that flies, which means death for organisations like RAAus, the Gliding Federation of Australia and your friendly neighbourhood skydivers. CASA is not of that opinion; they effectively invented the ASAO idea and is pursuing it vigorously as CEO Pip Spence revealed during the week. One of the reasons why CASA is pushing the ASAOs to get Part 149 is to make life easier for CASA. Internal sources have regularly told me that CASA wouldn't have the ability to deal with recreational aviation with the flexibility it needs to grow and flourish. If CASA was to take it all back, they'd apply the usual heavy-handedness with which they traditionally have dealt with GA. So what they are saying is the ASAO concept–be it under Part 149 or ongoing exemptions–is the only way recreational aviation can flourish. Could it be that the lack of an ASAO is one of the reasons why GA is not flourishing? That's probably a cheeky thought, but one worth airing on a Friday.

Ahh...yes the old Duck 149, majority rejected by the GA Alphabets in 2019, brought out for an attempted snow job by the current incumbent and incompetent million dollar DAS Su_Spence...  

From the AP archives, via Youtube:

References: REX set to embarrass the miniscule [/font][/color]https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread... & Duck 149 a catalyst perhaps? https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread...

---

Reference: https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=116&pid=10438#pid10438


Anyone visiting their social media accounts over the past week will have seen a considerable body of discussion and debate all focused on Part 149 Self-Administration and the impact it will have on our general aviation industry.


Whilst there are a range of opinions being offered, including some misguided personal attacks and insults, it is clear that aircraft owners and pilots have been afforded little to no information by CASA and are rightly concerned for where their industry is headed if forced to transition to a full user-pay Part 149 self-administration.


From my perspective, I honestly do not understand why any sector of our industry would desire Part 149, which simply duplicates the costs of aviation regulation, creating dual-standards that will only serve to add complexity, confusion and ultimately higher costs to the end user.


What industry needs right now is genuine reform, simplification and unification – not segregation via privatisation and certainly not the empowerment of self-interest.


During the past 20 years of CASA’s management of our aviation industry we have all watched on as they have slowly divided us into competing interest groups, and today we now have multiple pilot training and licensing standards, multiple aircraft registration standards, multiple medical standards and a host of other dual-standards that have nothing to do with safety, but instead on how much money you are paying to whom.


Never has Australia’s aviation ecosystem been so disjointed and unworkable than it is today.


CASA have fostered the rise of powerful self-interest which in turn has lobbied for regulatory disparity, arguing a right to maintain advantages, that have corrupted the integrity and impartiality of the regulator and its core function of safety.


No better example can be found than the issue of recreational and private pilot medicals, where CASA have entangled themselves in questionable approvals that benefit some self-administrations, permitting their pilots to fly powered aircraft in Australian airspace on a self-certification medical certificate.


Yet, in the same breath, CASA have outright refused to provide the same privileges to recreational and private pilots under their direct management and regulatory responsibility, citing safety concerns.  A decision that CASA is thoroughly unable to justify or adequately explain to either government or industry.


Where’s the Minister for Transport on all of this?  Either in absentia or conveniently looking the other direction, hoping no one notices him.


Now CASA is seeking to reinforce the segregations and disparity by establishing Part 149 Self Administrations for each sector within our aviation industry, creating powerful monopolies that will own our access to aviation.


Think about that… a Part 149 Self-Administration for model aircraft, one for uav/drones, one for ballooning, one for parachuting, one for gliding, one for rotorcraft, one for recreational, one for sport experimental, one for warbirds and maybe even one for private general aviation.

The possibilities for Part 149, according to CASA, are apparently endless and so will be the bill that aircraft owners and pilots will have to pay to participate.  Just assume that the average annual membership fee to each is $300 – that’s $3,000 per annum just to be a member.

Nowhere in the world would this Part 149 madness be accepted or allowed – and CASA knows this.

Our aviation industry, and the broader Australian public, are already funding CASA to the tune of approximately $300 million per-annum, so why should we pay a second time around?

Importantly, what can’t we do today under the government managed regulatory framework, that under Part 149 Self Administration we suddenly could, that it would justify forever surrendering ourselves to a never-ending world of increasing membership fees, costs and charges?

The answer is that there is nothing to justify a transition to Part 149, but CASA already know that.  Incredibly, so does the industry associations who are right now beating down CASA’s door to become their first approved legislated co-regulators.

CASA is fully aware and cognisant of the fact that Part 149 will create powerful sector monopolies that will drive up the cost of access to aviation, and they simply do not care.  Part 149 is not about industry, it’s about CASA and their desire to offload their costs and liability.

Simply, CASA is helping themselves at our expense.

To drive the transition to Part 149 CASA has now communicated a 2021 deadline, whereby they will withdraw all existing regulatory exemptions that permit the various sport and recreational aviation sectors to exist.

As of this week, six of the industry’s nine sport aviation bodies have expressed significant concerns with Part 149, lamenting that what CASA has delivered is unworkable.

Staggeringly, the actual stakeholders, that is aircraft owners and pilots – have been kept in the dark as to the full impact and scope of Part 149.  If you ask the average aircraft owner or pilot to explain what Part 149 is and how industry will benefit, don’t be shocked by the vague stare and silence that you receive in return.  it’s deafening.

Despite this fact, CASA continues to argue that they have adequately consulted with industry and have relied on the respective industry associations to inform and educate those impacted by the introduction of Part 149, which is a clear conflict of interest.

In fact, in last year’s Senate RRAT inquiry into Dual Medical Standards, CASA defiantly argued that AOPA Australia and others had given them a full endorsement of Part 149, only to be pulled up by the Senators who recognised their misrepresentation of the facts.  Several days later, CASA sought to withdraw their claims, confirming that no such endorsement was ever given and that they had attempted to front a meeting attendance sheet as a signed endorsement agreement.

Over the past five years CASA has invested the majority of their ‘consultative resources’ courting and cajoling industry associations, offering them the opportunity to guarantee their futures and incomes by becoming an approved Part 149 Self-Administering Organisation, a virtual CASA Pty Ltd.  As an approved Part 149, they become responsible for doing CASA’s job, accepting all the liability and risk, and most importantly, they sanctioned by the regulator to demand whatever fees and charges necessary from their customers for access to their respective sectors – pay for play.

Everything that is wrong with CASA is personified in its development and delivery of Part 149, is has been laid bare for all to see.

It is a clear demonstration of the corruption of the regulators integrity, highlighting the powerful forces within CASA that are conspiring against the freedoms and success of our general aviation industry.

In broad daylight, CASA have breached the trust of those they regulate and have abused their powers so manifestly in manipulating the introduction of regulations, that clearly are instrument of privatisation that seek to gift material financial gain to private business, at the cost and to the detriment of the rights of Australians to hold an aviation medical, a pilot license and aircraft registration.

Just as we now look back at the destruction caused by airport privatisation on our general aviation industry, we too will look back in the years to come at the moment in time that saw Part 149 introduced with great shame and deep regret.

The only winners will be CASA and the businesses who will own your rights, and for everyone else we will simply have empty pockets

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

Bullets and the dodging thereof.

Whenever Part 149 is dragged out, dusted off and pushed into the spotlight, it always defies clear cut discussion. In some instances, it is as great a concept to some as it is an anathema to others. For instance - the glider sector; they have, for donkey's years now managed their sector extraordinarily well, the products of their training easily defined on any flight deck - first class handling skills. Gliding is a small, clearly defined group which has always 'self administered', developed it's own safety culture, written it's own rules and has a decades long enviable safety record. Clearly defined success and a great example of how a small dedicated group can be 'safely' left to their own devices.  Why? Well,IMO the 'operation' is neither 'complex' nor complicated; straight lines all the way.

The question is - can this philosophy and application be applied to say powered flight training? This could be defined as both complex and complicated; once a licence is issued, the holder can carry passengers and travel great distances in complex machinery. The 'liability' equation steps into the mix; and of course, the blame game is always on hand to add more complexity. Stand alone, the two big items make regulators nervous, which makes the politicians nervous, which leads to many layers of 'arse coverings' fabricated in stainless steel and covered in Teflon. Enter the dragon.

In the beginning there were those who wanted to build, maintain and fly their own aircraft, a unique, uncomplicated operation, well qualified to follow the gliding club philosophy and application. History lesson to be avoided so (in simple terms) this has morphed into the RAOz operation. In principal, for those with no other ambition than to fly 'privately' in very limited aircraft, for 'pleasure' with multiple restrictions, then perhaps 'self administration' could work well; perhaps. But for whom? Certainly not the aspiring professional - not the folk who want to take the family away for weekend - not even the committed wanderer who simply wants to explore different places. Apart from the obvious lack of 'freedom' imposed, there is a building body of evidence  which divides the two camps; which leaves the 'regulator' in a quandary. Self declared medical for instance; good for Goose must be good for the Gander. Pilot qualified to fly the family almost anywhere (time permitting) under one registration but not under the other? Don't make sense. Why not - fully qualified to fly a Vixen but not allowed to operate a C150 or Piper Cub - bollocks. Fred reckons he's fit to fly on Sunday; Charlie is grounded because the regulator says he's unfit (Tribunal hearing pending). Etc, etc.

Then (last bit) we need to take a quick look-see at inequity. Buckley dreamed up a system which incorporated 'satellite' flying schools, many believe it was a good system, legal, proper, standardised; and, both legally and operationally 'sound'. The regulator, in it's wisdom drove a stake through the heart of what, potentially, could make their jobs much easier, cleaner and cost effective. Yet under the RA banner, satellite schools are springing up like mushrooms. It begs questions - like why not parity for 'private' operations across the board; safe in a 'Jab' safe in a Pa28? Self declared 'Fit' to fly a Vixen - but not the Auster across the field?

I've no quarrel with 'self administration' for small, dedicated operations for for fun or sport, non whatsoever - great idea. But when there is an unfair advantage given to one branch of 'private' operations over the other; then, explanation in detail is required. Particularly if the CASA budget is not reduced in size, commensurate with the size of their abrogation of responsibility. 

Toot toot.

CWB - added " To further expand this thought..

An RAOz pilot can fly a Vixxen (it's spelled with a double "x" by the way...) all day and.....all day.  Provided it carries a postcode on the side.

Register it VH-XYZ, and suddenly they can't.  Why not?  It's the *exact* same aircraft.  No change in MTOW, in power, in carrying capacity, in configuration.  Seems a tad inconsistent if you ask me..