CASA meets the Press
#61

Skidmore quote 1-"It is important to understand this is not just an Australian issue but must be looked at in an international context."

Skidmore quote 2-"That means we do need to look and think ahead about what is likely to change, what change will mean and how change can work for us."


Dear Mr Skidmore...

[Image: bollocks7102653169.jpg?itok=xrrCi7G3]
From Oz Flying today: 

Quote:[Image: CVDPA_73AF04C0-2458-11E5-A21D06EE95C51C2D.jpg]
The Colour Vision Deficient Pilots Association is battling CASA over what it says is discrimination. (CVDPA)


CVDPA to sue CASA in Federal Court
07 Jul 2015

The Colour Vision Deficient Pilots Association (CVDPA) says it will take CASA to the Federal Court to win relief from what it says is a discriminatory test for colour-vision deficiency (CVD).

The CVDPA has been battling the regulator over the CAD test, which it believes bears no relation to operational situations.

In a statement made public this week, CVDPA Director Dr Arthur Pape said that a presentation to CASA Director of Aviation Safety Mark Skidmore and NZ CAA Director of Civil Aviation Graeme Harris had left him in no doubt that CASA will continue to use the contentious CAD test.

"As a result of these encounters with both directors, the CVDPA is left in no doubt that CASA’s act of total bastardry in June 2014 in its assault on CVD pilots will not be reversed in any way by the new director," he said.

CASA instigated the CAD test in 2014, which uses a dynamic colour square against a changing-contrast background to evaluate colour-vision deficiency. Prior to that, CVD pilots were required to pass tower signal and PAPI lantern tests, which simulated operating conditions.

Failure to pass the CAD test barrs a pilot from holding a Class 1 medical, and they can fly only VFR by day on a Class 2 medical.

According to the CVDPA, the CAD test does not fairly represent operating conditions, a point it says that Mark Skidmore disputed.

"Of paramount significance were the two points: (1) the CASA Director was shown a film clip of the CAD test and declared that to him the test does simulate an operational situation, and (2) the changes implemented by CASA in June 2014 were just a 'clarification of the standard that was already there'."

In response to the statement, Skidmore said that the issue is bigger than just Australia.

"I listened carefully to all the information provided by Mr Pape," he told Australian Flying.

"We had a useful discussion about the issues and I said I was prepared to look at the results from any valid test that has controlled variables and set objectives.

"I did indicate that simply quoting the number of hours flown by pilots with colour vision deficiency is not in itself a complete safety argument.

"It is important to understand this is not just an Australian issue but must be looked at in an international context."

According to the CVDPA, the next step is legal action.

"The CVDPA has therefore, sadly, come to the conclusion that CASA’s claims of being a 'risk based and evidence driven' regulator are mere rhetoric, and we are left with no practical alternative but to litigate in the Federal Court against the lawfulness of the CAD test.

"The CAD test lies at the heart of the above-said act of bastardry, and demonstrates the blind regulatory prejudice that colour vision defective pilots continue to suffer.

"Steps are being now taken to set the process in motion."
 
Followed by Undecided :
Quote:[Image: CASA_forum_15-30_8B98BA80-2503-11E5-A21D...C51C2D.jpg]

Regulator to face the Community in Aviation Safety Forum
08 Jul 2015

CASA Director of Aviation Safety Mark Skidmore and his executive managers will face the aviation community in a forum to discuss what challenges aviation safety faces over the next 15 years.

The first one is scheduled for Mildura, Victoria, on Thursday 30 July. Depending on how it goes, other regional centres and capital cities may be added for later dates.

Skidmore says the forum is necessary because of the ever-changing landscape of aviation safety.

"All of us involved in Australian aviation face the challenges of change. Aviation is continually evolving in areas such as advances in technology, new approaches to safety or better ways of doing business," he said.

"None of us can afford to sit back and accept that the way we do things today will necessarily be the way of the future.

"That means we do need to look and think ahead about what is likely to change, what change will mean and how change can work for us."

The forum will run for three hours from 0900 - 1200, with the first hour dedicated to questions from the floor about aviation safety as it now stands, and the remainder spent on dicussing the needs of aviation safety as far as 2030. Topics expected to be covered could include:


  • maintaining the most effective safety culture
  • getting CASA’s safety balance right—an effective regulator that is not too "light" but avoids unnecessary burdens
  • the best ways to develop and implement regulations that achieve the right safety outcomes
  • minimising complexity while working in a legal and regulatory framework
  • the best ways to support the aviation community to meet safety goals and requirements
  • improving communication, consultation and co-operation
  • the safety impact of new technologies, for example low earth orbit transport
  • safety challenges in regional aviation
  • the growth in the remotely piloted aircraft sector
  • managing ageing aircraft.

"CASA is not the source of all ideas and knowledge in Australian aviation safety,"
Skidmore admits, "so we need the support and participation of everyone in the Australian aviation community to manage the issues of today and to plan effectively for the future."

For more information on the Mildura forum and to register your interest, go to the CASA website.
 
God help us.. Angel
Can someone please..please get a muzzle on this guy??
MTF..P2 Undecided
Reply
#62

Could someone tell that dumb ass ex RAAF wallah, all of the above will be achieved because there will be no industry left if it continues as it is. Australia will have a perfect "Safety" record.

Then maybe thats the cunning plan?

Who was it in the "Iron Ring" who said if he had his way the only things flying in Australia would be the airlines and the RAAF. The airlines no doubt piloted by ex RAAF pilots.

Skids old mate, just because you own a GA aircraft does not immediately imbue you with knowledge of the economics nor the wellbeing of aviation in Australia. The GA industry is already unviable and increasingly so by the day. Will you agree to resign if there's any further decline in Industry over the next two years? Your in the chair so you are the person responsible for that malevolent, moribund, maleficent mob of malcontented Minions you allegedly manage, or are they "managing" you?
Reply
#63

A source informs me that the Hooded one may end up back at Fort Fumble!! My source tells me two things;

1) The new Fort Fumble executive structure is close to being announced. There may be some surprises in store, possibly even redundancies. The new structure has been kept very very quiet, water tight, because there may be some unhappy campers.

2) There are some that recognise the Hooded One's potential. If you cast your mind back to 'Pelair gate' poor Hoody got lined up by Herr Skull and the A380 endorsed pensioner, to take the fall over Pelair. Hoody bailed over to ASA before being pushed. Now, in an act of tautology for him, rumour has it that Angus 'pea heart' Houston and Frau Staib may be lining up the Hooded one as a fall guy yet again. As a result the Hooded one may be heading back to Fort Fumble!

Now this is all just rumour, but one thing is certain and that is the IOS has picked up a lot of 'chatter' in the last week from the alphabet soup organisations in Can'tberra. It seems some sphincters are puckering!!

"Safe politics and pineapples for all"

P_666
Reply
#64

(07-08-2015, 04:52 PM)Gobbledock Wrote:  A source informs me that the Hooded one may end up back at Fort Fumble!! My source tells me two things;

1) The new Fort Fumble executive structure is close to being announced. There may be some surprises in store, possibly even redundancies. The new structure has been kept very very quiet, water tight, because there may be some unhappy campers.

2) There are some that recognise the Hooded One's potential. If you cast your mind back to 'Pelair gate' poor Hoody got lined up by Herr Skull and the A380 endorsed pensioner, to take the fall over Pelair. Hoody bailed over to ASA before being pushed. Now, in an act of tautology for him, rumour has it that Angus 'pea heart' Houston and Frau Staib may be lining up the Hooded one as a fall guy yet again. As a result the Hooded one may be heading back to Fort Fumble!

Now this is all just rumour, but one thing is certain and that is the IOS has picked up a lot of 'chatter' in the last week from the alphabet soup organisations in Can'tberra. It seems some sphincters are puckering!!

"Safe politics and pineapples for all"

P_666



Three Hours...How?

One hour aside for industry. Pathetic.
Two hours left for: 

TEN Points to be covered
Discuss the future of Aviation Safety, GA and so much oh,so much more.
Pathetic.

Mr Skidmore andCo. You're going to need a week there. Then a week at Bankstown. Then a week regarding the topic of from "here to 2030".
That is what a leader would do, not be told. It is your job to approach these rather complicated topic/s with more time given to the Professionals that Employ You.

Dear Oh Dear, how could one possibly believe, then absurdly put forth a suggestive solution to a vast problem in which it lacks an educated proposal toward very well educated people?

Three Hours   Confused

Tick Tock Indeed...


   
Reply
#65

Half steam - thanks Minnie.

No one can be this purblind, condescending or cynical; not without help.  If this farce is a Skidmore brain fart, then the HR people who hired him need to be sued, or the senior mandarin who briefed them needs beating to death with Pink bats.  Whoever is advising the Skidmore-Twist child about survival in the real world needs some rectal readjustment.   Lets have a reality fix, an alignment with some form of grown up sanity:-

.."CASA Director of Aviation Safety Mark Skidmore and his executive managers will face the aviation community in a forum to discuss what challenges aviation safety faces over the next 15 years." Couple of points in there:-

  “[will] face the aviation community” etc. Not meet, not confer, not consult; but face as in face the music, of face down.  Either way guilt or combat implied.  Bollocks 1

..”[challenges] aviation safety faces over the next 15 years. Etc.  Not how we can move forward and progress.  Reality is just how is industry expected to continue to stay viable, despite the challenges presented by CASA lunatic regulations.  But the real clanger is no mention of how CASA intends to implement the changes recommended by Forsyth; DEMANDED by industry, authorised by the DPM over the next 15 months, those totally ducking ignored by CASA, Skidmore and his advisors.  Bollocks 2.

…”[Skidmore] says the forum is necessary because of the ever-changing landscape of aviation safety”.  Wrong again, the same things that have always killed aircraft, still exist.  Regulation and paperwork help the ‘regulator’ avoid liability and abrogate responsibility.  Not one single, solitary thing CASA have presented in the past 20 years has had a tangible effect on, or improved safety. Quite the reverse in many instances, especially in operational matters.  Want to discuss those?: No, perhaps it because you have NFI what they are.  Someone tell these halfwits we are striving to mitigate risks, not shag the elusive, mythical dragon of ‘Safety”.  Bollocks 3.   

.."[All] of us involved in Australian aviation face the challenges of change. Aviation is continually evolving in areas such as advances in technology, new approaches to safety or better ways of doing business," he said.   Oh yes; this through ever more complex, hidebound rule sets I suppose.  Rules which now need to go through a parliamentary process to be changed; three and four tiers of ever more complicated, rigid regulation, which cannot ‘move with the times’. Like the 2300 + pages of law in Part 61 (MoS is law dopey).  Bollocks 4.

…"[None] of us can afford to sit back and accept that the way we do things today will necessarily be the way of the future. "  Where has this fossil been hiding for the past 20 years, in a sheltered workshop, cocooned by luxury, adored by his fans and never having to shout a round.  Yes, comes the cry.  Then I recommend a strong dose of reality, one which will not be given because the industry is too ducking terrified to break wind lest the CASA goon squads turn up next audit and feed their entrails to Wodger for ‘attention’.  Bollocks 5.

.."[That] means we do need to look and think ahead about what is likely to change, what change will mean and how change can work for us."  NO IT DOES NOT, ‘We’ need to start by repairing with the broken promises and damaged hopes.  Has this ‘knuckle’ got any idea how much work went into the Senate inquiry into Pel-Air, how much effort was lavished on Forsyth, how much bastardry was used on Airtex, Barrier, Polar etc.  Fix that you (deleted).  Bollocks 6.

Aye well, no matter, wonder boy is going to fix her up, in three hours in Mildura of all places. Perhaps it’ll be foggy and he can have a captive audience from the surviving 737’s to fill out the original audience of four , (two pilots, the re-fueller and the office cat) before swanning off for an executive lunch, high fives all round and feeling of job well done.  Bollocks 7.

I can’t bring myself to delve into the dot points; not fair on the key board, which has survived yet another thumping. 

Has this bloody fool any notion of what he has to face down.  Not the upfront, happy, clappy, meet, greet and get him out of the joint type; but the tea room reality type, the board room despair type, the Chief pilot frustration type, the Check pilot liability type, the dark determined type; or even the those who detest vermin type.  Nope, none of that; not for this DAS.  Now famous as one who couldn’t hit the side of the barn, with a shovel full of horse-pooh with the wind behind it.  Someone, anyone, for pities sake tell him there’s real work to be done and stop buggering about with feel good road shows, tent revivals and tambourines.  FFS I can now even understand old Terry’s impulse to belt him one; and to understand anything that Terry did, is, of it ‘self, remarkable.

One of them has to go, either him who approves this condescending crap or whoever writes it. Seven counts of Bollocks more than qualifies for ‘the’ caption. 


[Image: bollocks7102653169.jpg?itok=xrrCi7G3]

Toot-toot.
Reply
#66

(07-09-2015, 06:51 AM)kharon Wrote:  Half steam - thanks Minnie.

No one can be this purblind, condescending or cynical; not without help.  If this farce is a Skidmore brain fart, then the HR people who hired him need to be sued, or the senior mandarin who briefed them needs beating to death with Pink bats.  Whoever is advising the Skidmore-Twist child about survival in the real world needs some rectal readjustment.   Lets have a reality fix, an alignment with some form of grown up sanity:-

.."CASA Director of Aviation Safety Mark Skidmore and his executive managers will face the aviation community in a forum to discuss what challenges aviation safety faces over the next 15 years." Couple of points in there:-

  “[will] face the aviation community” etc. Not meet, not confer, not consult; but face as in face the music, of face down.  Either way guilt or combat implied.  Bollocks 1

..”[challenges] aviation safety faces over the next 15 years. Etc.  Not how we can move forward and progress.  Reality is just how is industry expected to continue to stay viable, despite the challenges presented by CASA lunatic regulations.  But the real clanger is no mention of how CASA intends to implement the changes recommended by Forsyth; DEMANDED by industry, authorised by the DPM over the next 15 months, those totally ducking ignored by CASA, Skidmore and his advisors.  Bollocks 2.

…”[Skidmore] says the forum is necessary because of the ever-changing landscape of aviation safety”.  Wrong again, the same things that have always killed aircraft, still exist.  Regulation and paperwork help the ‘regulator’ avoid liability and abrogate responsibility.  Not one single, solitary thing CASA have presented in the past 20 years has had a tangible effect on, or improved safety. Quite the reverse in many instances, especially in operational matters.  Want to discuss those?: No, perhaps it because you have NFI what they are.  Someone tell these halfwits we are striving to mitigate risks, not shag the elusive, mythical dragon of ‘Safety”.  Bollocks 3.   

.."[All] of us involved in Australian aviation face the challenges of change. Aviation is continually evolving in areas such as advances in technology, new approaches to safety or better ways of doing business," he said.   Oh yes; this through ever more complex, hidebound rule sets I suppose.  Rules which now need to go through a parliamentary process to be changed; three and four tiers of ever more complicated, rigid regulation, which cannot ‘move with the times’. Like the 2300 + pages of law in Part 61 (MoS is law dopey).  Bollocks 4.

…"[None] of us can afford to sit back and accept that the way we do things today will necessarily be the way of the future. "  Where has this fossil been hiding for the past 20 years, in a sheltered workshop, cocooned by luxury, adored by his fans and never having to shout a round.  Yes, comes the cry.  Then I recommend a strong dose of reality, one which will not be given because the industry is too ducking terrified to break wind lest the CASA goon squads turn up next audit and feed their entrails to Wodger for ‘attention’.  Bollocks 5.

.."[That] means we do need to look and think ahead about what is likely to change, what change will mean and how change can work for us."  NO IT DOES NOT, ‘We’ need to start by repairing with the broken promises and damaged hopes.  Has this ‘knuckle’ got any idea how much work went into the Senate inquiry into Pel-Air, how much effort was lavished on Forsyth, how much bastardry was used on Airtex, Barrier, Polar etc.  Fix that you (deleted).  Bollocks 6.

Aye well, no matter, wonder boy is going to fix her up, in three hours in Mildura of all places. Perhaps it’ll be foggy and he can have a captive audience from the surviving 737’s to fill out the original audience of four , (two pilots, the re-fueller and the office cat) before swanning off for an executive lunch, high fives all round and feeling of job well done.  Bollocks 7.

I can’t bring myself to delve into the dot points; not fair on the key board, which has survived yet another thumping. 

Has this bloody fool any notion of what he has to face down.  Not the upfront, happy, clappy, meet, greet and get him out of the joint type; but the tea room reality type, the board room despair type, the Chief pilot frustration type, the Check pilot liability type, the dark determined type; or even the those who detest vermin type.  Nope, none of that; not for this DAS.  Now famous as one who couldn’t hit the side of the barn, with a shovel full of horse-pooh with the wind behind it.  Someone, anyone, for pities sake tell him there’s real work to be done and stop buggering about with feel good road shows, tent revivals and tambourines.  FFS I can now even understand old Terry’s impulse to belt him one; and to understand anything that Terry did, is, of it ‘self, remarkable.

One of them has to go, either him who approves this condescending crap or whoever writes it. Seven counts of Bollocks more than qualifies for ‘the’ caption. 





[Image: bollocks7102653169.jpg?itok=xrrCi7G3]

Toot-toot.

On behalf of Sandy the following was his response to the Hitch article (above):

Quote:Sandy Reith •

No one who has any inkling about the appalling state of General Aviation and the CASA GA wrecking ball, incidentally which daily consumes hundreds of thousands of taxpayer and GA industry dollars, will go to another CASA gabfest waste of time meeting.
Never and not until we see a genuine commitment with reform regulation change in place.

The minimum, stress minimum, action required by us is the full implementation of the Forsyth report reforms. In addition we demand one specific reform immediately; the same medical requirements for private pilots as has just been enacted in the Congress of the USA. This one reform would show good faith.

To anyone who thinks this strategy is unproductive or unfair, you are invited review the facts, the demise of GA by a thousand cuts continues unabated and we have no better way of protest. In April 1989 they promised "more business-like procedures....with view to reducing requirements and their associated costs, to a minimum."

They have been dishonest, its now much worse, no quarter and no cooperation without good faith, and don't waste your time and money.

& also here on this Oz Flying article: CASA Directive "A Breath of Fresh Air": Rex

Quote:Sandy Reith •


Yes well of course Rex will gladly pat CASA on the back, a touch of gloss might help with Pelair casting long shadows behind the facade of smiling executives. Trouble is on the same page here we note that the CVD pilots are suing CASA and General Aviation is still on the ropes over Part 61.

CASA told us in 1989 that they were going to reduce costs to industry and to regulate in a more business-like manner. Wait until it happens before pouring on the plaudits, if you live long enough.

Which I also covered back here - Final Act of Bastardry & Betrayal. 

Update: Also hot off the Yaffa is this from Dougy:

Quote: Wrote:Editor's Insights 9 July 2015

09 Jul 2015
Doug Nancarrow

The Dick Smith ‘push’ has brought out a US ATC expert Jeff Griffith to review our airspace and ATC services this week.  I believe the consultant, no doubt highly paid, and at least two reporters were flying around eastern Australia to places like Ballina to examine what’s happening and report on the problems as he sees them.

Also included was a session at Bankstown Airport where assembled GA was ‘briefed’ on the issues.

And the assault continues in the media, with News Limited journos getting at least three pieces published prominently in the past week, the latest today. The ‘push’ is seeing Dick Smith staying out of the headlines, but one after another GA people are trotted out to instance the dangers inherent in our airspace management or the cost burden of mandatory fitment of ADS-B etc. This week we even got a serve about the phasing out of NDBs, something that’s been around for the last 10 years.

And the blowtorch has been turned on CASA now too, with some of the chatterers declaring this week that DAS Skidmore has failed to live up to expectations and has been captured by the CASA culture. Whether or not such comments are on the mark, once again I’d like to see the debate held face to face and not ‘off stage’.
 
With Airservices, ATSB and CASA all being hammered one way or another now you’d have to wonder how long the Minister can stay out of the fray.

Err Dougy don't you think that is the point of the whole exercise, example see here from near the start of the Dick Smith campaign: Dick Smith QON on the UP (26 May '15)

Quote: Wrote:Warren Truss – What Does He Believe In?




Can anyone advise me if, in the ten years Warren Truss has been either Minister or Shadow Minister responsible for aviation - he has ever articulated a view on any substantive issue that he believes in and that affects us in aviation? That is, has Warren Truss ever identified with one statement or one issue that he could be held accountable for?

Over the years I and others have given Warren Truss very thorough briefings on everything from airspace to rescue and firefighting, to Unicoms and Part 61 and the unique, costly ADS-B requirements for general aviation. Yet I don’t believe he has ever made one statement that illustrates his views on these issues. For example, has he ever made a comment about Part 61? Or the ADS-B mandate for general aviation aircraft?

Warren Truss is paid more than $300,000 a year and knows that, just like his predecessors, after he completes his term he will no doubt end up with a prodigious and highly paid position on the Virgin Airlines Board or chairing some type of fracking company destroying our valuable and productive rural land.

From time to time journalists phone me to ask my view on some aviation regulatory issue. I suggest they phone the Minister, but the journalists invariably don’t even know who the Minister is! Why a person would want to be in this important position but then actually not have any stated view that could help Australia is beyond me.

I am planning to give a number of talks around Australia and I want to know if ever in the last ten years Warren Truss (Deputy Prime Minister - unbelievable!) has made a statement in relation to aviation that he could actually be held accountable for. That is, I want to find out if there is one statement Warren Truss has ever made that depicts what he actually believes in relation to aviation. Or has he been cautioned by his political advisors not to go down that route, you know, in true “Yes Minister” style - i.e. the dishonest, never-say-anything-that-actually-means-something approach? But surely there must be something!!

or even earlier here: Nick Xenophon - The surrogate Minister for Aviation?? post#23

Quote: Wrote:“If the government doesn’t do what it said it would do and remove red tape, then we’ll look at standing candidates,” he said.


“Starting a political party is the last thing I want to do, but if I have to, I will”.

The 71-year-old says he won’t be standing or putting money into the party, which has yet to be registered, just his time.

“We’ll have some good policies and some great young people as candidates,” he said.

Smith has long campaigned against the foreign ownership of Australian companies, and for a cap on population growth.

He says general aviation is being driven to the wall by over-regulation and desperately needs reform, but it’s being stymied.

“There a one-way ratchet of increasing bureaucracy. I see the industry, which I love, being destroyed by increasing red tape and costs,” he said.

“I was out at Bankstown [airport] the other day, where there were thriving flying schools, and now I’m peering into locked hangars.”

Smith says he reached the tipping point last year, when new compliance regulations for private pilots, known as Part 61, were introduced.

“It’s the complete opposite to removing red tape, instead adding millions of dollars in compliance costs for the industry, but with no safety reason.

“It will increase my flying costs by about $5000 a year and I’m just a private pilot. Now I can afford it, but this will further destroy an industry that could be employing thousands of Australians,” Smith said.

“The Coalition said they were going to do something about it two elections ago. I’m sure the prime minister is as frustrated as I am.”

Err...no further comment required...P2 [Image: biggrin.gif]
Reply
#67

May I suggest we all show up and shirt-front the silver moustached gimp? Then sit in the audience and raise middle fingers and bare our spotted asses at him as he waffles along with complete shite. Afterwards, time permitting (only have 3 hours) we can smack him in the teeth for his being insolent and obtuse.

Skid-Mark, the line has been drawn mate.

P_666
Reply
#68

Since after the second world war the aviation industry has had to endure a string of Ex RAAF Types inflicting their particular brand of purgatory on the civilian industry. There were a few however who served the industry with integrity and common sense and they are fondly remembered.

The past decade or so has seen a string of Ex RAAF Types ascending to powerful positions within our regulator and its bastard children, ASA and the ATSB. They and their lawyers and acolytes have turned CAsA into a Sociopaths Nivana, and a playground for our legal fraternity. 

Perhaps required reading for every DAS and manager in CAsA should be Sidney Dekker's book, [i]Just Culture-balancing Safety and Accountability.

The book clearly illustrates the absolute folly of offences of "Strict Liability" that our regulations are based upon.
Australia is a country of Laws not a province for unaccountable bureaucrats to decide guilt or innocence.

That has lead to denial of "Justice",  think of the bastadry inflicted on Polair, Qadrio, Airtex and so many others.

All our regulations have done is be a major contributor to the decline of the industry, they have not contributed anything to safety in fact they have had a negative affect, much as warned against in Mr. Dekkers book.

The comparison between the USA and Australia"s safety statistics clearly illustrates just how out of wack Australia has become, the USA beats us hands down in the safety stakes.
CAsA spin would have the punters imagine we are the safest in the world. I say Bollocks to that contention, Australia is not safe just very lucky.

We are now faced with another ex RAAF DAS. 

His predecessor also ex RAAF was perhaps the most destructive in the history of Australian aviation. 

Mr Skidmore is now on a mission to outdo him? from his apparent contempt for the industry, the senate and the minister, it seems he's settled into the starting blocks.

The insult and injury continues, I heard a CEO with honours degree's from Australian institutions, who has built up a highly successful multimillion dollar company, has been summoned to appear before the sociopaths sociopath, none other than the ex RAAF Baggage handler and his worthless acolyte regarding his "suitability" to be a CEO.

Has the world gone mad? Mr. Skidmore has already displayed his arrogance, this just adds insult to injury as this CEO has expended hundreds of thousands of dollars and over two years in an attempt to gain an AOC to a point where he is seriously considering returning his aircraft to the states and giving up. He is also facing serious competition from New Zealand for his work, simply put, their cost base is so much lower than ours so he's at a disadvantage before he starts.

On a similar note, I heard a rumour that a New Zealand company has been awarded the Australian contract for radio aid calibration. They also provide this service to numerous places around the pacific.

Is this because once again Australian operators have been cut out by ever increasing regulatory costs?

Sometimes I just despair[Image: angry.gif]
Reply
#69

Go to the mattresses.

The thing Dougy and his ilk don’t seem to realise is that industry did it’s “talking” through Forsyth and has done with it.  In the twelve month since the report publication none, not one single, solitary recommendations has been fully and satisfactorily delivered.  The Minister supported the proposed reforms, the industry demanded those reforms and CASA; does sweet Fanny Adams, except more gabfests.  The time for talking is well and truly over.  Skidmore needs to get on with the promised reform, deliver the goods, make good the promises; or bugger off, and let someone competent do the job.  

It’s dead simple Dougy; the ‘chatterers’ as you so tritely call them, have achieved more with direct action than the trained poodles of tame media who will protect their rice bowls and only publish that which suits their paymasters, have done in the last decade.  No one pays me or tells me what, or how to write; can you, with a clear conscience, say the same?  

There are only two teams on the paddock, spectators on the side lines must pay their money, take their chances; and the devil take the hindmost..  
Reply
#70

(07-09-2015, 10:10 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  Update: Also hot off the Yaffa is this from Dougy: Editor's Insights 9 July 2015

Err Dougy don't you think that is the point of the whole exercise, example see here from near the start of the Dick Smith campaign: Dick Smith QON on the UP (26 May '15)


Quote: Wrote:Warren Truss – What Does He Believe In?




Can anyone advise me if, in the ten years Warren Truss has been either Minister or Shadow Minister responsible for aviation - he has ever articulated a view on any substantive issue that he believes in and that affects us in aviation? That is, has Warren Truss ever identified with one statement or one issue that he could be held accountable for?

Over the years I and others have given Warren Truss very thorough briefings on everything from airspace to rescue and firefighting, to Unicoms and Part 61 and the unique, costly ADS-B requirements for general aviation. Yet I don’t believe he has ever made one statement that illustrates his views on these issues. For example, has he ever made a comment about Part 61? Or the ADS-B mandate for general aviation aircraft?

Warren Truss is paid more than $300,000 a year and knows that, just like his predecessors, after he completes his term he will no doubt end up with a prodigious and highly paid position on the Virgin Airlines Board or chairing some type of fracking company destroying our valuable and productive rural land.

From time to time journalists phone me to ask my view on some aviation regulatory issue. I suggest they phone the Minister, but the journalists invariably don’t even know who the Minister is! Why a person would want to be in this important position but then actually not have any stated view that could help Australia is beyond me.

I am planning to give a number of talks around Australia and I want to know if ever in the last ten years Warren Truss (Deputy Prime Minister - unbelievable!) has made a statement in relation to aviation that he could actually be held accountable for. That is, I want to find out if there is one statement Warren Truss has ever made that depicts what he actually believes in relation to aviation. Or has he been cautioned by his political advisors not to go down that route, you know, in true “Yes Minister” style - i.e. the dishonest, never-say-anything-that-actually-means-something approach? But surely there must be something!!

or even earlier here: Nick Xenophon - The surrogate Minister for Aviation?? post#23
Dougy to firstly correct the record I think you will find that News Corp have sponsored the review the Australian airspace management by ATC expert Jeff Griffiths. Next if you go here you will see that Dick Smith appeared only yesterday in other News Corp publications.
Finally to perhaps further reinforce my assertions (above post) that Dick (supported by News Corp) has a far bigger agenda than just attacking ASA, please read the following... Wink :
Quote:Inspection edict ‘tearing light aircraft apart’  
[Image: ean_higgins.png]
Reporter
Sydney

[Image: 973951-9e9a336a-260d-11e5-b856-d650f72d3e25.jpg]

Tony Brand, director of Horsham Aviation Services, says a new inspection regime is driving operators out of general aviation. Picture: Aaron Francis Source: News Corp Australia

In general aviation circles they’re calling it SIDS — and it’s leaving the carcasses of light aircraft, some with their engines gone, some with tails and wings amputated, strewn around regional ­airports.  

SIDS stands for Supplementary Inspection Documents, and according to Tony Brand, who runs light aircraft repair and maintenance company Horsham Aviation Services in western ­Victoria, it’s killing the industry.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is enforcing a program initiated by the large US light ­aircraft manufacturer Cessna of ­special inspections of its older aircraft to check for problems like corrosion, wear, cracks, and other mechanical risks.

In Australia, Mr Brand said, that covers 3800 Cessna aircraft, and $285 million in additional compliance work.

“There was no industry consultation for this,” he said.

For Mr Brand SIDS means boom times, with his 11 aircraft mechanics including two apprentices working flat-out on aircraft flown in from all around the ­country.

“I could put on another five people tomorrow and still not keep up with the work,” he said.

But his concern is that SIDS will financially cripple many of his customers. “It’s driving people out of the general aviation industry one after the other,” Mr Brand said.

“They have just got it so wrong you wouldn’t believe.”

Flying school operators who spoke with The Australian this week all complained about SIDS.

“I had to take one plane ­completely apart then put it back together again and it cost me $30,000,” said Ray Clamback, who runs a flying school at Sydney’s Bankstown airport.

“It turned out there was nothing wrong with it.”

Mr Brand said the cost of SIDS was leading some aircraft owners to sell their planes overseas in countries such as the US where the program initiated by Cessna is not mandatory as it is here, but voluntary.

Other older aircraft are just not worth taking abroad, and those are being cannabilised for parts, explaining the carcasses.

CASA chairman Jeff Boyd said it was not the original deliberate intention to make SIDS compulsory, but it ended up so because of the regulatory structure.

“It just got caught up in the way our regulations are written,” Mr Boyd said.

He nonetheless defended the compulsory nature of the ­program here, saying it was essential to deal with a real safety issue.

Mr Boyd, a licensed aircraft mechanical engineer and former regional airline owner, said he had done the SIDS exercise ­himself on the 1977 Cessna 172XP he owns and flies.
He used it as an opportunity to fully renovate the aircraft.

Mr Brand is scathing of the people he describes as technocrats at CASA who have “not worked a day in general aviation, in the hangar.”

But Mr Brand has nothing but praise for Mr Boyd who has worked in the hangar, and still does from time to time as a ­consultant, such as oversighting maintenance for the Thai military.

Mr Boyd, Mr Brand said, was bringing some much needed real world private sector sense to those technocrats.

“He’s been doing an excellent job,” he said.

Hmm...don't think Airservices was mentioned once in that Higgins article... Big Grin

MTF..P2 Tongue  
Reply
#71

Well we kind of got wind earlier in the week with multiple attacks from the Oz, plus other News Corp publications, that the Dick Smith/News Corp v ASA/CASA/Dept campaign was escalating but wow! Rolleyes

Number #1 from that man again, with Jeff Boyd finally stepping up to the plate...yeh hah Big Grin :

Quote:Radical overhaul to deliver safer skies  
[Image: ean_higgins.png]
Reporter
Sydney


[Image: 595217-277fc23e-26a0-11e5-9967-4060475ab86c.jpg]

Newly appointed CASA chairman Jeff Boyd. Photo: Ray Strange. Source: News Corp Australia

After two decades of false starts, Australia will embrace the safer US model of managing the nation­’s skies that will see greater control of airspace in regional areas and allow ground staff to provide pilots with potentially lifesaving local weather and aircraft traffic information.  

The Weekend Australian can reveal the Civil Aviation Safety Authority will also adopt a fundamental change in philosophy and strategy, with CASA managers instructed to employ greater commercial sense and flexibility to bring the industry with them on a path of reform.

The moves follow a sustained campaign by The Weekend Australian and several aviation figures, including businessman Dick Smith, to address longstanding air safety concerns following fatal air crashes in Victoria and Queensland a decade ago.

The sweeping new initiatives were revealed to The Weekend Australian by newly appointed CASA chairman Jeff Boyd in his first media interview since taking up his appointment last week. “We have become inward looking, but we’re just a dot in the world community,” Mr Boyd said. “We need to look outside of Australia.”

The new moves offer a promise to fix an air traffic control system judged by many in the aviation industry to be not as safe as it could be outside the major cities — and by some, including Mr Smith, to be dangerous.

In 2004 six people died when the plane they were flying in from Sydney’s Bankstown Airport to Benalla in Victoria crashed into a mountain, with air traffic controllers being alerted by an alarm that radar had detected the aircraft was off course but not intervening in part because it was flying in airspace not designated as under their control.

In 2005 another accident, which killed 15 people in an aircraft which crashed into a mountain while approaching a small airport at Lockhart River in Cape York, might have been prevented if, as occurs at similar airports in the US, ground staff who were not air traffic controllers had had radio contact with approaching aircraft and warned of bad weather in that direction.

As reported in The Weekend Australian in recent weeks, there are also concerns about uncontrolled airspace at Ballina, in northern NSW, where rapid growth in commercial passenger traffic has led to congestion, and where at least one near miss has occurred.
Another near collision some years ago above Launceston led to the installation of a new type of aircraft surveillance system, but air traffic controllers still do not direct surveillance controlled approache­s in Tasmania, relying instead on a procedural method which is less efficient and which aviation experts say is less safe.

Australia, unlike the US and Canada, does not have an across-the-board system in which airliners and other commercial aircraft are directed by air traffic controllers almost to the ground.

The federal government had planned to move to the North American model in the early 2000s but the policy wasn’t followed through. Instead, a patchwork of protocols applies, with some areas and some airports designated as being under controlled airspace, but others not.

At many airports, some with substantial traffic, pilots are left to their own devices once under 8500 feet to sort out separation among themselves through radio contact, even though they may still be under radar coverage to much lower levels. Mr Smith had branded this situation as ridic­ulous and unsafe.

In addition to airspace reform, Mr Boyd will encourage CASA management, on a case-by-case basis, to allow exemptions and extensi­ons for aircraft owners to fit a costly new air navigation system known as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-­Broadcast, or ADS-B, if they can make a compelling practical and commercial case and safety is not compromised.

CASA will adopt a more flexible approach to a compulsory and expensive program of inspections of older Cessna light aircraft known as Supplementary Inspection Documents, or SIDS. It will consider making extensions because­ the size of the program has caused a bottleneck in the aircraft maintenance sector.

Mr Boyd told The Weekend Australian CASA had fallen into the trap of becoming “close to a ‘big R’ regulator”.

The organisation’s first priority remained enforcing a safe flying environment, but he would take a second look at any new regulations to determine if they amounted to “change for change’s sake”.

“You have to make sure it’s safe out there, that people are not doing the wrong thing,” Mr Boyd said.

“But you have to ask how the industry can comply with that rule or regulation, and whether, if it is going to cost them a lot of money, is it worth doing in terms of safety.”

Mr Boyd, a practising licensed aircraft mechanical engineer, former creator and owner of Brindabella Airlines, and a light aircraft pilot, is highly regarded.

The federal government appointed him CASA chairman after the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review report, chaired by veteran David Forsyth, called last year for wide reforms after criticising CASA for taking too hard a line and maintaining an adversarial approach to the industry, which had lost trust in the authority.

Late last year John McCormick, CASA’s director of air safety — essentially the authority’s chief executive — was succeeded by former senior RAAF officer Mark Skidmore, who is understood to share Mr Boyd’s view of the need for a new approach.

Mr Boyd said he would encourage a lowering of the floor of controlled airspace, known as cate­g­ory E, at airports on a case-by-case basis. “Let’s see where we can do E where we have reliable air traffic control surveillance,” he said.

Mr Boyd would not discuss spec­ifics, but The Weekend Australian can reveal CASA will recommend such a move for Ballina.

It is expected to recommend that the controlled airspace around Ballina be lowered from 8500 feet to 5000 feet, and that the airport install a radio operator to help pilots with local weather and air traffic inform­ation, something the airport’s management is keen to do.

Mr Boyd said he would sponsor a board directive to management to see if it could free up what the industry describes as absurdly tight rules, restricting what ground staff who are not serving or former air traffic controllers can provide pilots over the Unicom radio in the way of weather and traffic information. “If it’s used as supplementary flight safety information, we have no argument against it,” he said.

Some of the moves, such as liberating ground staff to man the Unicom, have been strongly resisted by the air traffic controllers union Civil Air, and the union is also disinclined to expand controlled airspace unless more controllers are employed.

The chairman of Airservices Australia, Angus Houston, has rejected calls from Mr Smith and others for the firefighters his organ­isation employs at airports without control towers to perform the radio operator function as they do at many regional US airports.

As revealed by The Australian this week, Airservices, the government-owned body which runs the country’s air traffic control and navigation system, insisted two years ago that CASA not grant exemptions or extensions for ADS­B, pulling out of an understanding with CASA, which as safety authority makes and enforces air regulations.

But Mr Boyd said under the new approach CASA would consider doing so if the aircraft owner could provide a solid case based on business, and practicality and safety was not threatened.

“We will look at it on a case-by-case basis to give some relief to these people,” he said.
  
Well I'll be buggered--- Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin

Love this bit...

 “We have become inward looking, but we’re just a dot in the world community,” Mr Boyd said. “We need to look outside of Australia.”


...finally someone daring to state the bloomin' obvious, instead of the politically correct, bureaucratic waffle & bollocks Wink

MTF...yeah what do you reckon?? P2 Tongue
Reply
#72

Great start to the day, truly wonderful. There was always only good things to say about Jeff Boyd, now even more. If Jeff can get the well meaning, but ineffective DAS on board and out of the clutches of Sleepy Hollow mafia, then perhaps hire Mike Smith (or look alike) as a Chief Operating officer; clean out the Bankstown coven and eradicate the vermin, the industry may yet survive, maybe even flourish.

Jeff – advertise for a snake and wabbit eradicator, then step aside, lest you be mown down in the rush of talented, experienced, qualified, honest, hardworking individuals.

Fire up the boilers Gobbles; the game is afoot.
Reply
#73

Jeff is to be congratulated for making a start, but don't lose sight of the fact that the tide is still running hard against GA. Take from another thread here on AP the CFI who has given up because he can't see over the mountain of paperwork. How many others like him these last twenty years, I'd say hundreds. Part 61 is still a disaster. The paperwork got to me when I was in the business. The ever changing rules to be incorporated into the ever changing ops manual, 12 pages when I started my joy flight and SE charter business. Now you wouldn't take an ops manual in your plane for fear of overloading. And what's in it? Pretty much a rewrite of the rules. If the Board wants GA to survive it must act quickly. Flying training is the bedrock of Australian aviation. We must insist on take up of the US system where instructors don't have to achieve the super expensive and time consuming AOC. This one reform would allow instructors to teach freely wherever and whenever there is opportunity. For any endeavour to succeed there must be incentives, will the CASA Board go for real reforms or just spend more millions on putting out spot fires?
Reply
#74

Fire up the boilers Gobbles; the game is afoot.

Boilers are lit and much heat being produced Captain!

From "that Man's" article;

"Mr Boyd, a practising licensed aircraft mechanical engineer, former creator and owner of Brindabella Airlines, and a light aircraft pilot, is highly regarded".

So so you understand what that means Frau Staib and Sir Anus? It means Mr Boyd actually has an aviation background and understands the system. He has 'real time' experience, and dare I say, he has actually gotten his hands dirty! Unlike some, he hasn't spent his time sliding up greasy poles, acting like a bobblehead or spent years under politicians desks licking their shoes and nibbling on their chinstraps!

Boyd said;

Mr Boyd told The Weekend Australian CASA had fallen into the trap of becoming “close to a ‘big R’ regulator”.

Oops, there goes 5 years of the Skull's big 'R' regulator bullshit! Hooray. I know Halfmanhalfbiscuit will be happy to hear that! But now that DAS 'Star Chamber' and the A380 tosser are gone, and with Boyd and possibly Skid-Mark willing to see CAsA hang up it's cattle prods, razors and jackboots, this could be a positive turn of events? However, Dr Voodoo is still around and he favours the 'death by hanging' approach, and so does Campbell's Soup, Wodger Wabbit and a good percentage of the organisation, so how in the name of pony-pooh they will change that is a real challenge. But if Skid-Mark's soon to be revealed restructure is done right, that may be the meal ticket.

So my question is this; 'has the voice of the IOS been listed to'? Perhaps. Keep in mind that the Australian aviation industry (albeit dying off) has some of the worlds most astute, technically skilled, business savvy, safety complying punters you could ever wish to put your lives in the hands of, so it would be thoroughly justified if finally we are being heard. The mealy mouthed alphabet soup characters such as Houston, Staib, Skid-Mark, Beaker, Foley and of course Pumpkin Head and Farmboy don't know shit from clay about real aviation (which excludes Chairman lounges, front row seats and lunch with Elaine Joyce and other assorted lobbyists), so maybe, just maybe, the worm has/might/will turn?

"Flicker of hope in the skies for all"

P_666
Reply
#75

(07-11-2015, 03:49 PM)Gobbledock Wrote:  Fire up the boilers Gobbles; the game is afoot.

Boilers are lit and much heat being produced Captain!

From "that Man's" article;

"Mr Boyd, a practising licensed aircraft mechanical engineer, former creator and owner of Brindabella Airlines, and a light aircraft pilot, is highly regarded".

So so you understand what that means Frau Staib and Sir Anus? It means Mr Boyd actually has an aviation background and understands the system. He has 'real time' experience, and dare I say, he has actually gotten his hands dirty! Unlike some, he hasn't spent his time sliding up greasy poles, acting like a bobblehead or spent years under politicians desks licking their shoes and nibbling on their chinstraps!

Boyd said;

Mr Boyd told The Weekend Australian CASA had fallen into the trap of becoming “close to a ‘big R’ regulator”.

Oops, there goes 5 years of the Skull's big 'R' regulator bullshit! Hooray. I know Halfmanhalfbiscuit will be happy to hear that! But now that DAS 'Star Chamber' and the A380 tosser are gone, and with Boyd and possibly Skid-Mark willing to see CAsA hang up it's cattle prods, razors and jackboots, this could be a positive turn of events? However, Dr Voodoo is still around and he favours the 'death by hanging' approach, and so does Campbell's Soup, Wodger Wabbit and a good percentage of the organisation, so how in the name of pony-pooh they will change that is a real challenge. But if Skid-Mark's soon to be revealed restructure is done right, that may be the meal ticket.

So my question is this; 'has the voice of the IOS been listed to'? Perhaps. Keep in mind that the Australian aviation industry (albeit dying off) has some of the worlds most astute, technically skilled, business savvy, safety complying punters you could ever wish to put your lives in the hands of, so it would be thoroughly justified if finally we are being heard. The mealy mouthed alphabet soup characters such as Houston, Staib, Skid-Mark, Beaker, Foley and of course Pumpkin Head and Farmboy don't know shit from clay about real aviation (which excludes Chairman lounges, front row seats and lunch with Elaine Joyce and other assorted lobbyists), so maybe, just maybe, the worm has/might/will turn?

"Flicker of hope in the skies for all"

P_666

For you Gobbles & "K" off the blog:

Quote:Kharon – “Fire up the boilers Gobbles; the game is afoot.”

11 Jul
[/url][Image: 11711108-Happy-emoticon-plane-flying-on-...00x100.jpg]
{P2 – Off the Aunty Pru forum this AM – finally a good news day, see here: CASA meets the Press #post71} Well we kind of got wind earlier in the week with multiple attacks from the Oz, plus other News Corp publications, that the Dick Smith/News Corp v ASA/CASA/Dept campaign was escalating but wow! Number #1 from […]


[url=http://auntypru.com/kharon-fire-up-the-boilers-gobbles-the-game-is-afoot/]Continue Reading
- See more at: http://auntypru.com/category/rrat/#sthash.P3j9VzYG.dpuf
Reply
#76

Gentlemen, the article in Rupert's weekend rag was all about airspace reform. It is the regulatory dogs breakfast that is killing general aviation. Without wholesale reform (of the total eradication and start again kind) the rot will continue.

Have to admit I did like thorn bird's comment;

"Since after the second world war the aviation industry has had to endure a string of Ex RAAF Types inflicting their particular brand of purgatory on the civilian industry. There were a few however who served the industry with integrity and common sense and they are fondly remembered.

The past decade or so has seen a string of Ex RAAF Types ascending to powerful positions within our regulator and its bastard children, ASA and the ATSB. They and their lawyers and acolytes have turned CAsA into a Sociopaths Nivana, and a playground for our legal fraternity."

But have to disagree on his comments re 'strict liability' which I think he is confusing with 'absolute liability'. The examples he quotes with the exception of the Quadrio case I don't think stand up. John Quadrio was shafted by the forum in which his case was heard, the AAT, which should never be used for a case where someone can lose their livelihood.
Reply
#77

(07-11-2015, 07:49 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  
Quote:Radical overhaul to deliver safer skies  


[Image: ean_higgins.png]
Reporter
Sydney


[Image: 595217-277fc23e-26a0-11e5-9967-4060475ab86c.jpg]

Newly appointed CASA chairman Jeff Boyd. Photo: Ray Strange. Source: News Corp Australia

After two decades of false starts, Australia will embrace the safer US model of managing the nation­’s skies that will see greater control of airspace in regional areas and allow ground staff to provide pilots with potentially lifesaving local weather and aircraft traffic information.  

The Weekend Australian can reveal the Civil Aviation Safety Authority will also adopt a fundamental change in philosophy and strategy, with CASA managers instructed to employ greater commercial sense and flexibility to bring the industry with them on a path of reform.

The moves follow a sustained campaign by The Weekend Australian and several aviation figures, including businessman Dick Smith, to address longstanding air safety concerns following fatal air crashes in Victoria and Queensland a decade ago.

The sweeping new initiatives were revealed to The Weekend Australian by newly appointed CASA chairman Jeff Boyd in his first media interview since taking up his appointment last week. “We have become inward looking, but we’re just a dot in the world community,” Mr Boyd said. “We need to look outside of Australia.”

The new moves offer a promise to fix an air traffic control system judged by many in the aviation industry to be not as safe as it could be outside the major cities — and by some, including Mr Smith, to be dangerous.

In 2004 six people died when the plane they were flying in from Sydney’s Bankstown Airport to Benalla in Victoria crashed into a mountain, with air traffic controllers being alerted by an alarm that radar had detected the aircraft was off course but not intervening in part because it was flying in airspace not designated as under their control.

In 2005 another accident, which killed 15 people in an aircraft which crashed into a mountain while approaching a small airport at Lockhart River in Cape York, might have been prevented if, as occurs at similar airports in the US, ground staff who were not air traffic controllers had had radio contact with approaching aircraft and warned of bad weather in that direction.

As reported in The Weekend Australian in recent weeks, there are also concerns about uncontrolled airspace at Ballina, in northern NSW, where rapid growth in commercial passenger traffic has led to congestion, and where at least one near miss has occurred.

Another near collision some years ago above Launceston led to the installation of a new type of aircraft surveillance system, but air traffic controllers still do not direct surveillance controlled approache­s in Tasmania, relying instead on a procedural method which is less efficient and which aviation experts say is less safe.

Australia, unlike the US and Canada, does not have an across-the-board system in which airliners and other commercial aircraft are directed by air traffic controllers almost to the ground.

The federal government had planned to move to the North American model in the early 2000s but the policy wasn’t followed through. Instead, a patchwork of protocols applies, with some areas and some airports designated as being under controlled airspace, but others not.

At many airports, some with substantial traffic, pilots are left to their own devices once under 8500 feet to sort out separation among themselves through radio contact, even though they may still be under radar coverage to much lower levels. Mr Smith had branded this situation as ridic­ulous and unsafe.

In addition to airspace reform, Mr Boyd will encourage CASA management, on a case-by-case basis, to allow exemptions and extensi­ons for aircraft owners to fit a costly new air navigation system known as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-­Broadcast, or ADS-B, if they can make a compelling practical and commercial case and safety is not compromised.

CASA will adopt a more flexible approach to a compulsory and expensive program of inspections of older Cessna light aircraft known as Supplementary Inspection Documents, or SIDS. It will consider making extensions because­ the size of the program has caused a bottleneck in the aircraft maintenance sector.

Mr Boyd told The Weekend Australian CASA had fallen into the trap of becoming “close to a ‘big R’ regulator”.

The organisation’s first priority remained enforcing a safe flying environment, but he would take a second look at any new regulations to determine if they amounted to “change for change’s sake”.

“You have to make sure it’s safe out there, that people are not doing the wrong thing,” Mr Boyd said.

“But you have to ask how the industry can comply with that rule or regulation, and whether, if it is going to cost them a lot of money, is it worth doing in terms of safety.”

Mr Boyd, a practising licensed aircraft mechanical engineer, former creator and owner of Brindabella Airlines, and a light aircraft pilot, is highly regarded.

The federal government appointed him CASA chairman after the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review report, chaired by veteran David Forsyth, called last year for wide reforms after criticising CASA for taking too hard a line and maintaining an adversarial approach to the industry, which had lost trust in the authority.

Late last year John McCormick, CASA’s director of air safety — essentially the authority’s chief executive — was succeeded by former senior RAAF officer Mark Skidmore, who is understood to share Mr Boyd’s view of the need for a new approach.

Mr Boyd said he would encourage a lowering of the floor of controlled airspace, known as cate­g­ory E, at airports on a case-by-case basis. “Let’s see where we can do E where we have reliable air traffic control surveillance,” he said.

Mr Boyd would not discuss spec­ifics, but The Weekend Australian can reveal CASA will recommend such a move for Ballina.

It is expected to recommend that the controlled airspace around Ballina be lowered from 8500 feet to 5000 feet, and that the airport install a radio operator to help pilots with local weather and air traffic inform­ation, something the airport’s management is keen to do.

Mr Boyd said he would sponsor a board directive to management to see if it could free up what the industry describes as absurdly tight rules, restricting what ground staff who are not serving or former air traffic controllers can provide pilots over the Unicom radio in the way of weather and traffic information. “If it’s used as supplementary flight safety information, we have no argument against it,” he said.

Some of the moves, such as liberating ground staff to man the Unicom, have been strongly resisted by the air traffic controllers union Civil Air, and the union is also disinclined to expand controlled airspace unless more controllers are employed.

The chairman of Airservices Australia, Angus Houston, has rejected calls from Mr Smith and others for the firefighters his organ­isation employs at airports without control towers to perform the radio operator function as they do at many regional US airports.

As revealed by The Australian this week, Airservices, the government-owned body which runs the country’s air traffic control and navigation system, insisted two years ago that CASA not grant exemptions or extensions for ADS­B, pulling out of an understanding with CASA, which as safety authority makes and enforces air regulations.

But Mr Boyd said under the new approach CASA would consider doing so if the aircraft owner could provide a solid case based on business, and practicality and safety was not threatened.

“We will look at it on a case-by-case basis to give some relief to these people,” he said.
  

Point taken Peter and I agree the main issue that is suffocating the industry is the regulatory reform "dogs breakfast". However I disagree with your assessment that the Dick Smith/NewsCorp campaign is only about airspace reform, especially in light of these comments...
 
"..The Weekend Australian can reveal the Civil Aviation Safety Authority will also adopt a fundamental change in philosophy and strategy, with CASA managers instructed to employ greater commercial sense and flexibility to bring the industry with them on a path of reform.."

"..The sweeping new initiatives were revealed to [i]The Weekend Australian by newly appointed CASA chairman Jeff Boyd in his first media interview since taking up his appointment last week. “We have become inward looking, but we’re just a dot in the world community,” Mr Boyd said. “We need to look outside of Australia.”..."[/i]

"...Mr Boyd told[i] The Weekend Australian CASA had fallen into the trap of becoming “close to a ‘big R’ regulator”.[/i]

The organisation’s first priority remained enforcing a safe flying environment, but he would take a second look at any new regulations to determine if they amounted to “change for change’s sake”.

“You have to make sure it’s safe out there, that people are not doing the wrong thing,” Mr Boyd said.


“But you have to ask how the industry can comply with that rule or regulation, and whether, if it is going to cost them a lot of money, is it worth doing in terms of safety.”..."

The old saying 'actions speak louder than words' is very true and industry has heard similar rhetoric and promises countless times in the past 2 or more decades. However I don't believe industry has heard it coming from the Chair of CASA before.

Nor have we had a Chair that has first hand knowledge & experience of many of the issues currently debilitating industry, number one being the big "R" regulator... Dodgy

The most revealing & refreshing aspect of the Oz article is that Jeff Boyd has taken ownership of the whole mess and essentially admitted there is a substantial number of problems that he & the Board intend to rectify. That is fundamentally different to the career bureaucrat who was his predecessor.

Here is part of the media release from Dr Allan Hawke when McComic was forced to resign:

Quote:...Mr McCormick has, however, agreed, to the Board’s request to stay on in the position until 31 August 2014.This will allow for an executive search process to fill the position and enable the Director to assist the Board’s initial consideration of the Government’s Independent Review of Aviation Safety Regulation scheduled to be completed around the end of May.


Mr McCormick’s leadership over the last five years has been the critical factor behind the significant improvements to Australia’s aviation safety regulatory regime and CASA’s performance. The aims he set out when taking up the position have been largely achieved, including:

  • Err...BOLLOCKS! x 8

...These improvements have come at a time of increasing and more complex demands on CASA with major growth in Australia’s diversified aviation sectors and record numbers of domestic and international passengers flying in Australian skies.

Australia’s outstanding international reputation for aviation safety owes much to John McCormick’s stewardship and the reforms and initiatives undertaken on his watch.

Dr Hawke acknowledged that CASA had had to take significant regulatory action in relation to a few aviation operators, aircraft types and aircraft equipment over the last five years. Dr Hawke praised Mr McCormick’s key role in ensuring that these actions were taken by CASA to protect the travelling public and industry operators.

The Authority has also developed a more stable funding model under Mr McCormick’s direction to underpin sustainable and effective operations for CASA.

The Board has regarded it as a privilege to serve with John McCormick in the interests of “Safe Skies for All” and wishes him all the very best in his future endeavours...(cough..cough BOLLOCKS!)
    
Hawke only left the Boardroom 11 days ago, so if this is Boyd's (& the new Board's) first real media foray then IMO it is a good start... Wink

MTF...P2 Tongue  

Ps Although fair warning from PAIN Boyd, you don't have much time mate..  Dodgy ..tick..tock on the IOS clock Big Grin  )

[Image: untitled.png]  
Reply
#78

Balancing acts and Shanghai darts.

Walked into a cheery session of the BRB last evening, good turn out, more to do with roster than anything else, but even so; the place was buzzing.  P7_TOM ambled off to get them in, for it was settling up day and I had four pints on his slate, so there we were.  The first inch off #2 pint was sliding down when the ‘guests’ arrived; the crew all went quiet (ish) and looked over to my corner.  “Wuzzup?” I asked TOM – “a challenge” he says nodding toward the door.  It was my old, treasured FO, now a Skipper, he only ever had one fault which was he beat me at darts – regularly.  Game on.  I’ll bore you a little, he and I only ever play a game called ‘Cricket’; it’s complicated, but essentially unless you can ‘Shanghai’ a selected number three times, you can’t score; a ‘Shanghai’ is where a double, treble and single, in the same number wedge can be hit with three darts – it’s tricky.  I had some better luck than my old mate and this time, scrambled to a narrow win.  I only mention this because the game set the tone for the evening discussion, tricky, complex an element of risk and a degree of concentration required.

[Image: Darts_11.jpg]

First up was the good Doc. Godley, AAAA, Hurst and the implications of that nexus.  Unanimously declared as the most positive step taken in many a long year.  The notion that a crew of experts in the field, could meet with an ATSB specialist to develop a program to measure and assess the results of a safety analysis then translate that into a practical, useful risk mitigation tool received a rousing cheer and much overt support.  Should be made mandatory and could only be improved by CASA adjusting the rules to meet the benchmarks set.  Enough said, kudos to all, in spades.

Item next – Board, Boyd and changes.   Tough call this one; the wrangle went on for a long while; two clearly defined groups, no abstainers.  The younger crew v the older hands defined the two sides.  The older troops thought the Boyd fresh air approach a good thing. BUT, cited reality.  The Senate recommendations produced no positive changes; Forsyth recieved the same treatment; and, history supports the claim that rhetoric is fine and dandy; but has put no whisky in the jar, not ever.  Plenty of hot air and an equal number of broken promises.  The final and most compelling argument (IMO) was the performance of the new DAS.  The CVD episode has angered many; the Part 61 speech and several other blunders have revealed a straw man, captivated by the iron ring.  Not only out of his depth but unable (or unwilling) to challenge the existing situation.  That was agreed 92/08%

The others argued that Boyd could fix it; lead the DAS to the light and with the support of the minister, the Senators and with a decent COO, turn the desert into a garden.   The minister had, they argued met his promises and had delivered the tools to do the job; the road blocks were now internal resistance to change which could be overcome by a determined assault.

No consensus on this topic was reached.  What was agreed is that the Senate and Forsyth recommendations could be used as the benchmark to measure change asking the Estimates committee to monitor progress (Umpire).  It was also agreed to promote DPM Truss from minuscule to minister for providing the tools, with upgrade to Minister if it all pans out.  

Airspace reform came in a poor third; the ‘old school’ won that round 87/23%.  Arguing that even if the unions could be persuaded to cooperate; there is a 20 years track record of abject failure to say that even if change can be made; the resistance to it will simply go underground and a sabotage campaign will result.  It’s a big call to ask Boyd to move a mountain with just a shovel and a wheelbarrow.  He will need help and lots of it, even then the sceptics airspace change bets seem fairly safe.  The wild card is Dick and sustained, public political pressure.  Even money is the best I can offer.

We shall, as always just have to wait and see.  But Boyd and his board have the best wishes and full support of the BRB, now that was unanimous.  The ball is rolling, if we want meaningful change we all must help keep it rolling.  Standing on the side-lines, hiding in the pavilion or sitting in the spectator stands is no longer an option.  Loose this one and it’s all over for industry as we know it.  

Ends Sunday ramble with much to think over.   Coffee with TOM and Mamma awaits, maybe even a muffin to share with the dogs, sometimes, I get lucky.

Toot toot.   
Reply
#79

I'm surprised that the 'ISIS approach' hasn't been raised yet! Where a group of unruly IOS come in wearing bandana's and holding up ICAO flags and blow the living shit out everything that is of historical significance? You know things like; outdated regs, long serving alphabet soup executives who uphold wicked Western aviation methodologies, naked statues of David and Farq'u'hard'son, Government buildings where acts of torture and embuggerance have been inflicted on the aviation minority, stuff like that?

Bad bad Gobbles...........
Reply
#80

Haven't witnessed "libricide" since the library of Baghdad incident, but perhaps such could take place on the doorsteps of Fort Fumble with a ritualistic sacrifice of Australian Reg's, (plus amendments and exemptions), in the presence of main stream media. A fire permit would need to be obtained in summer months due to the mass of combustible material and of course have the fire brigade attend for added seriousness.

If "they" thought the "caravan of courage" was outrageous "they" may think twice before someone puts match to this lot and causes a catastrophic global warming incident.

Greens support would be forthcoming if a copy of the US reg's were shown to highlight the destruction of trees impacting all "Earthiens".
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)