[Peetwo]

St Commode: "Nothing to see here Mick Mack??" -   



Our useless NFI miniscule continues to believe his CASAmite and former St Commode adviser that everything is A-OK within the maladministration of CASA in this country - FDS!     

Via the SMH:

---

Aviation safety inspectors claim staff shortage amid CASA restructure


By Patrick Hatch
December 9, 2019 — 12.00am

Federal transport minister Michael McCormack has declared "full confidence" in the nation's cash strapped aviation safety regulator amid claims a restructuring of the agency has led to a dangerous shortage in frontline inspection staff.

The Civil Aviation and Safety Authority is facing a $3.4 million budget shortfall this financial year, amid uncertainty around domestic aviation fuel excise revenue. Revenue from the 3.5¢-a-litre excise tax has been flat because major airlines Qantas and Virgin Australia have been limiting the number of domestic flights they offer in a bid to ensure stable profits.



CASA also faces a growing workload from international flights, which do not pay the excise tax.

Professionals Australia claimed there are 41 unfilled technical air safety positions at CASA, representing a 25 per cent reduction in airworthiness, pilot and safety systems inspectors over the past three years.

CASA said its inspector numbers have only fallen by eight, from 151 to 143. But the union claimed a further 33 positions are vacant due to inspectors being taken off front-line duty through secondments, special projects and acting roles.

"CASA has refused to fill these positions and has informed staff it has no intention of filling them until an anticipated restructure has taken place," said the union's Australian government group director Dale Beasley.

History has shown repeatedly what happens when standards slip. We are on a slippery slope towards degraded safety standards.

Mr McCormack, who is also deputy prime minister,  said in a statement he had "full confidence in CASA’s ability to perform its industry oversight obligations and ensure aviation safety.”


A CASA spokeswoman said the agency was in the process of "transforming the way we operate to provide more consistent and standardised safety oversight", and was developing a new "oversight model" that would identify staff roles and capabilities.


One CASA inspector, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not permitted to talk about the organisation publicly, said the staff shortage was forcing inspectors to cut corners and adopt “box ticking” approach to safety checks.

“We’ve got a huge number of people in CASA who have zero faith in management and genuinely believe that we’re setting ourselves up for a catastrophic event,” he said.



“We set a high standard, but that’s what first world aviation safety requires.

“History has shown repeatedly what happens when standards slip. We are on a slippery slope towards degraded safety standards.”



The resourcing gaps meant CASA has been unable to carry out inspections of overseas maintenance facilities, and unacceptable delays , Mr Beasley said.


CASA's latest corporate plan said it expected to run at a $3.4 million deficit in this financial year, and that it would try to balance its budget during "challenging" forward years.


CASA was to present a "detailed review" of its activities and funding requirements ahead of the government's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, in a fortnight. CASA's spokeswoman said this review was likely to be considered in the next federal budget.


Labor's federal transport minister Catherine King said the union's claims were "extremely concerning", and Mr McCormack "must explain how he thinks this level of resourcing is sufficient to keep Australians safe.”


The government earlier this year amended the Civil Aviation Act so that CASA must now "consider the economic and cost impact on individuals, businesses and the community" of its safety regulation. This followed an outcry from smaller aviation operations who claimed they were being strangled by red tape.

---

And also from Yahoo Finance:

---

Aussie lives at risk from understaffed air safety workforce


Jessica Yun

View photos


Boeing's 787 Dreamliner aircraft lands in Sydney in May 24, 2012 in Sydney, Australia. (Source: Getty)

More

Australian travellers are at risk because of ‘chronic’ understaffing at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), an aviation union has warned.

According to Professionals Australia – ACT Branch and Australian Government Group director Dale Beasley, there are 122 technical air safety inspector positions across Australia.

However, only two thirds of them are filled, with current workers struggling with an “unsustainable” workload that was putting travellers in danger.

“Right now, these technical air safety staff are struggling to cover 41 vacant positions and have been doing so for 18 months. It’s an unacceptable risk for air travellers and is unsustainable for air safety staff,” he said.

Sydney and Melbourne were missing 25 per cent of their technical air safety staff, while Brisbane and Adelaide are missing a third of their workforce, he pointed out.

In Darwin, there are seven total positions available – but only one is filled.


“Clearly this is a highly stressful and dangerous situation for the air safety inspectors involved and puts Australia’s air travellers and flying operations at risk,” said Beasley.

“CASA’s understaffing of air safety across Australia has reached crisis point.”

However, he said CASA does not plan to fill up the available positions until an anticipated restructure planned over the next 18 months to three years.

The director added that concerns had been raised with CASA regarding the rising safety risks and hazards, but that the Authority’s response has been “flippant and dismissive”.

“Rather than simply filling the vacant positions, they’ve told staff it’s their responsibility to step forward if they’re feeling under pressure.”

If technical air safety roles are not filled, we could see disasters akin to the Lion Air Boeing 737 MAX crash, which resulted in 189 deaths, said Beasley, who urged CASA to fill the roles.

“If CASA fails to fill these vital technical air safety roles and support existing staff, we’ll be counting the cost in lives, not dollars.”

Australian Federation of Air Pilots industrial and legal officer Paul Ferguson said CASA was not giving flying operations inspectors sufficient support, with flying training falling short of maintaining pilot qualifications.

“The minimum yearly 39-hour requirement of flying currency training is not being met,” he said. “Stalled recruitment has resulted in significant staff shortages, which is now compromising the effectiveness of CASA.”

“As Christmas approaches, it is critical that these gaps are filled to ensure the safe travel of all Australians at one of the busiest times of the year.”



Community and Public Sector Union national vice-president Lisa Newman added: “As Christmas approaches, it is critical that these gaps are filled to ensure the safe travel of all Australians at one of the busiest times of the year.”


Yahoo Finance has reached out to CASA for comment.

---

Hmm...penny drop moment?? I just worked out why it was that Sterlo was asking these questions:

Question on notice no. 390

Senator Glenn Sterle: asked the Civil Aviation Safety Authority on 8 November
2019—

How many Flying Operations Inspectors are employed at CASA?
On average how many hours of flying currency training was completed by Flying
Operations Inspectors last year?
How many applications for flying currency training put forward by staff have been
rejected by CASA in the last year? On what grounds?
Are CASA meeting the ICAO requirements to maintain the skills and currency of
their staff to the same level held by industry?
How many Flying Operations Inspectors are 'not current' (ie training not up to date)
on the aircraft types they are required to oversight?


Question on notice no. 391

Senator Glenn Sterle: asked the Civil Aviation Safety Authority on 8 November
2019—

Is it correct that any engineering/maintenance organisation that wants to conduct any
maintenance on the aircraft conducting high capacity regular public passenger
services needs an approval issued by CASA under Civil Aviation Safety Regulation
(CASR) 145?
What are the steps involved in assessing and approving Part 145 approvals? Where
are these published?
What is the normal practice for reviewing Part 145 applications to conduct onsite
inspections of overseas operators and facilities who are seeking Part 145 approvals?
In the last 2 years, how many physical site inspections have been conducted as part of
145 approvals within Australia?
In the last 2 years, how many physical site inspections have been conducted as part of
145 approvals overseas?
What are the risks posed by organisations not being properly scrutinised in the Part
145 approval process?
Were CASA regulations followed in the assessment and approval of EFW's Part 145?


Question on notice no. 392

Senator Glenn Sterle: asked the Civil Aviation Safety Authority on 8 November
2019—

Does CASA agree that there are serious issues with workplace culture?
What steps is CASA taking to improve workplace culture?
How many vacant positions exist in the technical workforce?
What is the impact on industry and aviation safety of these positions being unfilled?
When does CASA plan on filling these vacancies?
CASA's corporate plan recognises that staff lacking skill or not having the capacity to
perform their role is a risk to aviation safety, why has CASA allowed so many
vacancies to remain in the technical workforce?

Hmm...I note that those questions still remain unanswered despite going past the due by date - 

I wonder if now would be a good time to mention that a decade ago we had very similar issues that was exacerbated by the findings of both an ICAO and FAA IASA audits that almost saw Australia bumped to Category II:

5. (C/NF) A downgrade to Category 2 would be the worst-case
scenario, which would entail measures such as
freezing Australia-U.S. flight operations to current levels
and terminating code-sharing arrangements, such as the one
between Qantas and American Airlines.  CASA officials are not
taking this possibility lightly and seem committed to
resolve the shortcomings in order to avoid a downgrade.

---

7 December 2009: FAA/ICAO brief on 'next steps' after poor results/findings in the ICAO USOAP 2008 & FAA Nov 30- Dec 4 2009 Australian audits. (ref links - #53 & WikiLeaks cable PDF: http://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/2...ileaks.pdf

Ref: Pel-Air: A coverup: a litany of lies? - Version III




Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-24-11-2019-thre...-fountain/

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

Many axes; one, small grindstone.

A lot of slightly stretched agenda supporting going on too. One element (of the many) which is being ruthlessly ‘exploited’ is the short fall in technical staff. That, stand alone, begs many questions, which IMO demand immediate answers.

Two of the most pressing of those questions are:- (i) ‘who would want to work for CASA?’ (ii) ‘how much money is wasted?’

The Buckley case serves us well, proving an almost perfect base for defining the answers; albeit, the case is one of many similar events, it is however current and will suffice as a support for unanswered questions.

1) In total, how many staff and man-hours (total) were involved, from the beginning, in Buckley’s application for upgraded Flight School approval, under the new regulations?

2) In total, how many staff and man hours were involved in revoking the approval?

The answer should contain a detailed account of every hour from Board to the clerk who first received the application. The cost in purely fiscal terms is horrendous; achieving what?

But, the seriously sinister part lays beneath the outrageous expenditure and its not the embuggerance of Buckley.

Consider working with the ‘type’ of mentality which ordered a documented, known ‘CASA hit-man’ to leave his base and run the total destruction of the Buckley dream and write off previous approval.

Consider working with a management structure which ordered the destruction.

Consider leaving an industry position to be part of an organisation which can, does and will continue to prevent innovation and set out, with malice aforethought, to destroy individuals and businesses.

Consider working for the ‘big three’ – imagine having to bear the shame and isolation associated with being ‘one of theirs’.

The CASA ‘track record’ is there for all to see; not making it up.

Conversely; many I know would gladly work for CASA. It would a thing to be proud of – being part of the reformation and rehabilitation of the industry. Had good sense prevailed and a Director who had the best interest of the nation at heart, determined to see aviation thrive again been appointed; things would be very different. But, as it stands, I’d rather chew my leg off than be tainted by association with likes of Aleck, Carmody and Whatsisname.

Start again Senators; clean it out, get rid of the vermin and for the sake of the nation get some sensible advice through to this hapless thing called minister, from someone who actually knows how to resolve the farce. At the moment government is grasping at straws, relying entirely on ‘advice’ designed cover over the gaping holes in the CASA knitting, through which, one day something will fall and shame this once proud nation.

All that is being heard at ministerial level is a faery tale:-

It is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

Toot – toot.

[thorn bird]

You beat me to it K, but I think that presser regurgitated needs a little unstitching.

Its a press release from the union, quite obviously fishing for their members, even using
the "Safety" card to terrify the punters ie. "if you don't employ more people or pay the ones there even more it's going to rain aluminium in a suburb near you."

You mention joining CAsA, on the surface a nice cushy job, paid well above industry standards and pretty unimaginable perks to go with it, one would think there would be a queue at the door for would be applicants. Instead only industry rejects get a look in, the odd white hat with a desire to educate and assist the industry does not last long in the toxic environment prevailing at CAsA.

Remember the old quote attributed to a former sociopathic CAsA Das?

"I don't care how you do it, just shut them down"

The press segment starts out:

"Federal transport minister Michael McCormack has declared "full confidence" in the nation's cash strapped aviation safety regulator"

Very nice of him to say so, but as a professional politician who supposedly has his finger on the pulse, is he not aware that the industry CAsA oversights has a diametrically opposite view. Plenty of evidence out there if he got off his shiny ass and consulted.

CAsA is cashed strapped?? didn't they put a levee on avgas, supposedly a temporary measure to employ more frontline staff, but actually went to employing more managers and staff pay rises, its still in place, bleeding the GA industry of funds that could have been spent on maintenance or training or currency. Its a proven fact less participation reduces competency which in turn compromises safety, cause and effect, CAsA never considers effect, just look at the Angel Flight imbroglio, cause was known, CAsA reacted with inane requirements that had nothing to do with the causes but will reduce participation. The arrogant Cheshire cat stated he did it because he can, no explanation given. A sure indication he has no understanding of aviation matters and why would he, he's nothing but a career bureaucrat with background in the spook business. Giving a career bureaucrat extraordinary powers with no understanding of wielding those powers is tantamount to insanity, especially when his advice comes from a mad hatter and some bloke who can't find his marbles.

When they create tens of thousands of pages of legislation, which their own personnel don't understand, it takes a lot of man power to oversight. Cant help wondering what the ratio of employee's to active aircraft is in Australia compared with the USA, they have an industry that dwarfs our, or anyone else's on the planet, but they only have a thousand pages of reg's to deal with, and they achieve better safety outcomes than we do.

Given the decline of General aviation in Australia and its continued slide into oblivion one would expect redundancies at CAsA rather than increasing staff levels.

“We’ve got a huge number of people in CASA who have zero faith in management"

Yup, about the same within Industry.

"genuinely believe that we’re setting ourselves up for a catastrophic event,”

Australia's aviation industry is incredibly safe, thats despite CAsA not because of them. The vast majority of industry believes a catastrophe is in no-ones interest and strives to keep it as safe as possible, despite CAsA continually attempting to undermine it.

“We set a high standard, but that’s what first world aviation safety requires."

High standard? set by whom and measured against what. If its measured against the number of regulations we are without doubt the best in the world, if it's measured against actual statistics properly interpreted, we do no better than anyone else, we are just vastly more expensive.

Australia first world? good grief someone is delusional.

“CASA’s understaffing of air safety across Australia has reached crisis point.”

Simple and affordable solution to that. Adopt USA FAR's, not only would a whole industry be saved from oblivion, but we'd be safer as well, a no brainer actually.

"A CASA spokeswoman said the agency was in the process of "transforming the way we operate to provide more consistent and standardised safety oversight", and was developing a new "oversight model" that would identify staff roles and capabilities."

Well they've been at it for thirty odd years, spent a half billion dollars to achieve nothing. Its so bad now they have to produce a whole new manual to explain the regulations they've put in place, CAsA really has become the grand master in the bureaucratic make work sphere of government agencies.

"Australian Federation of Air Pilots industrial and legal officer Paul Ferguson said CASA was not giving flying operations inspectors sufficient support, with flying training falling short of maintaining pilot qualifications."

Never used to be a problem in the past when FOI's actually flew. Now their like seagulls, you have to hurl rocks at them to get them in the air. Also almost all high end CAsA training is conducted overseas, same for the industry at crippling cost.

"Community and Public Sector Union national vice-president Lisa Newman added: “As Christmas approaches, it is critical that these gaps are filled to ensure the safe travel of all Australians at one of the busiest times of the year.”

What a wonderful statement to put out to the public to end on. If you fly over Christmas your all going to die.

[P7_TOM]

Holy falling Aluminium Batman; CASA have knocked off for Christmas – we’ll all die without their godlike oversight of our safety. Heaven help us – a pilot may make a clerical error – we are doomed – you can’t trust pilots unless CASA is present to hold their sweaty, clumsy, incompetent, criminal hands. Oh me – Oh my.

Thinks (hope there are some bipartisan politicians on board when it happens) maybe we get lucky? Eh?

[P7_TOM]

Required reading for the drive home. From a 'real' minister. History

[Kharon]

A ramble; sound, fury and SFA else.


Shall I compare thee to an Elvis promo?

Sometimes, it is best to reflect on wise words; writ of old, when such things as ‘honour’ and honesty and ‘pledging your word’ actually meant something. Not so in the modern world it seems. Australian politicians swear oaths; meaningless to them. Just the last gateway to the trough of plenty, where promises and platform become irrelevant in the great game of political survival. Always an excuse. Always a convenient escape route; always a reason for not doing– never a guilty conscience; just following ‘party line’ a valid excuse  to all questions related to past promises.

The 'biggest lie' ever told is that of ‘ bipartisan’ on matters aeronautical. Do you realise how much time, money and effort this crock of shit has cost this nation? The total cost of three decades of ‘inquiry’ without a positive proactive result has almost decimated the will and spirit of aviation in this once proud land.

The things which have been done in the name of bipartisan ‘safety’ are a travesty. Full stop; end of. The history of this is freely available, demonstrable and provable. All there, clear as day, writ large.

From this, a quiet, unheralded, unsung revolution is emerging. Sooner or later a tipping point will emerge; when it does, someone, somewhere, somehow will have to deal with it. Then, perhaps, meaningful, rapid, effective changes will be enforced through public outcry that ‘government’ sat on it’s collective beam ends being ‘bipartisan’ and allowing (Oh yes, through inaction) the current dangerous state of affairs to exist.

Meanwhile; the following may serve (well, those with the wit to understand it) to focus parliamentary attention on the future; because gods help you when the next major event happens, without world class ATC, without fire services, without sensible rules and, heaven forbid another building full of kiddies, Christmas shopping, is decimated.

Now, my co-mates and brothers in exile,

Hath not old custom made this life more sweet

Than that of painted pomp?

Yes, it is. Why? – Read on………

Are not these woods More free from peril than the envious court?

Here feel we not the penalty of Adam,

The seasons' difference, as the icy fang

And churlish chiding of the winter’s wind,



Which, when it bites and blows upon my body,

Even till I shrink with cold, I smile and say,

“This is no flattery. These are counsellors

That feelingly persuade me what I am.”



Sweet are the uses of adversity,

Which, like the toad, ugly and venomous,

Wears yet a precious jewel in his head.

And this our life, exempt from public haunt,

Finds tongues in trees, books in the running brooks,
Sermons in stones, and good in everything.


Aviation, like the Deer – an easy mark


Come, shall we go and kill us venison?

And yet it irks me the poor dappled fools,

Being native burghers of this desert city,

Should in their own confines with forkèd heads

Have their round haunches gored.

Think on – but; I ask you seriously is ‘this’ the saviour of Australia’s once proud aviation heritage. “Elvis has left the building”. Oh, how I wish it was true – Alas……



Aye: a weary Toot - toot. TOM awaits with golden glass - enough I say, let the year pass with no progress, save the universal whines of cowardarse.

[P7_TOM]

The legend – enshrined. (Musically).

Aloha shirts, the Prime Minister may own, probably even bought one ‘on-site’ – for safety reasons (multiple colours hide multiple stains ( from excess fruit in the glass). But did you know he has a donkey?

‘The boys’ discovered this - listening to ABC radio. They was this strange ‘braying’ sound coming from some small village out West – claiming to be the new capitol of the nation. Well; they re tuned the radio – to be sure; and, listened again.

Seems a gifted musician/singer/ songwriter has set the story (legend even) to words and music. No doubt the PM is delighted that the legend of the Wagga based donkey (warrior) has made the charts. A life’s ambition to be a ‘star’ realised. Here is the song we are all singing along to. A tribute to our DPM who has so magnificently held the fort while the nation burned.

There remains a fair lump of money in the Kitty – soon, we shall have yet another rendition of the song which best highlights the character and achievements of our esteemed transport minister.

[thorn bird]

Picked this off the UP.

Mr Approach with some advice to Glen Buckley.

Glenn = I recently left CASA because it had totally lost it's way. The body (it is not an organisation) that I originally joined was transformed after Mr Carmody joined into a true branch of the public service. Layer upon layer of new management, confusion about roles, lots of "Plans" but no coordination of change, zero documentation, inability to keep regulations up to date, and as far as I could determine absolutely no safety assessment process. An SMS, as required by all authorisation holders, is completely missing from CASA. No-one in my branch could even detail the required content of a Safety Case or how such a submission would be assessed by CASA!

! tried to raise your plight internally to get the corporate response but all I ever got was "he's a nutter', "difficult to deal with" and as for PPRuNe - who reads that rubbish anyway! In other words corporate denial that there was even a problem and if the messenger dared to suggest CASA may be wrong - there are a thousand egos willing to toe the company line.

I wish you luck but they have got so much money set aside to protect the Minister from criticism that they will simply use the legal system to bankrupt you over an over until you are forced to give up.

My advice is to forget tribunals and courts and go political. If you can get a politician onside money becomes meaningless. Your issues can be raised in parliament under privilege and reported on verbatim by the media. That will really put the pressure right back where the Minister does not like it - in plain view.

Pretty much says it all and I suspect there are a lot more white hats like him. I just reverently hope takes the time to make a submission to the Senate Inquiry an "insiders" story carries a lot of weight and can open the pandora's box on the machinations of the CAsA machine in action, or if you prefer inaction.

[Kharon]

A fart - in a thunderstorm.

TB – “Pretty much says it all and I suspect there are a lot more white hats like him. I just reverently hope takes the time to make a submission to the Senate Inquiry an "insiders" story carries a lot of weight and can open the Pandora's box on the machinations of the CAsA machine in action, or if you prefer inaction.”  (MA is brave to have said as much as 'he' did. Bravo that man).

Spot on. How many times now have we called for ex ATSB, ASA and CASA employee’s to be questioned by an Inquiry panel? Lot and lots is the answer; for there secret lays. Exit interviews by an independent, official body or person would clearly define a true understanding. Confidentially could be protected – the exit statement protected and anonymous, to side step the blood curdling ‘non disclosure’ agreement.

The ‘new’ RRAT inquiry allows scope for individuals to detail their ‘CASA’ experience. A simple statement of fact, detailing cause, effect and outcome, made confidentially may just be the catalyst required to shine a light on the very real, urgent need for reform of the regulator and importantly, how it does business.

I believe, that until the Senate committee and the public ‘know’ what ‘we’ know and some of the horror stories are examined, Buckley for the latest in a long line; there is little hope of breaking the bipartisan automatic rubber stamp process, or achieving ministerial clarity.

Toot – toot.

[P7_TOM]

Boxing day at the movies.

We all remember the release of ‘Sleepless in Seattle’. Today, at a private screening, ‘the boys’ provided their latest video effort (montage)– ‘Witless in Wagga’ and a supporting feature ‘Gonzo runs the Weather’. All cobbled together from publicly available media; free to air.

If, and that’s a big IF, the lads can ever be persuaded to release it on ‘Face-book’ or ‘Twitter’ it would go ballistic. Never, in the field of political cornflakes, have so many gaffs been made by such a notable few.

You watch TV and listen to the radio – we all do – however; when you ‘lump’ together every fatuous statement and load of spoken bollocks, there is a very clear picture which emerges. The lunatics have not only taken over the asylum; but are making much more money than you or I in doing so. And we just sit back and let ‘em – shame on us.

[Peetwo]

Glenn = I recently left CASA because it had totally lost it's way. The body (it is not an organisation) that I originally joined was transformed after Mr Carmody joined into a true branch of the public service. Layer upon layer of new management, confusion about roles, lots of "Plans" but no coordination of change, zero documentation, inability to keep regulations up to date, and as far as I could determine absolutely no safety assessment process. An SMS, as required by all authorisation holders, is completely missing from CASA. No-one in my branch could even detail the required content of a Safety Case or how such a submission would be assessed by CASA!

! tried to raise your plight internally to get the corporate response but all I ever got was "he's a nutter', "difficult to deal with" and as for PPRuNe - who reads that rubbish anyway! In other words corporate denial that there was even a problem and if the messenger dared to suggest CASA may be wrong - there are a thousand egos willing to toe the company line.

I wish you luck but they have got so much money set aside to protect the Minister from criticism that they will simply use the legal system to bankrupt you over an over until you are forced to give up.

My advice is to forget tribunals and courts and go political. If you can get a politician onside money becomes meaningless. Your issues can be raised in parliament under privilege and reported on verbatim by the media. That will really put the pressure right back where the Minister does not like it - in plain view.

Hmm...according to St Commode everything is fine and dandy over at Fort Fumble HQ...

Via CASA Briefing:

(Warning: The following bureaucratic weasel words from our one and only Patron Saint of Oz Aviation Safety may leave certain readers feeling nauseous or with suicidal thoughts) 

CEO and Director of Aviation Safety Shane Carmody comments:

With 2019 rapidly drawing to a close it’s time to reflect on the achievements of the past 12 months and look ahead to the challenges of the near future. In a recent speech to the Regional Aviation Association of Australia I set out my current five priorities. They cover finalising the remaining civil aviation safety regulations, improving service delivery through digital enhancements, finalising the plain English guide to the new operating rules, the successful transition to new fatigue rules and remotely piloted aircraft systems.
Work on the three remaining civil aviation safety regulations - parachuting, sport and recreational aviation operations and balloons – is progressing well. Manuals of standards to support the package of operating regulations is also well advanced and will be completed next year. Longstanding concerns over the new fatigue rules have been addressed and there is now broad support for this approach. The new fatigue rules commenced on 2 September this year, with transition to be completed during 2020.

In addition we have a number of large initiatives underway to improve the way CASA does business. The first is known as service delivery transformation – best described as our big ‘client facing’ project. The intent is for you to get services from CASA much more quickly and simply than in the past. Significant improvements have already been made and we are working on others such as an on-line digital aircraft registration system and an electronic pilot licensing system. The second is our regulatory services and surveillance transformation initiative. This is our entry control and surveillance project which will see us improve the way we manage a wide range of tasks, utilising a more targeted and streamlined approach. A key outcome of this project will be greatly improved consistency in decision making. We will achieve this by creating one central area, which we are currently calling a guidance centre, through which all questions will come and from which all answers will flow. No longer will we have different interpretations from different inspectors or different regions.

A lot has been achieved during 2019 and with the initiatives we have in train there will be many more runs on the board during the year ahead. As always the goal is maintaining our strong aviation safety record and constantly focusing on the evolving nature of risk. Please read my speech to find out more about our priorities and current issues.

Best wishes

Shane Carmody

---

Excerpts from the RAAA speech:

...Speaking of anniversaries, I should acknowledge somewhat more soberly that 2 October was the 25th anniversary of the tragic Seaview accident (2 October 1994) (9 deaths) which led directly, together with the Monarch tragedy (11 June 1993), (7 deaths) to the establishment of the modern CASA in 1995. Investigations into those tragic accidents concluded that the then CAA (our predecessor) had failed in its safety responsibility by placing commercial considerations of operators ahead of the safety of passengers. It is a point that remains very front of mind in CASA these days, the primacy of safety and making sure that we are not captured by industry relationships, ensuring that possible conflicts of interest are identified and managed and that we do not become too close to those we are responsible for regulating. This is front of mind for many regulators given the revelations from the banking Royal Commission.

This takes me to another obvious anniversary, ours. CASA was established on 6 July 1995, as Australia’s Aviation safety regulator with a focus first and foremost on aviation safety. Next year marks 25 years since CASA’s inception. Things have changed quite a lot over those 25 years. CASA has matured and industry has matured. Aside from the fact that we all have another 25 years on the clock, the reality is that many things have improved, aviation safety amongst them. Approaching a significant anniversary provides us with the opportunity to reflect on our safety role, our achievements, improvements made and yet to come and the technological advances that have occurred over the years. Most importantly where we are headed and how we can get there more safely, efficiently and effectively...

...Not everyone will agree with my assessment of our achievements and some observers would prefer we tackle their rub point before all others. It’s pretty much an impossible task to please everyone as a regulator. But I can’t just sit around and not action a safety improvement simply because some people might not be happy. Maintaining Australia’s and the industry’s strong aviation safety record and constantly focussing on the evolving nature of risk and the safety of our passengers is very important to us, that’s who I’m making my decisions for.

Aside from the project deliverables I have covered already, we have also made some other big decisions this year. The grounding of Boeing 737-8 MAX was one of those. We did so on a precautionary basis when we thought it was necessary, and, as it happens, well before the Federal Aviation Administration or European Union Aviation Safety Agency or Transport Canada to name just a few. CASA’s actions didn’t go unnoticed globally, that’s one of the reasons we were one of nine global safety regulators to be asked to participate in the Joint Authorities Technical Review (JATR) of the Max.

Next was the G8 Airvan. As state of design and in the knowledge that we have some level of responsibility for over 220 Airvans flying globally and 60 plus in Australia alone, we acted quickly to ground the GA8 Airvan after the tragic accident in Sweden that resulted in nine deaths. We also lifted the grounding in record time, as soon as we could be satisfied that there was not an inherent safety concern that led to the catastrophic failure of this aircraft in flight. We remain very conscious of costs to industry from our decisions.

Next, despite opposition we went ahead with our risk-based decision on improving the safety of community service flights after two tragic accidents led to six easily avoidable deaths.

Unlike the other two big decisions which were generally well received, and while many pilots I have spoken to are very comfortable with the changes imposed, the CSF matter has resulted in a lot of unnecessary criticism. The most problematic has been the maintenance requirements. As you probably know, we have imposed a 100 hours or 12 months maintenance requirement. Although this applies to commercial activities, under Schedule 5, it doesn’t normally apply to private because most private flying doesn’t reach 100 hours per annum – the average is around 50 hours.

Again, I don’t see it as a problem. This provision is specifically designed to catch the relatively few CSF pilots who significantly exceed this benchmark. Frankly, if you are flying 200 or 300 hours you should probably be doing some maintenance!

With regard to criticism, as a regulator we do cop some. It goes with the territory. I accept that sometimes this may well be called for but, causing difficulties and hindering the industry is most definitely not our intention. I do often wonder about those who continually push so hard against regulators and safety regulation.

I have also heard people (and associations) say that CASA is trying to “destroy General Aviation” and using phrases like “kill off, shut down GA, destroy GA”, “regulate people out of business, prefer to see no aircraft flying”. This is both ridiculous and patently untrue, particularly if you step back and look at what CASA actually does to promote safe aviation across all sectors. But, I suppose, some people have their own motivations!

Now criticism comes in many forms, the simple comment from an “individual” – and believe me I get a lot of those either directly or through my CEO inbox (3 or 4 every day) or through various other traditional means such as letters. Some are easy to fix. Others are not. They relate to everything from food, seats and delays (not my problem) to drones, overflights, safety. We answer them all.

So don’t be fooled by the negativity. Focus on what is being delivered. We always do aim to make the right choices. We do listen to industry, we do genuinely consider feedback from industry through our consultation mechanisms. The Consultation Hub, the ASAP and TWGs are working well, but I go back to my earlier comment – we still can’t please everyone, every time. I will however go on record and say how much I appreciate the time and effort it takes to provide comments and the passion and commitment you show to maintaining aviation safety in Australia when you do that.

This line of thinking also made me reflect more generally on another topic which has been vexing me of late. It’s the question of attitude and, in this case a very worrying trend – poor pilot attitude.

Some of my own research is starting to indicate to me that it is often those who work hardest at pushing back against the regulator, are often the same ones who end up having serious accidents or incidents in flight. You all know someone like this! It seems to me that they can’t see past their own narrow self interests to realise the overall importance of safety and safety regulation. When you look at some recent tragic accidents, as I do, I think my concerns are well founded. We have had pilots who were constantly trying to get around the rules to suit themselves. They criticise CASA (and others) at every turn and they end up killing themselves and others. I could (but I won’t) cite in detail several tragic examples in the last two years or so involving pilots with a history of poor judgement, a history of ignoring regulation or skirting around it, a history of Facebook bluster or criticism of the regulator (knowing of course we won’t respond) thinking they can operate above the rules, that they know better or they are bullet proof. My colleagues in the Australian Transport Safety Bureau won’t and can’t call out pilot error, it’s not their role. But that restriction doesn’t bind me. My real point is that attitude is important. I’d ask you as industry experts to very closely scrutinise some of these very high quality ATSB reports and ask yourself. Some key questions: why did/would pilot knowingly fly into IMC; why was the pilot flying after last light; why did the pilot have passengers on board when they shouldn’t have, why was the pilot engaged in manoeuvres in aircraft that they wasn’t licenced skilled or qualified to undertake. It isn’t simple oversight ladies and gentlemen. It isn’t forgetfulness either. Its attitude...

Now let's also reflect on the other highlights of 2019 from the Great St Commode:





So yes I agree with both Thorny and "K" that it would be extremely informative and IMO essential that the good Senators examine in much detail industry and former CASA employees evidence of historical embuggerances, suspected malfeasance and double standards within the halls of Aviation House...

MTF...P2

[P7_TOM]

The eve of a new year –

One could be forgiven for letting go of the old, indeed one should be encouraged to do so. However – almost a decade ago, I attended the funeral and the lad took part in a formation ‘fly-past’ for the “missing man”. The man – although not much more than a boy coming to terms with shaving; without cutting off his nose, was shaping up to be a conscientious, thinking airman. I had many discussions with him; often over a quiet Ale, regarding the realities of ‘load v distance; and the practical ways of getting a job done. The task set was no easy one: heavy loads, schedule, long distances (for his aircraft) and many other considerations. Fresh out od ‘school’ and determined to learn his trade and excel – my short time with him was well spent and enjoyable. He had the makings of, IMHO, in time, a first class Captain. In the true sense of the word. He has been dead for many a long year now.

I could, but won’t rattle on for many pages explaining why he died in tragic – although – IMO – avoidable circumstance – much as I’d like to. I simply ask AP readers to consider the following extract from a completely ignored submission to a Senate inquiry (yes another one).

The ‘facts’ as we know ‘em are pretty much summarised – what has never, not ever, been closely examined is the ‘why’ and the ‘wherefore’ of this (IMO) totally avoidable accident occurred. The link –below - will take you to a first hand, ‘expert’ opinion. As the fireworks on the Sydney Harbour bridge bring in the new year; I ask you but one thing, look back a decade and tell me how things have improved. CASA denied empirical evidence and hounded out of the industry a couple of very qualified men, rather than let go of the wrong bone. All true, demonstrable and supported.

Herewith a link to a Senate investigation/inquiry – which (spectacularly) once again failed to prevent a reoccurrence – despite qualified warning.

P.S. The reporter has never worked again - go figure..........

Happy New Year – yeah, I suppose so………..

Andy Wilson.

May the road rise up to meet you.
May the wind be always at your back.
May the sun shine warm upon your face;
the rains fall soft upon your fields and until we meet again,
may God hold you in the palm of His hand.

[Peetwo]

As Australia burns: Whatever happened to the L for Leadership?

A message (or two) for #ScottyFromMarketing et.al (which includes our dopey, useless, spineless, self-absorbed, self-serving, WOFTAM of a miniscule Mick Mack) -     

Ever since our PM tried to secretly skip the country to more hospitable surrounds in Hawaii while Australia continued to burn, the level of toxicity and disassociated, ill informed venal commentary has ramped up to unprecedented levels on the Twitterverse and Farcedook (for example see link above). This unfortunately means that any sensible rational debate and discussion is consequently drowned out by the constant screaming and hair pulling going on between both the hard left and hard right.

Meanwhile, underscored by a dismal decade of political, constitutional and democratic decay, the real underlying issues (elephants in the room) continue to manifest themselves pushing this once 'lucky country' (like lemmings) to a precipice of unknown, unprecedented, social and economic disaster?? 

Grim though the present picture paints, there is a light of hope that is perhaps highlighted by the reasonably centred and rational discourse that followed this Ben Cook Linkedin post...

Ben Cook
• Following
Chief Executive Officer at Human and Systems Excellence
1d • Edited • 

Some thoughts for 2020 as Australia burns - please stop bullying a school kid that cares about the environment and who’s worried about the future. What we’re experiencing is unprecedented. I’ve never been so offended by the number of adults who live within a prosperous, western society who think it’s ok to belittle someone who cares. Yes you‘re allowed to have an ego but are you actually prepared to make positive changes to make a difference? And for those waiting for the hand of God to take care of everything - I acknowledge your commitment to your faith but it’s time to listen to the science. Make positive changes and stop relying purely on prayers in your overly prosperous position in life. Action is what is needed!!! Change your glorified Western lifestyle and get back to the basics - live as a community, eat and buy locally but only the things you need. And that’s it for todays sermon.

Some comments:

Steven Bowne
National Safety Manager at Kalari Pty Ltd
19h

"Unprecedented" ? - if your talking about the fires - look up 1983 - Ash Wednesday - 37 years ago - 73 lives lost. Australia is not "burning" - parts are - and its devastating for all concerned -  but it has happened before and will again.

---

BC in reply: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-ne...recedented

---

Plus BW:

Ben Wyndham  2nd degree connection
2nd
Owner/Director/Chief Pilot at Airspeed Aviation
13h

I was 10 in 1983 and I remember it. Ash Wednesday was pretty much isolated to Victoria.

This spreads from QLD to NSW to Vic to SA to Tas.

It started in September in northern NSW and has continued unabated until it rains.

This is totally unprecedented.

Next:

Rick van de Velde CAHRI

Senior Business Partner - People and Capability at Ventia Pty Limited
23h

I admire your passion and concern Ben, however I note that you are speaking about ‘us’ making changes but not ‘you’?  This is where I take umbrage where ‘we’ are made to feel it’s ‘our’ fault that the world is where it is.  I seldom hear how the so called environmentalists are putting their money where their mouth is and how ‘they’ will make a difference and take a lead for others to follow.  It’s very easy to criticise but much more difficult to propose a solution.  Sure, we can stop using fossil fuels, stop extravagant consumerism - all symptoms of a decadent western society, however there are other forces exerting pressure on the environment. 

People in developing nations continue with deforestation by implementing slash and burn techniques to create palm oil plantations or to merely create cleared land for subsistence farming.  The real pressure is on a world that demands more resources, food, fuel to support an ever increasing global population which knows no limits.  Keep populating and consuming appears the only constant.

Whilst there are anthropogenic influences at work in changing the climate as we know it - or knew it, the world’s climate has always been changing both with and without humans influence. Rant over ?  (edited)

---

Plus BW in reply:

Ben Wyndham  2nd degree connection
2nd
Owner/Director/Chief Pilot at Airspeed Aviation
23h

Rick,

We all need to play our part. By starting with 'us', we will influence 'them'.

You point your finger at environmentalists and developing nations - but it is the first world economy that has put us on this path.

We can only act within our own sphere of influence - We must take the lead.

---

Rick in reply to BW:

Hey Ben... I’ve been listening... what kind of sustainable and acceptable action/s has or have been proposed?  Or, in ‘management speak’ they say - don’t come to me with problems, come to me with solutions. 

So far all I’ve heard regarding solutions is ‘clean energy’.  And with that, we must close down coal-fired power generation, stopping coal mining and exports - but to replace with what?  Nuclear energy is not option for Australia (at least unlikely in the foreseeable future), solar power is expensive, reasonably sustainable wind power generation is limited to certain favourable locations / latitudes etc.

I do agree that to do nothing to try and maintain a healthy and sustainable environment is not an option but whatever actions are taken have to be considered in a sustainable and rational economic way.

Further comments:

Jen Sheridan
Managing Director, Learn More; Global Educator
1d

I completely concur Ben Cook. This is devastating and it’s time we respect those with knowledge not ideology. Does anyone think the 23 Fire Chiefs who wanted a prevention summit earlier this year were a bunch of greenie lefties. They joined a paramilitary organisation twenty or thirty years ago. Maybe their views have changed since they’ve seen the evidence. They care about their people and communities so let’s listen to them.

And I’m disturbed if anyone is being picked on for caring and compassion for our communities, towns, animals and lives. Can we at least be kind and compassionate at a time line this. Woooohaaa.

---

Ben Wyndham  2nd degree connection2nd
Owner/Director/Chief Pilot at Airspeed Aviation
23h

We spent NYE 700km away from the family beach house at Rosedale near Bateman's Bay.

As we lost touch with family and friends in the area we had to assume the worst, that we had lost the 80 year old house and the status of our loved ones was unknown.

---

Jon Whyte
Airframe and Engine (B1) Instructor - Pilatus PC-21
1d

Spot on Ben ??

---

Leah D.
Risk and OHS Compliance Specialist.
20h

Well said!

---

Lynne Power
Independent Human Resources Consultant/Contract Trainer/Recruitment Consultant
1d

We are definitely living in interesting times right now.  Bullying behaviour is never right.  It’s shocking.  I hear you Ben.  A lot of people are starting to wake up.

---

Mark Rossiter
Executive Director Capability, Engagement and Legal at Environment Protection Authority Victoria (EPA)
1d

Good on you Ben. From the heart.

---

Zana (Alexandra) Moss
✈️Human Performance Specialist ✈️Aviation Safety Investigator ✈️
1d

My thoughts too Ben.
(Not bad for a sermon ?)

Hmm...reckon it is about time the quiet Australians started piping up and demand the L gets put back in Leadership...

MTF...P2 


Ps And for the sake of the aviation industry, send the Muppet masquerading as the Minister packing back to Wagga. Dare I say it but even 6D Chester could do a better job - watch and wonder...

Federal Minister
@DarrenChesterMP
updates on the military efforts to help Mallacoota.

"The Minister for Defence has deployed assets, approved the deployment of some naval vessels and also heavy lift aircraft. The intention is to get them in as quickly as they can."

https://twitter.com/i/status/1212116408533839873

[P7_TOM]

Smoke gets in your eyes.

Or – But where to put it?

As the boy’s would term it – ‘tis but a ramble. I need to ramble on a bit, because at the moment the picture is fuzzy – borderline murky, complex and surrounded by a fog of contradiction and rumour. I refer of course to the Box Hill/ Soar imbroglio which has, on the surface, a great potential to embarrass the Government on many fronts. No doubt the confusion will be resolved eventually – but from the outside looking in; and, holding several pieces of the puzzle, the potential for a political disaster looms large on the edge of the radar screen.

Clare Prop from the UP gets awful close to the ‘cutting edge’ with this POST HERE-. Her summary in the last paragraph almost puts the whole thing into the nutshell of public perception:-

Clare Prop – “Meanwhile I believe that this corruption must go to ministerial level to have gone as far as it has for as long as it has. The video with Mike McCormack is sickening. Unfortunately I can't copy the link but if you go to their faceache page and look among the videos for "Deputy Prime Minister, Michael McCormack visit to Soar Aviation.”  Faceache video – HERE…….

She is quite correct, the video is sickening and about as genuine as the rest of McCormack (now 7 G’s) happy horse-pooh related to matters not only related to aviation but to pretty much every subject he opens his fool mouth about.

No one minds the village idiot ambling about the place not doing too much harm; but, this idiot is 2IC of this nation. That simple fact troubles a whole lot of people – me included. Too many coincidental elements for my money. He’s at Essendon (unscheduled) not long after the DFO accident, then he’s hugga-mugga with Soar Aviation promoting the bejassus out of a very sketchy operation; at about the same time as Glen Buckley’s little troubles began. Coincidence? I forget which Bond book I read it in but some gangster declared that once was happenstance; twice was coincidence; third time was enemy action.

You can see how it raises big questions – the BRB hard right declared him a wrong’un from the get go. The ‘left’ declared him ‘fool’ just doing as directed (or advised); on account of his being no more than a no-account grade two country journo and unable to cope with the limelight. Either way – both sides are unanimous, voting in favour of his being anywhere but parliament, let alone aviation – heaven forbid as a potential ‘leader’ of this nation.

It is not certain where this current open sewer will empty; there are lots of seriously heavy weight boots on the legal ground. The Box Hill/Soar story is only just coming into light. Much to consider. PAIN has been digging about – talking to folk who have been ‘touched’ by this unfolding tale; it is quite a story. Will it ever be told? Probably not. Much depends on the feed back received and verification of ‘story’. Should there be enough ‘hard evidence’ uncovered, the AP crew have offered to collate, edit and present the whole thing to the upcoming Senate inquiry. We shall see and watch with interest as the DPM, CASA and Soar parlay all of it into a version which will cover the ministerial posterior, which is very much exposed (as it is perceived) at the moment.

At very best – the minister has publicly and sycophant manner endorsed a very suspect method of flight training in unsuitable aircraft.  Meanwhile sitting back allowing Crawford and his mates to decimate a very sound and honest system for meeting the moral and legal obligations of proper flight training to be rubbished and almost destroyed. It is a decision for government – tick a box pilots who have been ‘part’ trained through SOAR or the Glen Buckley method where we know the training has been thorough – despite Part 61.

Ministers choice – based on his advice of course.

Shame on McCormack 7G’s thread seems appropriate – maybe wrong – but I’m tired, bored and thirsty.

[P7_TOM]

Of Priests, lawyers and suchlike.


> I know – I know; there is a call to do away with the lot of ‘em. But just about now, I’m wishing I was one – they have indemnity when a crime is confessed – I don’t. I have however just completed a list, a fairly long one, detailing ‘information’ gathered related to SOAR. No bloody evidence, just a lot of hearsay without tangible proof. That said, smoke usually indicates fire.
 
The problem is a complex one: for those who have information to offer – in one way or another; no matter how the ‘breach’ came about, in many cases the informants signature is on the paperwork – making them complicit, in law.
 
I guess it is a perennial problem for the law enforcement agencies. I have no knowledge of how it works in practice, but I understand that in some cases an amount of relief is available. IMO the SOAR case demands ‘indemnity’ in some cases, to facilitate a clear view of ‘what’ was going on.
 
For example: I have listened to two pilots who admit that their signature was ‘forged’ onto approval paperwork and said nothing. Three admit to accepting supervisory roles without having met the mandatory requirements, accepted the role, signed the paperwork and went ahead in the role.
 
I have no names, no documented evidence or even a blind clue to the veracity of these claims. Sure, they were ‘confessions’ (to which I cannot grant absolution). Under the existing regime, ‘true confessions' are unlikely to be offered, considering the ‘criminal record’ element. However; for the greater good and operational integrity going forward; I believe that an ‘indemnity’ and anonymous (in camera) reporting would be of great benefit.
 
I will leave it there – not my puzzle nor responsibility. There are some good kids out there who deserve a break and a stern warning. The information they could provide, given opportunity without dire penalty – would greatly improve the integrity of flight training in Australia. Only my opinion of course; but, young, ambitious, cost conscious people have no real knowledge of just how evil some folk in this world can be. They are easily lead and if the deviance becomes normalised, through group acceptance that this is the ‘way things are done’ – when one of ‘em dies through flawed, faulty, fraudulent training – who carries the can (or coffin)?
 
The current system has created this environment – time to look deep and clear.
 
That’s it – I’ll have the BRB working on it – maybe even draft a submission – for what that’ll be worth. Ale, lots of please, much to consider when keeping a government honest.
 
DiD I just say ‘honest? Oh dear!

[Peetwo]

Timeline of miniscule corruption...err duplicity? - Part I

ToAR: Part IV 

Reference posts:

There are posts which are worthy of cribbing – then, there are posts which, in a nutshell, say all that needs to be said. Lead Sled, at cobbed throttle; spot on:-

Sunfish. This is one time I am going to have to disagree with you, and I am speaking from the point of view of "being there". As "on the spot", "in the room" (or wherever we were), often with the only notes taken by the Minister and/or me, or a colleague with me.

Both Sharp and Vaile set things up so the real decisions were made without the "benefit" of set-piece formal meeting with "industry", the basic program was set before the end 1996 elections. Look up "Soaring into Tomorrow.

Interestingly, John Anderson followed the same pattern, with a "big bang" shakeup of CASA planned, but he got blown out of the water by OPM&C politics, John Howard got cold feet, even though Kim Beazley supported the plan, he had no time for CASA either, based on his Ministerial experiences.

I have a far better opinion of Anderson as a Minister than most, because I know what he wanted to do would have sorted the CASA KULTCHA once and for all --- essentially a "scorched earth" and start again approach.

Interestingly Martin Ferguson, and principal and aviation advisors agreed, that the problems in CASA were so intractable and so entrenched, that anything less drastic would fail. How do I know, because I discussed the matter at length with them.

And look where we are, all these years later!!

Tootle pip!

John Sharp is running rings around ‘the system’ – could not beat it, so now he exploits it. Lessons learnt; well done that man.

A matter of some interest.

“The Australian understands another scheduled flight training session at Soar was cancelled because of unsuitable weather conditions.”

The average student has not got a blind clue about what the current ‘weather’ conditions mean. Traditionally, it has always been up to the student’s mentor to decide if Bloggs should or should not be let loose in the prevailing conditions. For example; the ‘hate-sheet’ reflects more practice at cross-wind landings – before solo operations. "Sorry mate, too much wind today" end of....Commercial considerations never, not ever, entered into that decision.

"At the time of the crash, just before 10am on Thursday the winds were between 10 and 12 knots, with a 12 knot crosswind."

10 to 15 knots across a runway ain’t a problem – for an ‘experienced’ student. Not one who has had the X-wind landing box ticked – but one who can actually manage such a thing. It ain’t difficult – but it requires training and practice. The decision to send a fellahin out in a gusty X-wind is subjective, based on the instructors assessment of progress – not a bloody box ticked; but competency – tested, proven and documented…..


Another crash involving a Soar student pilot and training instructor remains under investigation by the ATSB.

It is of concern that a first class operator like Buckley is fighting for survival after attempting to bring in a system which would not have allowed the injured child out alone in a breeze he could not handle. Yet this ‘Soar’ thing, using airspeed, weight and CoG ‘critical’ aircraft to mass produce ‘legally’ qualified (tick a box) pilots is allowed to continue? WTD?

CASA, part 61 and Part 141/2 have a lot to answer for; before the operator gets to answer some fairly prickly questions. It seems to me that the aircraft being used, whist ‘cheap’ are intolerant of the fumbles new pilots make – does a speed, weight and centre of gravity critical aircraft really suit a training environment; despite a CASA ‘tick’? I think not. Great for the weekend warrior – but as a suitable platform for training? Seems there are some deeper questions which demand answers here.

Toot - hate AP night shift – toot.  {P7 has matters ‘Christmas’ related to attend}. Hurrumph!

To begin here is a 'Soar' update...

From Ironsider on the Oz, via the AFAP on Farcebook: 

Soar Aviation sells aircraft as it faces loss of registration



The Melbourne-based flying school facing the loss of its registration to train pilots has put seven aircraft worth more than $500,000 up for sale.

Soar Aviation was informed last week that its Registered Training Organisation (RTO) status was being revoked following an audit by the Australian Skills Quality Authority.

ASQA is the national regulator for the vocational education and training sector and has oversight of the VET fee student loan program.

An ASQA spokesman said the audit found Soar Aviation was not compliant with the standards for RTOs, and had not supported the needs of individual students, or met the requirements of the aviation training package.

The company, which partnered with Box Hill Institute to deliver flight training, was also found to have inappropriate assessment processes and practices.

Box Hill Institute also lost its authority to deliver aviation courses and a spokeswoman said it would not be able to offer any further study for a diploma of aviation from late February.

“We deeply regret the impact this will have on our students and are committed to helping them navigate through this difficult period,” said the spokeswoman.

But Soar Aviation has rejected ASQA’s findings and applied for an internal review of the decision, due to take effect on February 24.

A spokeswoman said as a result of the ASQA decision, the company was having to realign its fleet and employee numbers.

“The fleet is being trimmed on that basis,” she said, in reference to the seven aircraft advertised for sale on www.planesales.com.au.

“Fifty-one planes are more than enough to meet the needs of the services the business provides.”

Among the aircraft up for sale are three Aeroprakt Vixens and three Aeroprakt Foxbats, and one BRM Aero Bristell, all painted in the distinctive Soar colours.

Prices range from $59,950 to $120,000.

ASQA’s audit of the flight training offered by Soar Aviation and Box Hill Institute followed complaints from students and concerns raised by a former aviation manager at the TAFE college about the partnership.

His report alleged sloppy billing practices that had disadvantaged Box Hill Institute, including a requirement to pay upfront for services from Soar Aviation Flight Training (SAFT) before they had been delivered.

The report also observed that “most students pay in advance to SAFT for the full 200 flying hours and associated training but never finish the course”.

“Only 19 students have graduated from our CPL (commercial pilot licence) course since May 2016 to the current date yet over 950 students have enrolled,” said the report written in April 2019.

“Of these 19 students, only two were ‘novice’ pilots, the rest entering the course with previous flying training qualifications.”

It went on to point out that no student had ever been recorded as “failing” the course.

“All students who are not currently enrolled are recorded as ‘withdrawn’,” the report said.

“This enables SAFT to receive full payment without incurring the expenses associated with delivering training services.”

Melbourne law firm Gordon Legal is now acting for 15 former students of Soar Aviation left with huge debts but no qualifications after undertaking the CPL course.

Principal lawyer James Naughton said in many cases the students had raised concerns and complaints about the course.

“I believe it’s with a sense of frustration they’ve got lawyers involved now and there’s still been no response from Box Hill or Soar in relation to these concerns and that’s a worry,” Mr Naughton said.

The Soar spokeswoman said they had not been contacted by any students’ legal representatives.

Plus an update from Clare Prop, via the UP...

One guy on the Pilots Lounge fb page said 100% of the students were on the VET loans.


This corruption geos all the way to the top, see the video with McCormack. "That's what this government is all about...Neel's doing a fantastic job" etc. There is no way that they didn't know what was going on, another massive money laundering exercise using VET loans and vulnerable aviation students with stars in their eyes.

Pride comes before a fall, and putting yourself on the rich list worth 66 million was probably not such a great idea because he can hardly plead bankruptcy three months later...can he?

RA-Aus must have been glad of 950 memberships, too.

I would make an offer for some of those avionics, they are probably worth more than the aircraft.

Next I have a QoN for Hitch off Oz Flying - http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...n-approval - in relation this para??

..ASQA's decision is being seen as another blow for Soar after a string of incidents including crashes of Bristells at Stawell and Moorabbin and another incident at Drouin, Victoria, on Christmas Eve when a Bristell struck trees during a practice forced landing...

Where did you get the underlined information from? The reason being that I have checked both the RAAus - Accident & defect summary - and the ATSB aviation occurrence database without any success in tracking down that particular incident??

However as an aside, while trolling through those latest RAAus incidents, I was disturbed by the number of a) reported incidents (30 from 1 December 2019 to today) and the naive admissions of b) very poor airmanship, basic aeronautical knowledge and blatant disregard for the rules...  

This one was most disturbing:     

...Inadvertent flight into IMC: The aircraft departed Narromine into significant smoke haze. At 500' the pilot could see objects out to about 10NM but could not see the horizon. At cruise altitude of 4,500' visibility became worse. The visual cues indicating the aircraft's attitude became degraded. The pilot could judge pitch and roll only by looking at the paddocks and roads within a 45 degree cone beneath the aircraft. When they were head-down looking up the latest weather details for their next stop at Griffith the pilot glanced sideways at the ground to see if they were still wings-level and all seemed OK until they saw the artificial horizon on the EFIS which indicated that they were in a 15 degree bank. The pilot knew then what IMC was they then engaged the autopilot so the next time they were head-down in the cockpit they weren’t going to give themselves another fright. The smoke progressively thinned out towards Griffith and visibility entering the circuit was satisfactory until initiating their turn to base. The pilot seemed to have descended into a lens of smoke which totally blocked their view of the runway, but views crosswind and downwind were relatively clear. The pilot estimated where the extended centreline of the runway was and turned final only to find, when exiting the smoke lens, that they had turned too soon, requiring a dog-leg correction to get back on the centreline...

 
Now I know that the basic RAAus aircraft are only allowed to carry two POB outside of radar CTA but in hindsight if you were the miniscule responsible for oversighting aviation safety would you be prepared to actively promote an aviation business flogging around in aircraft not properly certified for the purposes of training young pilots to fly, while overflying large built up urban areas adjacent to secondary airports that you are also ultimately responsible for...  

TBC - Part II to follow...

Ps I get the impression that one of Mick Mack's predecessors John Anderson, some 20 odd years ago, would never in a million years have allowed the festering Soar imbroglio to remain on his desk unattended to for the minimal amount of time it took to get his head around the serious safety issues before firing off a 'please explain' to both St Commode and the Hooded Canary:

An interesting letter from John Anderson regarding ultralights

---

I was recently going through some material from the old days and found a letter from John Anderson dated 16 March 1999. Surely this can start some interesting discussion on PPRuNe.

---

16.3.99 - Minister John Anderson to DS CASA Chairman re ultralights

[Kharon]

An embarrassment of epic proportions.

Or, a world class cock-up if you prefer; with the added fillip of mindless ministerial support, is about to unfold. This courtesy of SOAR flight training.

There’s precious little wriggle room for CASA and almost none for the ATSB. Oh, they’ll cite the ‘law’ as they wrote it and dance about ‘responsibility’ maypole; but, at the end of the shift they sat back and allowed it all to happen. The damage is deep on many levels, but IMO the most damaging element is the loss of ‘Safety’. Operational, legal and financial safeguards all compromised. These claims are self evident; we will be taking a long hard look at these elements. This will take a little time as some of the knots are complex, however with a thumbnail dipped in tar, some food for thought.

Operational. There a two major elements to consider. (i) Suitability of the airframes being used for ‘basic’ training. (ii) the quality of training provided. Any short investigation reveals certain truths. For example Stall/Spin fatal accidents. One of the very important lessons a trainee pilot must be full versed in is recognising the approach to, development of and recovery from a ‘Stall’. Solid training is a prerequisite but, importantly, the airframe used to develop this skill must be capable of recovery. The most likely time for a trainee to actually stall an aircraft is during early training, when they have not developed the skills required to avoid or recover from the situation. The aircraft must be capable of recovery from a developed stall and incipient spin. Here’s young Spotty out on a navigation exercise – solo – and he stumbles into cloud, rain and turbulence. While trying to execute a turn out of the clag – he stalls the airframe, and a spin situation is on the cards. Now then, lets say he has skill enough to recover but the airframe won’t cooperate – because it can’t. RIP.

So we bury him; then we look to the accident investigation for guidance and find twaddle like this:-

..."Inadvertent flight into IMC: The aircraft departed Narromine into significant smoke haze. At 500' the pilot could see objects out to about 10NM but could not see the horizon. At cruise altitude of 4,500' visibility became worse. The visual cues indicating the aircraft's attitude became degraded. The pilot could judge pitch and roll only by looking at the paddocks and roads within a 45 degree cone beneath the aircraft. When they were head-down looking up the latest weather details for their next stop at Griffith the pilot glanced sideways at the ground to see if they were still wings-level and all seemed OK until they saw the artificial horizon on the EFIS which indicated that they were in a 15 degree bank. The pilot knew then what IMC was they then engaged the autopilot so the next time they were head-down in the cockpit they weren’t going to give themselves another fright. The smoke progressively thinned out towards Griffith and visibility entering the circuit was satisfactory until initiating their turn to base. The pilot seemed to have descended into a lens of smoke which totally blocked their view of the runway, but views crosswind and downwind were relatively clear. The pilot estimated where the extended centreline of the runway was and turned final only to find, when exiting the smoke lens, that they had turned too soon, requiring a dog-leg correction to get back on the centreline...

That is an example of ‘internal’ investigation?

What the minister has sanctioned, what CASA have encouraged to develop and what has been taken advantage of demands immediate inquiry. IMO the AFP need to become involved and the inquiry needs to be oversighted and completed by an independent chair. This situation is wrong on so many levels, particularly when the likes of Angel Flight and Buckley are being beaten into the ground. I say enough is enough; time to stop the merry go-round. Start by disillusioning the minister.

Toot – toot.

[Sandy Reith]

In regard to suitable airframes, it was always a huge failure of aviation policy to cause the low weight category split. This artificial split causes most of the aircraft to be designed down to the maximum all up weight of that category instead of aircraft being designed to suit purpose. Thus the great majority in the government mandated Recreational category are hard up against the 600kg weight limit, a limit which is not conducive to building aircraft to fully suit Australian conditions for training or travel flights. Noting also that the vast majority of low weight aircraft are uncertified, ie not built to proven standards of strength and safe handling characteristics, and therefore are not permitted to fly under the Instrument Flight Rules. This is a serious problem against the take up of Instrument Flight procedures by pilots which would mitigate the problems and accidents associated with Visual Flight Rules and inadvertent flight into weather of poor visibility. As has been said elsewhere real improvements, particularly for private flying, could be had if CASA’s rules were more realistic and had affordable procedures for Instrument Flight Rules training.

[Kharon]

P7’ s Opinion – delivered; as requested.

“Given the size and scope of the RA Oz ‘incident and accident’ list; reading through the responses made to those events; we thought it may germane to take a closer look. ‘K’ is still fuming over the following, too cranky to be impartial. “Can you do it?” Well I’m as appalled as he, however; I’ll take a shot. Lets see”.

..."Inadvertent flight into IMC:

Call pony-pooh right there. “Inadvertent” is a gross misnomer. At night, in Instrument conditions it is possible to ‘inadvertently’ re-enter IMC. The published approach is conducted – the field in sight – then it disappears – why? You have just inadvertently entered cloud )or rain). Anything else is ‘deliberate’. Particularly flying during daylight hours under visual flight rules. Pilots can and rightfully do take a ‘look’, the smart ones always leave the back door open. Nuff said.

The aircraft departed Narromine into significant smoke haze.

Why – the forecast was pretty accurate.

At 500' the pilot could see objects out to about 10NM but could not see the horizon.

Fair enough – a visual reference to the horizontal was available.

At cruise altitude of 4,500' visibility became worse.

Cue drum roll – it is bad visibility, forecast to get worse – at 4500 the effect of ‘slant visibility’ kicks in. Often, when an aerodrome is shrouded in fog – from overhead you can see the runways and stuff; but from three miles out on final approach you are looking through a lot more fog and no surprise – you cannot see the runway. So why go to cruise height where visibility – horizontally is likely to be worse?

The visual cues indicating the aircraft's attitude became degraded.

No shit Sherlock;

The pilot could judge pitch and roll only by looking at the paddocks and roads within a 45 degree cone beneath the aircraft.

Uhmm: that would be to the side only – the nose would preclude full vision forward and the other window would be virtually useless. Essentially – there was zero forward visibility in a text book perfect situation for spatial disorientation.

When they were head-down looking up the latest weather details for their next stop at Griffith

Funny time to be checking the forecast. Most do it pre flight and take note of the details – it’s called pre flight planning.

the pilot glanced sideways at the ground to see if they were still wings-level and all seemed OK until they saw the artificial horizon on the EFIS which indicated that they were in a 15 degree bank.

Aye, an oldie, but a goodie. The hand will follow the eye; head down distracted trying to see what the forecast says – when every eye should have been outside, concentrating on avoiding the perils of disorientation.

The pilot knew then what IMC was

Did you ever read a more fatuous, puerile statement. And it’s bollocks to boot.
"they then engaged the autopilot so the next time they were head-down in the cockpit they weren’t going to give themselves another fright.

That simply beggars belief. They should have been afraid, from the get go. Too poorly trained to realise that they were at real risk – head down, head up, and shake it all about. What a great way to bring on disorientation. Why not use the AP to take a belated look at whatever it was they were concerned about; settle down and think their way home?

The smoke progressively thinned out towards Griffith and visibility entering the circuit was satisfactory until initiating their turn to base.

As previously mentioned – slant viz.

The pilot seemed to have descended into a lens of smoke which totally blocked their view of the runway,

There exists a well tried and tested true manoeuvre called a ‘Go-Around’. Traditionally executed when one cannot see the duckling runway. And WTD is a ‘lens’ of smoke?

but views crosswind and downwind were relatively clear.

No kidding – Wow! a Eureka moment indeed.

The pilot estimated where the extended centreline of the runway was

Top marks for safe thinking? Let’s get this straight – the aircraft is low, slow and on final approach – then the runway vanishes. Had the aircraft been lined up correctly in the first place – why (if you were silly enough to persist) would you start changing ‘heading’. A steady hand and a cool head would sit still and wait until the ‘lens’ (WTD) was flown through – doglegs and estimates are OK with wriggle room – but on final? No mate, not the best idea you ever had. Why not take the crosswind runway if ‘tuther was ‘smoky’ – you can do a crosswind landing can’t you?

and turned final only to find, when exiting the smoke lens, that they had turned too soon, requiring a dog-leg correction to get back on the centreline...

Careful study – pre departure of wind and temperature may just have indicated an ‘inversion’; not mentioned, more training required?  In my office the debrief over tea a biscuits would have been ‘interesting’. Not too bad for the crew – mild bollocking would suffice – but for those who trained these clowns; an entirely different matter.

But the real villainy is in the blasé report; there are some serious safety matters on display. The caviller manner in which this report has been drafted is a danger in itself. The complete absence of any safety briefing is deplorable; to the extent that it almost promotes a gung-ho acceptance of ‘derring-do’. The team operating were at risk before they turned a wheel; that risk escalated with every passing moment. They should have known better, they most certainly should have been trained better and they bloody well should have known better; through native common sense.

There – nearly as cranky as ‘K’ by the time I got done with that inexorable failure of system.

[Kharon]

Skip, skip, skip to my lou.

Wiki – “Skip to My Lou" is a simple game of stealing partners (or swapping partners as in square dancing). It begins with any number of couples skipping hand in hand around in a ring. A lone boy in the centre of the moving circle of couples sings, "Lost my partner, what'll I do?

Perhaps this is the ministers new theme song (that, or Jail House Rock). All the agencies skipping about him; he without a partner to dance with or even a leg to stand on. Not his fault of course; but ultimately, in public perception at least it will be. No matter how much you wriggle and dance etc. You see being totally ignorant, he was a prime candidate for ‘capture’. Without question he has accepted, as gospel, the words of his aviation advisor. Too late now to say I was led astray – for he is now so far beyond ‘astray’ that it will take every bit of influence the Nats can muster to save him from shame and ridicule.

It is not too complex a scenario; on the surface. But below that thin layer of surface ice, there is a deep, murky pit waiting to swallow the unwary. No one has control of the beasts which lurk beneath that surface. They are beyond ministerial or indeed government control and are voracious. A snack of ministerial size will only be shared by the biggest and most dangerous beasts below the icy surface; minister for breakfast – yummy.

You see the SOAR debacle is about to implode. The minister, whether willing participant or simply an actor saying it’s lines, is but a cats paw for those who control matters aeronautical. Without prejudice; this SOAR episode is not only a matter for the Royal Commission, but one for the AFP. It gooses CASA in a most robust fashion, ropes the ATSB in as willing accomplices; gives Angel Flight and Gen Buckley’s legal advice a rock solid platform from which to shout “foul” long, loud and backed up to the hilt. It places RA OZ is a ‘difficult’ position – for they must, by association be tainted. Membership matters raise questions; particularly ‘temporary’ training matters raise even more questions. Aircraft suitability for purpose is a genuine problem alongside of training pilot qualification. All this even before the nitty-gritty is exposed.

For exposed, in all it’s villainy, it will be. That you can take to the bank. For far too many years now CASA has been a law unto itself; the results of that uncontained, unmodulated, arrogant thinking are being shown in accident and incident reports. Well, those that get published that is. The problem lays not in what is known – but in what is not known. i.e. Pilots who don’t know what they don’t know. Honest kids led to believe they are being given top line training for example. RA Oz recorded 31 (thirty one) events in the last 12 months (1 Dec 2019 to today) of these many have had the potential to be serious; indeed many were. All swept under the carpet; as CASA and ATSB have engineered a situation where ‘they’ are not responsible. Not only that, they actively promote the division between ‘established’ GA training and the RA Oz version.

The damage done to the spirit and intent of ‘flight training’ will be clearly seen in future accidents. Paperwork does not a pilot make, despite protestations of being ‘legal’ and compliant’ (tick-a-box). Even now, we see ‘incidents’ which can be backtracked to ‘tick-a-box training methods. We even see the degradation of standards being supported in what the ATSB describe as ‘reports’ and ‘recommendations’ of airline incidents no less. What they did to Angel Flight being (IMO) the pinnacle of gross manipulation.

Fair warning minister – there is no way that this happy horse-pooh is going to become the new ‘norm’.  Not if it’s the last thing I and my crew do. So grab your tin hat, muster up all the mates you have in the Nats; this is only the beginning. Will we rock you? – Bet on it. We don’t live on Candy Mountain – don’t want to hit it either.

Selah.