[Kharon]

Friday Arvo Fax.

There are some equally ‘silly’ reports on the RA Oz reporting card, but the one which jumps off the pages is this one:- HERE -. I asked P7 to give it a gentle ( five minute) once over – just to make sure that once the laughter stopped, there were indeed not only several very serious breaches of basic common sense ‘flight safety’ and a certain disregard for the rules which govern both. The whole thing was fraught with peril from before even the engine was started. The manner in which the final approach to landing was conducted is not only reckless, but a danger to any other aircraft operating within the aerodrome precincts and the very airport infrastructure.

There are many parallels to be drawn between this episode and the Angel Flight fatal at Mt. Gambier. The most obvious being deliberately persisting into non VFR conditions, then continuing an approach in less than prescribed minimum visibility conditions. One led to a fatal accident, the other just got lucky.

CASA brought the boom down on AF after Mt. Gambier and yet the RA Oz crew have been allowed to present a ‘signed confession’ of dangerous operational practice and neither St. Commode nor his henchmen have raised an eyebrow, ATSB have simply filed the thing in the ignore bin.

The report provided speaks of some piss poor training – across the spectrum. Glen Buckley gets a severe hammering while the idiot posing as minister sings the praises of SOAR and their wonderful CASA sanctioned training systems.

St. Commode said this:

If; as he claims, all the gods bestowed the right to be responsible for “keeping Australians safe” does this refer to only a select group or to all? Seems to me it is time CASA accepted that responsibility and took a very close look at the incident cited in relation to rules being broken, poor airmanship through training and the possibility of a mid air; or, collision with an aircraft on the duty runway or even a CFIT. Alternatively, have CASA questioned RA Oz in relation to this matter and shown them some of their famous ‘tuff-luv’?  Told ‘em to straighten it out – or else. Did ATSB run some statistics? 31 'incidents' reported by RA Oz since Dec 2019 (6 weeks worth). Time someone paid attention I’d say…..

Nah to all of the above. Why no?. Why has the patron Saint of aviation safety not swooped in, cleaned up the mess, drafted some new onerous, restrictive rules to make RA Oz a compliant citizen of the land where St. Commode rules as the supreme doyen of aviation safety? Because it’s not his responsibility is it. Course its not, that has been ‘delegated’.

It’s not only a farce, an insult and a cop out, it betrays the very standards CASA have set but fail to enforce. Stall and spin training is now being diluted because many of the ‘cost effective’ - ‘bar-code’ aircraft ain’t tested and not certified as fit for task. What a brilliant start to a professional career that makes.

Sooner or later, the RA Oz system needs to be discussed. In principal it is a fine idea for
‘Recreational pilots’.  Personally, I have no quarrel with it, in it’s rightful place. Seems to me to be a really good thing for many folk; those who just love to fly, recreationally potter about, tour the country side: those on the land who use an aircraft in much the same way as a ute. It is a blessing for those who can safely drive a vehicle but just fall short on CASA medical standards. The benefits are many, the ‘risks’ when sensibly addressed acceptable and the restrictions placed not too draconian at all – considering.

But – (there’s always a but) as a pathway to a Commercial pilot licence and higher? In theory there is a cost saving. In reality the savings are marginal, when you do the numbers – for real. Then, there is the ‘quality’ question. I know many of the RA instructors hold a CASA IR; but many do not. No doubt these are well intentioned and properly mentored by the CASA approved senior crew; but I wonder; if there is a ‘gap’?

It is a truism, that one may teach Granny to ‘fly’ a simple aircraft in a very short period of time – up, down, left, right - try not to hit anything. Does this create a sound basis for progression to the jet command most of those (in debt) ‘training’ aspire to? It is a fair question for open, friendly discussion. BRB opinion to follow…I raise the issue because (IMO) the ‘basic’ training a pilot receives is very, very important. Essentially, that period is of very short duration – the time it takes between first lesson and first solo is the only time a pilot is actually ‘taught’ to ‘fly’ an airframe. After that it becomes a matter of further education, the basics the platform on which advanced training, ‘experience’ and operational knowledge is built. If the foundations are flawed, sooner or later the cracks will begin to appear

With the crew involved in the incident cited (above); the cracks seem o have appeared at a very early stage. Is this a good enough platform from which to build an airline career? The minister seems to think so – but then…………..

Anyway, I ramble. The whole thing is going to a full house (IOS and BRB) - - session (no darts). The agenda is far reaching, beginning from the blatant CASA misrepresentation of a 1999 ministerial directive to the current day legislative mess. Should be interesting –

Toot – toot.

[P7_TOM]

A whiff of corruption.

The human sense of smell ain’t world class; not as acute as that found in the animal world, but it does work, quite well. Medicine says it can affect and stimulate many areas of the brain; one of the short falls is that we get very quickly ‘used’ to a smell and it simply becomes part of the background. When you’ve been in town all day and get off the bus at home ‘on the beach’ you can smell the ocean – but after a hour or so at home – no longer does the odor linger.

Corruption carries a certain taint; often just the merest hint – a whiff if you like. One can soon become accustomed to the smell; indeed some thrive on it. There is a distinct odor emanating from the business at Moorabin; to my memory bank it is a warning smell, just the smallest hint of it escaping from under the rocks and piles of paperwork. I can identify it but I’m having trouble locating the root source. There are several areas which beg a deeper investigation.

The problem with investigating is the smell attaches itself to all who have come into contact with it; this distributes and dilutes the odor. Someone quite innocent may have been in contact – even if only briefly – and then you’re chasing your tail. But, needs must follow that trail to a conclusion, if only to ‘eliminate it from our enquiry’ so to speak. So; where do we begin at Moorabin? How do we complete our jigsaw puzzle? Tradition says to start by identifying the corners and border pieces – seems a reasonable start point.

The corners of the SOAR jigsaw are easily found. CASA; RA Oz; SOAR and ‘VET’ loans.

Each corner piece is the meeting point of two axis, vertical and horizontal forming a right angle into which the remainder of the pieces may be fitted. Then in alphabetical order, lets build the right angle of the frame.

CASA – lots of pieces here – the minister, his advisor, the board, the DAS, his stalwart support group, the managers, the boots on the ground. Each piece tells part of the story; yet we must work up the chain, not down it to see the pug marks and clues. For instance – not my story to tell; one operator at Moorabin has had endless ‘hassles’ with a certain CASA FOI; however, it is rumored that this particular individual was ‘friendly’ with SOAR and was aware of the conflict between the two operators and familiar with one operators determination to ‘take out’ the other. The next piece involves some heavy duty action from CASA against Glen Buckley who attempted to establish a system which allowed ‘satellite’ operators to be housed within a robust safety system. Yet this proposal was thrown out – without a by your leave. Meanwhile RAOz were being granted approval for doing exactly the same thing – with CASA top line blessing. The RA Oz operations manual clearly defines this CASA sanctioned practice. The ‘top cover’ for SOAR and RA Oz dragged the minister in to pimp and pander as directed by ‘best advice’; while Buckley was left floundering in the gutter. There are many more pieces to this corner of our puzzle – but you get the idea. A wee whiff of something ‘off’?

Item next – RA Oz. SOAR falls within their remit; their own operations manual spells out in careful, nebulous, coy terms the way their oversight of operation is supposed to work. Section 3.01 of the RA Oz operations manual sets out the requirements for establishing a Flight Training School’ (FTS). There is a whole pile of waffle in the section – even detailing the size of chalkboard to used. They promulgate the way a satellite school may be set –up by the ‘primary’ school – any bells ringing there? Heard that notion before have we? There is even a system for audit and inspection.

Operations inspection of an FTS and the CFI in accordance with Section 2.10 Paragraph 9 of this manual shall be undertaken within a period of two years since the last inspection by the Operations Manager of their delegate, unless varied by written extension by the Operations Manager. Alternatively, a self-assessment process related to documentation requirements may be conducted remotely by the Operations Manager or delegate using the RAAus Self-Assessment Inspection Report.

Loopholes aside. Now you could be forgiven for imaging that an operation like SOAR, which grew like Topsy did would attract some scrutiny – even if just as means of protecting other RA Oz operations. The rumors, the incidents, the accidents should have rung a small bell somewhere. It seems however that those determined to build an empire and make a fortune were too busy chatting with CASA about increased weight that SOAR was allowed to continue unchecked. A good starting point, although unobtainable, would be the internal and external ‘inspections’ and ‘checks’ and approvals issued by RA Oz to SOAR. Just to prove it was all above board and kosher.

The SOAR corner is a dark, mysterious corner of our puzzle. There are lots of pieces which look like they may fit – but even with our limited microscope, it is difficult to sort them out. Perhaps its time to call in the experts of digging about in dark places. It would be good to know who was shagging whom, what it cost and who paid for it. This must be done even if for no other reason than to eliminate the minister from the puzzle at very least. We only have a pile of stories at the moment – facts and data required.



“Data! data! data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay.”

Last, but not least we come to the VET loans how-de-do. There are other reputable operations conducting training for students under the system. I think it a good one – in principal; and, provided all the ducks line up those students should get what they paid for – first class training and a ‘proper’ pilot licence – within the scope of their aspirations and abilities. Their results prove the system – which makes the SOAR story even more of a stand out event. These honest operators are likely to be tarred with the same brush unless a full, open, no top cover investigation is initiated.

I think for the amount of money, time and blood invested, we need to complete the picture. That’s it. BRB full session today – should be ‘interesting’. Trouble with a puzzle is if it walks like a duck, and quacks – it is probably a duck.

[Kharon]

Dumbledore, knitting patterns and the stable cat.

Not balmy – last I checked, all marbles accounted for etc. But, I do crave your indulgence; a ramble is required to explain the last BRB/IOS ‘conference’ results. So we must begin with ‘knitting’ patterns.

I still own the two pair of ‘socks’ my Nana made for me when I began climbing; to this day they are without holes, warm and incredibly resilient to the wear and tear I subjected them to. And they got plenty of that – and never were my feet cold – not once; remarkable things. Now the ‘pattern’ she used has been handed down for generations – cragsmen and fishermen both need to be certain the clothes they wear will sustain life. But the ‘pattern’ is an intriguing mystery: stand alone. Think about it; lines of computer code in isolation mean nothing; as do lines in a knitting pattern. The results of those ‘lines of code’ may be anything from a moon orbiter navigation protocol or – a pair of socks. The pattern is the key. Nearly done now: a result of any ‘pattern’ completed eventually emerges as a ‘creation’ of some description.

It is the emerging ‘pattern’ of aviation which has the grown up’s concerned. Much like a line of computer code (or a knitting pattern) by it’s lonesome don’t really signify – it is all part of a grand plan, the finished results being the ‘whole’.

What has the stable cat to do with it? ‘We’ had been to the vet, on the way home I stopped at a friends place – the dogs know their way about, but Mog had never been there. I was impressed and fascinated by the way the cat identified and catalogued the place, all senses at full throttle, alert to possible danger, every step taken in exploration carefully considered and the best escape route back to the vehicle identified. It was an education in how to asses and evaluate a strange situation.

Although not quite as adept as the cat, the BRB/IOS have been in the ‘environment’ a long while and have had the time and freedom to roam and explore the place; so when –anything new emerges it can be quickly identified and easily evaluated.

CASA is always banging on about ‘risk’ – not to those flying – but of the legal variety to themselves and; of course, the benighted minister. Both a sinister and cynical system is emerging from the pattern they are using to ensure ‘safety’ for the ‘administration’. The CASA get away with some truly dreadful stuff simply by saying that the are the ‘expert’ body. They are not of course, but no one in government want’s to rock that little boat, for obvious reasons. What government can’t see is the finished article emerging from the pattern CASA are using. Each line in the knitting adds one more strand to what will become a straight jacket for restraining any form of entrepreneurial, independent development of aviation ventures. A further development is the castration of Australian flight standards. We used to produce world class pilots; now we simply provide a warm bodies, ‘legally qualified’ made by the mile, cut off as needed. That standing alone is bad, but the devious ‘splitting’ into a multi tier system is despicable.

RA Oz has been granted a mandate to ‘administer’ their own version of ‘governance’ for general aviation. They have freedoms a snake oil salesman would kill for. The way SOAR and RA OZ have manipulated their remit, with CASA blessing is slowly coming into focus. Reading through the RA Oz operations manual I was at first surprised, then progressively alarmed as the full picture emerged. You need to read it for yourself. The BRB did (at my insistence) the general reaction was the same – amazement at the depth and scope of the CASA deviance and paranoia. By granting an unfettered licence to become a pseudo ‘training academy’ without any CASA responsibility is a travesty. To foster and promote the mega ‘Company’ training schools is a further ducking of responsibility. In both cases, total responsibility lands squarely on the organisation – with CASA in the box seat to prosecute as it pleases, with the surety of a win. All care, but alas, no responsibility whatsoever. The determination to obliterate the small, independent flight schools and rural flying clubs clearly defined.

It is an international first and IMO an eternal shame on this nation and it’s government ministers, past and present. The USA is considered a world leader; their rules almost universally accepted as the prime example of simplicity and fairness. Even if they are not the ‘absolute’ last word they are streets and continents better than the tangled mass of the CASA ‘get out of jail’ jumble. Count the pages of FAA part 61, read it (and weep) – then take a stroll through the mindless blather supporting the RA Oz wet dream – and count the pages.

FAA deal with the RA Oz type of aircraft in about two pages in their Part 61. Part 141 deals with all flight training – from independent instructors working from home; through to fully integrated ‘academy’ type factory schools. Then, flick over a few pages and Part 142 appears. This covers ‘the rest’ – advanced training and checking – places like Flight Safety hold 142 approvals. All of these operations are monitored by FAA inspectors who carry responsibility for making sure all is as it should be.

That begs only one question remaining – who oversights an outfit like SOAR? Please don’t say RA Oz; at the end of the day they have about as much say-so as the tea lady; CASA will simply line up the top ranks, lop off their fool heads and put in a new team of fools who believe that they can rule the aviation world. Puppets on a string may amuse the crowd and distract them while the pickpockets work – but don’t forget, it is the puppet master who gets a cut at the end of the show.

This is one of the easier patterns to follow for the neophyte knitter; there are other more complex patterns to attempt; some of ‘em so twisted and devious that one can spend a lifetime unravelling. But one thing is for certain sure; so long as this industry is prepared to allow CASA to operate as it does, without a single word of protest; the changes will continue, unabated. How many chief pilots have told a FOI to bugger off and take their ridiculous notions of what should be written into a manual part? Not too many I’d guess and not one still employed of those that did. Just go along to get along – and don’t look at the termites in the woodwork. Great idea……

Aye well, so much for knitting patterns and cats. The point of the ramble is to try and explain the awful tangle we are in – across the whole range of industry endeavours. Restriction, regulatory uncertainty, the ever present threat of being dragged into a court unable to mount a defence. The Glen Buckley saga, Angel Flight and of course SOAR all products of a seriously flawed system. ATSB now selecting which accidents they will investigate in an attempt to make their numbers look better and to hide their shame after the AF debacle. The accident rate increasing, the responsibility shifted, the pay packets growing and an industry caught up in a death spiral without the skill or legal tools to prevent the inevitable. Game, set and match I’d say.

The decision has been made; PAIN will not make a submission to the next Senate Inquiry. I have over 100 multi page notes on my ‘desk’ – to translate them all into a document of less than 1000 pages is not possible. The consensus is ‘the game ain’t worth the candle’. No, its not. Take a few moments and read through P2 Post #832  – it is as good a clear view of what the Senate faces as any; its all been said before – many times – over many inquiries. The result is always, relentlessly, inevitably the same.. I could, on my own account, send in a very simple submission, condensing the very best of all comment and providing the government with the very best advice – free of charge and no favour sought.

1) Bring in a reform DAS and top dog crew.

2) Adopt the NZ or USA rule set immediately.

3) Have the political balls to do what is known to be necessary.

That’s it. End of ramble. I feel better now; that lot off my chest. This endless dancing and prancing about while ignoring the putrid corpse is beyond my simple understanding.

Selah……….

[Peetwo]

Timeline of miniscule corruption - Part II

(These are my thoughts and opinions only -  ) 

Most people in the know say that Mick Mack is just a village idiot with not the first blind clue about aviation. However I think there is more to it than that and not only is he an imbecile that has lost his village but he is also a bought idiot who is beholden to his owners. 

Now McDonaught is not on his Pat Malone being a Pollie bought and captured by a third party (usually foreign) interest, it seems to be part and parcel with politics these days. However I am not sure that there has ever been a Deputy PM that I suspect was captured long before he was ever elected in 2010 to the Riverina Federal seat??

Taking a look at the Mick Mack Wikipedia entry it says...

..After leaving school, McCormack took up a cadetship at The Daily Advertiser, the local daily newspaper. He was appointed editor of the paper in 1991, aged 27, making him reputedly the "youngest newspaper editor in Australia".[8]

McCormack was sacked from The Daily Advertiser in February 2002. In response, "more than 20 journalists, photographers and other editorial staff" staged a 24-hour walkout.[9] McCormack went on to sue the Riverina Media Group for unfair dismissal, and in 2003 settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.[10]... 

 ...McCormack was campaign director for Kay Hull, the Nationals MP for Riverina, at the 2004 and 2007 federal elections. [b][i]Hull announced her retirement from politics in April 2010, and McCormack subsequently won preselection for her seat at the 2010 election...[/i][/b]

A fairly major part of the job of a political campaign director is to look for political support and donations from local businesses and Kay Hull already had a strong affiliation with REX airlines...

Regional Express executive chairman Lim Kim Hai (centre) with deputy chairman John Sharp and then federal member for Riverina Kay Hull at Wagga airport in 2010.

...Mrs Hull points to saving regional aviation as one of her success stories.

“We were told that regional aviation was just too hard, the government that I was part of told me that. I didn’t accept that and I joined forces with (original Regional Express chief) Michael Jones and worked tirelessly and brought about the government support that was required to put that airline into the sky...

...which culminated with the announcement in 2009 that REX would be relocating it's pilot academy AAPA to Wagga Wagga:

The Nationals Member for Riverina, today welcomed the news that Regional Express’ (Rex) wholly owned subsidiary ‘Australian Airline Pilot Academy’ (AAPA) will be relocated to Wagga Wagga, starting April 2009.

“This is terrific news for Wagga Wagga, the Riverina, and regional aviation in general. The AAPA will bring with it 70 high quality jobs and a high profile role for the region as a centre for pilot training,” Mrs. Hull said.

“I congratulate the Chairman Kim Hai Lim and his board for their continued investment in the future of regional Australia. The commitment of REX in providing frequency of services and access for professional support teams particularly in the area of health needs to be recognised.

“Rex has had to overcome major challenges due to skills shortages, but they have chosen to invest their hard earned profits into securing the future of regional aviation.

“I am aware that Mr Davis, Rex’s Managing Director, has paid tribute to the Wagga Wagga City Council staff, led by Mayor Kerry Pascoe and General Manager Lyn Russell, who have been instrumental in making this happen.

“I also send my congratulations to the Wagga Wagga City Council for their efforts in ensuring that the Rex board decided in favour of Wagga Wagga.

Rex has purchased a modern hangar at Wagga Wagga airport as well as 2.4 hectares of land that borders the Wagga Wagga airport for a total of $1.55M.

Plans are being drawn up to develop a state-of-the-art Training Centre on the land as well as accommodation, administration and recreational facilities to house the trainee pilots. It is expected the first stage of the development to be ready by the end of 2009.

“I am aware that there are plans for AAPA to be the premier pilot academy in Asia Pacific with a projected throughput of more than 200 pilots a year for both Australian and international airlines.

“For the city of Wagga Wagga and the entire Riverina area, this announcement is really exciting and I welcome wholeheartedly this new chapter in our relationship with REX and the benefits it brings to our region,” Mrs. Hull said.

 
Nearly every year since Mick Mack was elected he has been involved locally in multiple official events surrounding both REX and AAPA, including in 2017 the graduation of the first intake of Vietnamese Airline pilots...

Regional Express Airlines is part of Wagga Wagga's family.

It was an honour to join Foreign Minister Julie Bishop MP as Wagga Wagga's Australian Airline Pilot Academy - AAPA graduated its next class of pilots yesterday.

This graduating class included seven Vietnamese pilots, who have come to Wagga Wagga to learn from the best and take those skills with them to their careers abroad.

The class strengthens the city's reputation around the world as a leader in pilot training.

Congratulations to the graduating class!

For a bit more, here's my chat with AAPA Chairman Chris Hine.

... and just last year where he addressed the 2019 REX Graduation ceremony:

Hmm...makes you sick listening to that bollocks...  But despite the staged, plastic rhetoric, I guess it is fair enough given he is the local member and REX/AAPA are a significant local business and employer. However I think as the minister overseeing the aviation industry there is much more to it than that?? 

Since the election campaign of 2013 - Coalition's policy for aviation, August 2013 I don't believe there has been one coherent aviation policy delivered by the Coalition in Government?? Perhaps this is because the big aviation players (like REX, Qantas et.al)  are more than satisfied with the current aviation regulatory and/or oversight environment (where St Commode is happy beating up on small GA players like Angel Flight and Glen Buckley).

Cribbed from a pre-election Oz Flying post (on behalf of Mick Mack) the following extracts provide a disturbing vision of where the Smoko/Mick Mack Coalition Govt believe the future lies for the once proud Australian pilot training industry (my bold)...

I acknowledge there are pressures on flying training schools. I am always happy to look at what we can do better. But I do not agree with the idea that the industry is somehow dying.


CASA has recorded an increase in the number of flying schools on its register from 210 in 2012 to 235 in 2014 and now the number currently sits at 250. P2 - Coming from CASA you have to be suspicious about those figures? For example does that figure include Part 142 approvals for internal Airline training organisations and/or simulator service providers like CAE or Flight Safety?  

This comes as the way in which we train our future airline pilots is also changing.

Previously, a young pilot would get their commercial licence and either become a flying instructor or enter the small charter sector. This would then lead to a job at a small commuter airline connecting regional centres with the capital cities in larger twin engine aircraft such as the Piper Navajo that many regional airlines operate.

But things have changed. Regional Express Airlines’ SAAB 340s, Qantas Link’s Dash-8s and Virgin’s ATR-72s now connect the country and coast to the cities. P2 - How many years have regional airlines been operating mid-range turboprops?? - FDS!

These airlines have their own training schools designed to prepare young pilots specifically for that type of flying. Rex’s training school, the Australian Airline Pilot Academy in Wagga Wagga, has trained more than 230 pilot cadets since 2007, nearly all of whom are now flying the SAAB 340.

Qantas has announced the first of its own schools to be based in Toowoomba, like Virgin’s announcement for a flying school at Tamworth. This is the modern way of training future airline pilots and it is being replicated world-wide.

Australia’s aviation record means that when foreign airlines are looking for training grounds for their young pilots, Australia sits at the top of the list.

This is something we should embrace.

It is easy to see the economic benefit to the communities where these flying schools are located.

The pilots generally spend at least a year at the location. This means jobs in the community. It means money flowing around the economy. And it’s another option to recruit or retain skilled young people – and young families – to stay in the regions. P2 - Hey dipshit, this economic benefit is limited to a small number of larger communities. What about the smaller communities that once had aeroclubs or small flying schools that offered flight training services for the local region bringing business and trade to both the airport and local community. Just ask Senator McDonald about that - DIPSHIT!  

Despite some speculation, there is no evidence of substantial foreign ownership of regional airports and aviation training facilities – or the training of foreign pilots – and nor is it impacting the supply of pilots in the Australian market.

If flying schools, airlines and airports want to undertake training here, they play by the same rules and requirements as everyone else. P2 - But they are not licensed here but rather in their home country, therefore there is no requirement for them to operate under the onerous and expensive regulatory requirements of both Part 61 and 142.  

And – thanks to The Nationals in Government – the Foreign Investment Review Board was given additional powers in 2015 to investigate ownership by foreign state-owned enterprises – regardless of value – to ensure it’s in Australia’s national interest.

So the story of Australian aviation remains a good one, and one of which we should be proud.

The Liberals and Nationals will continue to support all parts of the aviation sector to thrive and as the election draws near, we will have more to say on what a re-elected Liberal and Nationals Government will do to help into the future.

But at the heart of this discussion is an Australian export creating jobs and opportunities in the bush. An industry with a bright future and bipartisan support.

And that’s something which is the envy of the world.

Michael McCormack is Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development, Leader of The Nationals and Member for Riverina.
Comment on the future of aviation in Australia has been sought from Shadow Minister for Transport Anthony Albanese.

And to reinforce the above bollocks statement in the lead up to the election:

Ref: https://www.michaelmccormack.com.au/medi...n-clemence

...Our government is also making an investment in regional Australia and this is part of our overall decentralisation, if you like, because what we're going to see as a result of this Instrument Landing System is better, safer airways here at Mildura. A system by which planes can land in low visibility, planes can land much safer in all sorts of conditions. But what we're also going to see is pilot training schools from metropolitan cities relocate to Mildura.

We've already seen that there's going to be a lot of interest in this. And for every dozen or so pilot trainees, that's pumping about a million dollars into the Mildura economy each and every year. And I know that for a fact because Wagga Wagga has a pilot training school. Wagga Wagga has an ILS and I've seen the difference that the ILS makes in pilot training, in those sorts of training schools and in the future of aviation at Wagga Wagga.

So if it's good enough for Wagga Wagga, it's certainly going to be good enough for Mildura and I know the local Mayor has said that this is going to be such a difference, make such a difference for Mildura, for the airport, and for the pilot training future of this particular region...(blah..blah..blah)

[/font][/size][/color]

---

Plus after the election:

Which brings me back full circle to the strange duplicitous actions/statements of Mick Mack bizarrely favouring the dodgy Soar operation; while under his watch the attempted embuggerance by CASA of Glen Buckley's fully compliant APTA (Part 142) operation (that was ironically designed to enhance aviation safety outcomes while facilitating the continued existence of small town aeroclubs and flying schools) was being carried out??   



MTF? - YES MUCH!...P2   

ps In light of the current smell surrounding Mick Mack's deputy I found this extract (from the MM Mildura ILS transcript) interesting...  

MICHAEL MCCORMACK:

And the Mayor was just here, the Mayor Simon Clemence just made that point that this is the most significant investment in Mildura. He talked about the local sports stadium, which came at a cost of a bit over $20 million, about $26 million, which in his words, "they had to fight, and scrap, and scratch for," and it was funded, but this just has such economic activity around it. I mean, the flow on effects are incredible. As Anne Webster just indicated, the direct and indirect jobs that are going to be created, not just for Mildura, but also for Wentworth, the Ouyen, and towns around Mildura. It's going to have such an economic outpouring of money, of jobs, of accommodation, of food. Everybody needs to be housed, and fed, and watered, and so it's just going to be such an incredible economic outcome for this area.[/font][/size][/color]

 


pps - Additional AP reference:  Oz aviation, safety compromised by political and bureaucratic subterfuge ?- 

[thorn bird]

I'm surprised the kids at the graduation were not rolling on the floor laughing at the drivel flowing from the ministers mouth. With their employment on the line, keeping a straight face shows incredible willpower. Do these kids receive HEC's to fund their training? No mention of who pays what, just asking?

PURELY HYPOTHETICAL

In todays Australian Robyn Ironside contributes a story regarding QUAINTASS taking legal action against an American company, L3 Commercial Training Solutions for breach of contract. They had agreed to run the Toowoomba pilot training academy, but pulled the pin before it got going.

All passing strange.

The whole pilot training thing was a little Napoleon brain fart much promoted by Hype and hyperbole.
I really do wonder why endeavour to train in Australia? It's about half the cost in the USA.

Do Quaintasses cadets receive HEC's, if so consider the UK example where BA ex cadet first officers declared bankruptcy rather than pay back the cost of their training. If they do receive HEC's that would explain it, another SOAR with a Red rodent trademark and a nice little earner as a profit centre and bonuses for the Irishman.

The vertically challenged Irishman was quite happy to export maintenance offshore, even building a one hundred million facility in LA to conduct maintenance which allegedly saved costs, yet pilot training had to stay in Australia. Was that to garner political support? Give a platform for a blowhard minister to blow his trumpet?

What? Why? because OUR standard is better than anyone else???If you find someone who espouses that line tell them their dreaming QuantAss would save a fortune by moving pilot training offshore and they would get a better product.

Which brings me to the Yanks pulling out.

Could it be that the poor old L3 people got blind sided by the CAsA propaganda that Australia is the world leader in Aviation regulation, until they actually got here and were confronted with PART 61, not the US version the OZ one, then Part 141 and 142 not the US version the Oz one and went What the F...Ck! As K is fond of saying exit stage right.

[P7_TOM]

Thorny – On the money.

But: when you take the time to actually read through P2’s carefully researched, spot on post – above – a bigger, more dynamic picture emerges. Someone ‘owns’ a fellah who had no idea where circumstance would place him. Time for a reshuffle methinks, – before the horrible truth emerges? The Sco-Mo train is running out of steam, rapidly.

On a practical note. You TB; and I have both had the benefit of training and operating under the USA system. We have both been subject to the UK system; and I know damn well we have both laboured under the Australian system. Of the three – I would argue for the (old) UK system– I liked it. But I would take any offer under the USA system – both are damn good – world class in fact. The other boot falls when you come home; it is actually a shock. But as ‘professionals’ we both have tried to bring a ‘semblance of operational sanity’ into play and paid a price for that.

We have both tried to bring ‘balance’ into the mind of a 2500 hour pilot with sod all experience on turbine aircraft; both suffered through the never ending CASA ‘pay-as-you-go’ system for having factory approved checklists and SOP – without modification – brought into operations. The list just goes on, and on, ad infinitum, ad tedium, ad an urge to thump someone.

Big Q ain’t silly; but neither are the Americans. Trying to ‘fit’ the USA philosophy, rule set, can do attitude and practical approach to flight training into a the CASA world of wonder – is a bloody big ask. The average American training operation would just roll about the floor laughing – indeed they do. Try getting a FAA inspector to fill out the thirty pages required for a simple type rating, it’s DYI or bugger off. But, IMO, it’s the insult which wrangles the USA folk. There you are, just finished with Flight Safety; signed off, legal, ready to go anywhere in the world – except Australia. The rigmarole to have a USA/FAA type put on your Aus licence is beyond any joke made about it. But, the hard part is some 2000 hour VFR instructor, masquerading as a CASA FOI who wrote Part 61 wants more. It’s bullshit. An American type rating should be automatically and instantly placed on your third world Australian licence – end of.

I can’t blame L3 for pulling out. The USA is really short of drivers – the problem is the ‘visa’. I reckon if they shuffled that around, just a bit, the exodus from the Land of OZ to better pay, better aircraft and a much better life would gut the regional airlines of senior crew. There but for the sake of a visa go I. Real flying, real weather, real training and real rules which assist in getting the bloody job done – on time appreciated – however; they do understand – shit happens. De Ice queue a permissible ‘late’ arrival.

If I had my time again (no chance) I’d never have left the misty, quirky UK except for a gig with a USA based outfit. Alas – here we are old mate – stuck forever trying to bring operational sanity to the bunch of self deluded amateurs who claim to run and manage aviation properly. BOLLOCKS………the tea lady has more notion of ‘how to’ than any FOI I’ve met this past 20 years.

Heh, heh – ‘K’ has a new keg on tap in the workshop – the women folk are away, doing whatever it is they do. Whatdyareckon? Fresh keg, cool evening, workshop tidy, stable quiet, I have cigars, it’ not raining and the deck chairs are just outside the doors. Much to discuss under the quiet evening skies.

[Kharon]

Narcissism.

I had to look it up on Wiki; complicated stuff - and a very real problem. Then, fearing, through ignorance, that I was getting the ‘bull-by-the-tits’- I reached out to some of the more qualified brethren. It was a simple enough question; no names, no pack drill - given (a) (b) © and (d) what would you make of it? No side on the ball – just a series of events cobbled together in support of the ‘scenario’. The answers, without much deliberation and little bet hedging, came back plain, pure and simple. “Someone’s got a problem”.

I took it a step further (pushing my luck) and expanded my search for ‘learned’ ‘considered opinion – even to some aviation ‘Guru’s: they all said the same. Then I fed ‘em some background and salient information. Perhaps I should mention, these are overseas, professional ‘guru’s who actually know what they are about in their day to day work – assessing aircrew. ”Do not hire this man” – singular response, repeated.

Then I really went to work. A catalogued history of the individual – ‘soup to nuts’ including Toga parties and hair color changes.

“Do not hire this man” – singular response, repeated. Then, I completely unmanned ‘em; I told ‘em who I was banging on about. Ever seen four guru’s explode at once? Amazing….

Anyone want to bet on just who I was talking with ‘senior’ sensible people about.

Promoted to a level of incompetency a’la the ‘Peter Principal’ may be acceptable in the slow moving, political arena - . Subtle , unspoken ‘blackmail’ may even be a valid road to promotion; but where I’ve noticed that happening, there was always a level of ‘qualification’ and at least, even if scant ‘proof’ of ‘experience’ to back up the promotion.

I only have one question left unanswered – why; of all those dancing about the CASA maypole, was Hood put in control of accident investigation? Boss ATSB?

I really would like that question answered – fat chance eh?

Toot – toot….

[Peetwo]

Has Senate exposed; a) captured Miniscule Muppet(s) & b) CASA rule by exemption??

As next week is the 1st Parliamentary sitting week of the year, I was mindlessly trolling through the Senate notice paper until the following caught my attention:

Notice given 14 November2019

1 Chair of the Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances (Senator Fierravanti-Wells): To move — That the Helicopter Aerial Application Endorsements Exemption 2019, made under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, be disallowed [F2019L01132].

Seven sitting days remain, including today, to resolve the motion or the instrument willbe deemed to have been disallowed.

Curious I decided to follow this up by first; a) checking what the exemption was all about and; b) finding out what issues the Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances had with the exemption??

What I was to discover was a real eye opener -  

(Note: The SSC on R&O, as of the 4 December 2019, has been re-badged the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation)

To begin - HERE - is a link for the named exemption. 

Excerpt:

1              Name

This instrument is CASA EX101/19 — Helicopter Aerial Application Endorsements Exemption 2019.

2          Duration

                 This instrument:

(a)   commences on 1 September 2019; and

(b)   is repealed at the end of 31 August 2022.

 
This exemption replaces a previous exemption which had expired on the 31 August 2019: 

Exemption - helicopter aerial application endorsement requirements: CASA EX120/17

This is the duck's guts of the exemption:

4          Exemptions

        (1)    Subsection (2) applies to a person who applies for the grant of an aerial application rating based on meeting the requirements set out in regulation 61.1140 of CASR for the grant of a helicopter aerial application endorsement.

        (2)    For the purposes of paragraph 61.1115 (1) (b) of CASR, the person is exempt from compliance with the relevant requirement, if the person has the aeronautical experience mentioned in subsection (4).

        (3)    For the purposes of paragraph 61.1140 (1) (b) of CASR, a person who applies for the grant of a helicopter aerial application endorsement is exempt from compliance with the relevant requirement, if the person has the aeronautical experience mentioned in subsection (4).

        (4)    For subsection (2) and (3), the person must have at least 10 hours of dual flight in a helicopter while receiving training in aerial application operations.

More curious now I was even more keen to discover what issues the Senate Committee had with this particular legislative instrument?? 

Once I got a handle on the relevant web pages and how the committee operated, I was able to track down lines of correspondence on the matter between the committee and our NFI miniscule Mick Mack:

References: 1) Page 4 -  https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...ndence.pdf

Dear Minister,

CASA EX101/19 — Helicopter Aerial Application Endorsements Exemption 2019 [F2019L01132]
The Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances assesses all disallowable legislative instruments against scrutiny principles outlined in Senate standing order 23. The committee has identified scrutiny concerns in relation to the above instrument, and seeks your advice in relation to this matter.

Significant matters in delegated legislation

Senate standing order 23(3)(d) requires the committee to consider whether an instrument may contain matters more appropriate for parliamentary enactment. This may include instruments that grant or extend exemptions from primary or enabling legislation.

The instrument exempts certain persons from requirements in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) relating to helicopter aerial application ratings, if they meet alternative requirements set out in the instrument. The explanatory statement justifies the exemptions on the basis that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has determined that the alternative requirements in the instrument are 'more effective' than those prescribed by the CASR.1 However, it does not explain why an exemption instrument has been used to prescribe these alternative requirements, instead of amending the CASR.

The exemptions in the present instrument were initially introduced by CASA EX120/17, which commenced on 10 October 2017. In November 2017, the committee raised concerns that CASA EX120/17 had been used to make 'improvements' to the CASR, rather than directly amending those regulations. The committee sought the minister's advice as to why that approach was taken, and whether the government proposed to amend the CASR to address the matters covered by CASA EX120/17.2 In response, the (then) Minister for Infrastructure and Transport advised that CASA would amend the CASR to address the
matters covered by CASA EX120/17, with amending regulations to be made in 2019.3

Despite the former minister's advice, the present instrument appears to remake CASA
EX120/17 in substantially the same terms, thereby extending the operation of the relevant
exemptions to 31 August 2022. The committee is therefore concerned that the
amendments to the CASR have not being progressed in accordance with the former
minister's undertaking, and, consequently, the relevant exemptions have now been in force
for such time as to constitute de facto amendments to the CASR.
In light of the matters above, the committee requests your advice as to:
• whether the government proposes to amend the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations
1998 (CASR) to address the matters covered by the present instrument, in
accordance with the former minister's undertaking to the committee; and
• if so, when the relevant amendments are likely to be made.

If the government does not propose to make such amendments, the committee requests
your advice as to why it is considered necessary and appropriate to further extend
exemptions to the CASR, instead of amending those regulations.

The committee's expectation is to receive a response in time for it to consider and report on
the instrument while it is still subject to disallowance. If the committee has not concluded
its consideration of an instrument before the expiry of the 15th sitting day after the
instrument has been tabled in the Senate, the committee may give notice of a motion to
disallow the instrument as a precautionary measure to allow additional time for the
committee to consider information received.

Noting this, and to facilitate the committee's consideration of the matters above, the
committee would appreciate your response by 31 October 2019.

Finally, please note that, in the interests of transparency, this correspondence and your
response will be published on the committee's website. If you have any questions or
concerns, please contact the committee's secretariat on
(02) 6277 3066, or by email to regords.sen@aph.gov.au.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Next the miniscule's reply...

Reference: 2) Page 4 - https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...resp08.pdf

Hmm...lovely when you get a couple of confessions of capture and admissions of incompetence, plus CASA's preferred method of ruling by bureaucratic legislative instrument exemptions, all in a few short paragraphs -   

Also note how CASA will 'be looking to complete a number of planned amendments to CASR Part 61' - code for yet another tranche of pages added to the already behemoth, WOFTAM Part 61...   

Next the committee reply...

Reference: 3) Page 9 - https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...ndence.pdf

Dear Minister,

CASA EX101/19 — Helicopter Aerial Application Endorsements Exemption 2019 [F2019L01132]

Thank you for your response of 7 November 2019 to the Senate Standing Committee on
Regulations and Ordinances, in relation to the above instrument. The committee considered your
response at its private meeting on 13 November 2019.

The committee welcomes your undertaking to amend the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998
(CASR) in 2020 to incorporate the exemptions set out in the present instrument, in accordance
with the committee's request.

While this amendment remains outstanding, the committee has resolved to place a protective
notice of motion to disallow the instrument, to ensure that the undertaking is implemented. The
committee will withdraw the notice once the CASR is amended in accordance with your
undertaking.

In this regard, please inform the committee if you envisage any difficulties in making the
amendments before the revised disallowance period is due to expire in mid-February 2020
(subject to confirmation of the 2020 sitting calendar).

Finally, please note that, in the interests of transparency, all correspondence relating to this
matter will be published on the committee's website, and recorded in the Delegated Legislation
Monitor.

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the committee's secretariat on
(02) 6277 3066, or by email to regords.sen@aph.gov.au.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Hmm...any bets on whether or not the miniscule will get off his beam end in time to meet the disallowance motion deadline? 


MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Part II: It gets worse - 

Chair: "...The exemptions in the present instrument were initially introduced by CASA EX120/17, which commenced on 10 October 2017. In November 2017, the committee raised concerns that CASA EX120/17 had been used to make 'improvements' to the CASR, rather than directly amending those regulations. The committee sought the minister's advice as to why that approach was taken, and whether the government proposed to amend the CASR to address the matters covered by CASA EX120/17.2 In response, the (then) Minister for Infrastructure and Transport advised that CASA would amend the CASR to address the
matters covered by CASA EX120/17, with amending regulations to be made in 2019...."

The 'then' Minister was Chester - JUST by about two weeks before Barnaby briefly took over for 68 days. The Chair at the time was John 'Wacka' Williams, who was also an 'active' participating member of the Senate RRAT committee. Conveniently Wacka has also departed the fix, retiring from the Senate prior to the last election.

So continuing to follow the trail, I referred to the '2017 Delegated Legislation Monitor' webpage, where I firstly discovered the following for the 15 November 2017: (ref: Ch1 pg 5)

Matters more appropriate for parliamentary enactment: exemptions

Scrutiny principle 23(3)(d) of the committee's terms of reference requires the committee to consider whether an instrument contains matters more appropriate for parliamentary enactment (that is, matters that should be enacted via principal rather than delegated legislation). This may include instruments that grant or extend exemptions from compliance with principal or enabling legislation.

The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) require applicants for helicopter aerial application ratings and endorsements to have at least 15 hours of dual flight in a helicopter while receiving training in aerial application operations, and at least 10 hours direct supervision within the first 110 hours of aerial application operations.

CASA EX120/17 exempts an applicant from these requirements, subject to the applicant having at least 10 hours of dual flight in a helicopter while receiving training, and 20 hours direct supervision within the first 110 hours of aerial application operations (the alternative requirements).

In relation to these matters, the ES states:

[The requirements in the CASR] have been reviewed and it has been concluded that it would be more effective if the person has 10 hours of dual flight in a helicopter while receiving training but, within the first 110 hours of aerial application operations, has 20 hours of operations under direct supervision.

It appears that the exemption granted by CASA EX120/17 has been used to introduce these improvements, rather than amending relevant provisions of the CASR to remove the less effective requirements and replace them with the alternative requirements. The ES does not provide a justification for this approach.

CASA EX143/17 exempts organisations required to have a drug and alcohol management plan (DAMP) from compliance with reporting obligations in subregulations 99.100(1) and (2) of the CASR, subject to certain conditions.

The instrument extends, until 30 September 2020, a previous three-year exemption from compliance with those reporting obligations provided by CASA EX39/15 [F2015L00225]. The ES for CASA EX143/17 states that the continuing exemption is necessary because:

CASA continues to consider that the reporting requirements in those subregulations are not necessary and their removal will have no identifiable impact on safety. Consistent with this policy, the instrument exempts DAMP organisations from compliance with those reporting requirements.

The ES further states, under the heading of consultation, that:

Prior to the making of instrument CASA EX39/15 CASA received substantial feedback from industry about the burdensome nature of the DAMP reporting requirements.

No explanation is provided in the ES as to why an exemption continues to be used to effectively amend the DAMP reporting requirements, rather than amending regulation 99.100 of the CASR.

In cases such as those outlined above (i.e. in relation to both CASA EX120/17 and CASA EX143/17), the committee's general preference is that exemptions are not used or do not continue for such time as to operate as de facto amendments to principal legislation (in this case to the regulations).

The committee requests the minister's advice as to:
• why it is considered more appropriate to establish or extend exemptions to the CASR in each of the above instruments, rather than making amendments to the regulations; and
• whether and when government proposes to introduce amendments to the CASR to address the matters covered in the two instruments above.

From the 'ministerial correspondence' for the 6 December 2017, I then tracked down the former Minister Chester's reply...

(Ref: Pg 9 - dated 29 November 2017, ironically the day he finished and Barnaby took over as Minister)

...Thank you for your letter of 16 November 2017 regarding a number of instruments
included in the Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances Delegated
Legislation Monitor No 14 of 2017.

Civil Aviation Safety Exemption Instruments
I have sought advice from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) about the concerns
raised by the Committee in relation to these instruments.

CASA has utilised exemptions in this case as a means to provide more timely relief to
industry for provisions that are intended to be implemented through regulation
amendment.

However, CASA agrees that it is preferable to amend regulations rather than make
exemptions. The process for making regulation amendments that will cover these
exemptions is underway with CASA expecting to bring forward amending regulations in
either 2018 or 2019. More specific information is included below relating to each
exemption instrument.

CASA EX120/17 - Exemptions- requirements for helicopter aerial applications
endorsements [F2017L01332]
Since Civil Aviation Safety Regulation 1998 (CASR) Parts 61, 141 and 142 commenced in
September 2014, CASA has identified various issues or unintended consequences that
were then the subject of general exemptions. CASA proposes to amend these Parts
(in particular Part 61) to deal with these issues with drafting instructions for an
amendment regulation expected in 2018, for making of the regulation in 2019.

CASA EX143/17 - Exemption - DAMP organisations to provide information to CASA
[F2017L01300)
CASA has been intending to progress regulation amendments to deal with this
exemption but the work has been delayed in order to address higher profile safety
critical regulation amendments.

However, CASA has worked with the Office of Parliamentary Counsel during 2016 and
2017 to finalise an amendment package to CASR Part 99 relating to drug and alcohol
management, and proposes to introduce the amendment package in early 2018
(together with a Part 99 Manual of Standards). The amendments will deal with the
reporting requirements that are the subject of the exemption...

Now go back to the nearly 2 year later response from Mick Mack to the present Chair of the committee: 

---

---

 
Yes I know the implications are disgusting?? Probably won't happen because Mick Mack is totally captured and spineless; however IMO this should be evidence enough to supply at least a St Commode HEAD on a Platter and probably the Minister's ( Plus: former St Commode and Chester's) aviation adviser as well...   

MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

For and on behalf of Sandy, via the AP email chains.


Post of the month - Bravo Sandy.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s (CASA) fatuously styled “Director of Air Safety,” Shane Carmody, has a briefing today making comment towards a move to increase the All Up Weight (AUW) of Recreational Aircraft from 600 kg to 760kg, another arbitrary number.



Quote:- “A common comment made in the feedback was the proposal would benefit the aviation community as it would stimulate activity in the private recreational aviation sector across the board. Feedback indicated the change would result in improved safety as a result of access to aircraft with greater structural integrity, as well as the ability to carry to greater useful loads and additional fuel. It would likely change the perception of recreational private flying and attract new and former pilots into the sector, creating greater opportunities in training and maintenance.“



Shane Carmody seems favourably disposed, though somewhat coyly put, towards a weight increase for the Recreational Aviation Australia (RAAus) category. RAAus being a Commonwealth sponsored private monopoly company administering this section of General Aviation (GA). The weight increase is welcome but points to the colossal policy failure by government through it’s regulator CASA.



It seems that the penny has dropped, after about twenty five years, about the wrong weight limit. The wrong split of GA, and the rules twisted to induce thousands of pilots into less capable aircraft, is the root cause of this unhealthy situation. And so the pronouncement of the peak aviation safety body of government after all this time. Why do we pay these people when they cannot see or act in the National interest to correct operational and safety issues that have been so obvious for so long? Where have our Aviation Ministers and their advisors been all these years? Heads in the sand?



CASA supports the wrongful division of our industry to the detriment of Australia’s aviation industry, it cannot admit to a wrong structure or systemic failure because it is reactionary and has no appetite or incentive to change.



The wholly unnecessary and unjust revocation of Glen Buckley’s flying school umbrella model, a model developed to overcome the extraordinary and super expensive new CASA flying school regulations (the infamous Part 61), will now be seen with, if possible, even more cynicism. Why? Simply because RAAus effectively uses the same model with CASA’s tacit approval and with the weight increase will undoubtedly lead to most pilots having to learn to fly via the RAAus system.



Too bad for Australia (no wonder we are now importing pilots) that we cannot have the rational rules of the USA where instructors can teach without the huge fees, expenses and bureaucratic delaying tactics of CASA.



Make the change, not difficult, and we would see a resurgence in training, maintenance and other jobs and services growing in General Aviation.



Sandy Reith

[Peetwo]

Woh-hoh-oh, his nose is gettin' bigger -

Ref:

The curse is come upon me.

...Bored with adding ‘G’s’ (for genuine) to McCormack’s illustrious name, the troops have picked up “Pinocchio” as a catchall. Puzzled, I innocently asked Why? You seen the size of that bokes ‘snozzle’? I admit I’d never given it a thought; but when they came to mention it – well.

The guy started off well endowed in the long nose race; but has anyone noticed how much longer the Mick-Mack 6G proboscis has grown lately? 



Some say due to his constantly tweaking it to avoid the stench, others have it that a need for more thought assisting finger room has increased the proboscis to it’s present state.– The rest of us; those who believe in Karma say simply that the camera’s have stopped being kind to this creature from NDI land. That is a fair assessment. Look at the mans path through life, then ask the only question that matters: – is this man capable of leading this nation? In a nutshell NO!. So why are we pretending he can?

Hot off the Twitterverse more proof that Mick Mack is inflicted with Pinocchio-itis:




Chorus sung to...

MTF...P2

[Kharon]

Hallelujah – Rain.

“The sun did not shine. It was too wet to play. So we sat in the house. All that cold, cold, wet day.”

Like a lot of folks who’s work is affected by the weather, pilots pay a lot of attention to the details – they matter. Not just from a ‘safety’ POV, a ‘weather day’, like today along the East coast brings all kinds of penalties for ATC, passengers etc. Operationally this all adds up to ‘expense’ extra fuel, additional flight time, delayed fights and all the associated ‘challenges’ the day brings – for every one involved, from the wet cold baggage handlers to the ‘top floor’ worrying about the bottom line.

The ‘infrastructure’ – the system has a whole lot to do the efficiency of operations; take Sydney as an example. Lots of aircraft all looking to keep schedule and minimise the flight time bill (maintenance) and the fuel bill. When the weather is liquid and lousy delays creep into the equation; one of the saving graces is the Instrument Landing System (ILS). With designed approach tracks and stepped sequencing the ATCO’s can ‘flow’ traffic onto the ILS and minimise the delays. The ILS approach and associated lead in lights etc. almost guarantees a landing in all but the most appalling weather conditions. But once away from the ‘amenities’ a port like Sydney provides – with few exceptions the East coast is ‘light on’ for ILS – except for similar major ports. Ballina is one that comes to mind; busy and without not only ATC but an ILS. The GPS approach’s provided work just fine; but the minimum descent height is higher than an ILS; the pilots must self separate, and the time separation takes adds cost to the whole operation. Albeit not very often.

But, ILS systems are very expensive to buy and install; and expensive to maintain. The on going calibration and testing ain’t pocket change; so a compromise is found. For the number of days when only an ILS will get the flight to landing the ILS expense cannot be justified. 90 times out of 100 even with East coast ports which are affected by SE stream weather (today) the GPS approach will see the job done, safely. The ‘big’ aerodromes, with stacks of traffic have ILS and ATC– fair enough; all safe as houses.

The subject comes up periodically for ‘discussion’ and nearly always logic and good sense prevails – except when someone mentions Mildura. It depends on the mood the crew is in; sometimes a dark humour prevails, but mostly the Mildura ILS is discussed with a sense of wonder. WTD do they need an ILS out there, for who paid for it and why? The weather statistics for Mildura prove one thing; the sun shines most of the time and apart from the occasional early fog – the ‘weather’ is rarely anything more than between delightful and ‘easy’.

The Mildura ILS has long been a puzzle; an occasional subject over an idle Ale or two. Seems our current Minister had somewhat to do with it.

McDonaught - “Because it was important and Anne Webster continually reminded me about the need for an Instrument Landing System here at Mildura”.

Be buggered if I can see the 'important' need; when there are East cost ports which would do very well with one. Aye well - Check the Mildura WEATHER DATA. Passing strange I’d call it.

Toot – toot,

[Peetwo]

From the school of 'passing strange' coincidences??

Sunshine & Daylight Hours in Mildura, New South Wales, Australia

• There is an average of 2938 hours of sunlight per year (of a possible 4383) with an average of 8:02 of sunlight per day.
  
  
• It is sunny 67% of daylight hours. The remaining 33% of daylight hours are likely cloudy or with shade, haze or low sun intensity.
  

Hmm...says it all really??   

However you never know when you might just have another Mildura fog duck up...  

Ref: The great Mildura Fog and fuel duck up. & https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...12#pid1012 & https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...96#pid3696

Of course there was a lot more to what could have been Australia's worst ever aviation accident but at the end of the day could a ILS have made an iota of difference to the, thankfully successful, on fuel vapour, zero viz landing into Mildura?? 

Extract from Mildura Fog duck-up report:

...In response to this occurrence, Airservices advised that they would work with the Bureau of Meteorology to explore feasible options to provide information on significant deteriorations in weather conditions to address the very high frequency radio range limitations of the automated broadcast services. In the meantime, Airservices has updated the Manual of Air Traffic Services to ensure dissemination of weather information from locations with an Automatic Weather Information Service should that service be unavailable.

The Bureau of Meteorology advised of various system changes and improvements in response to this occurrence. This included to equipment used in forecasting...

I know it is all purely academic but perhaps a QON for the ATSB's Mr (lies, damned lies & statistics) Godley, could be...

Q/ What is the % probability of all the holes in the Swiss Cheese lining up again to produce another Mildura fog duck-up?    

Oh well obviously the % PROB was considered to be high enough to save potential future embarrassment for miniscule McDonaught. Couple this to helping secure a considerable economic benefit for the Sunraysia district and the city of Mildura through helping attract a Chinese airline flying school, plus maybe other flying schools in the future. Add that to the political pork barreling benefit to the Nats in the lead up to the last election, all adds up to a win, win scenario. Except of course if you happen to be a rate and taxpaying resident of somewhere like Byron Bay (refer P9 post above)...  

Moving on and while trolling through pages of Google searches on the subject matter I came across some passing strange coincidences/connections??

Starting with the Mildura information at the bottom of my post #268 I happened to come across the following Aviator magazine related article, on the announcement of 2 additional directors to the Mildura Airport PTY LTD Board :

New Directors at Mildura
written by Aviator November 21, 2018

[b]The future of Mildura Airport has been further strengthened, with the appointment of two highly-credentialed new Directors to the Board of Mildura Airport Pty Ltd, the body which operates the regionally significant transport hub.
[/b]
Stephen Angus and Brooke Curtin join four continuing Directors on an expanded six-member Board.

“The quality of candidates who applied to be non-executive Directors was exceptional,” said Chairman, Mr Peter O’Donnell.

“We received interest from across the country, which I believe is a testament to the high regard people within the aviation industry hold Mildura Airport and what we’re doing here.”

Ms Curtin has exceptional commercial experience in many leading businesses including Qantas. She has been a senior executive at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, a senior aviation adviser to the Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and was an F-111 Navigator in the RAAF.

Mr Angus is Airservices Australia’s Executive General Manager of Air Navigation Services, managing 1,800 staff to deliver safe and efficient air traffic management services. He is a qualified Air Traffic Controller with 27 years’ experience in the industry.

“Safety is obviously a key concern for everyone – passengers most certainly – and given Stephen’s current role and history his input in that area is going to be incredibly valuable,” Mr O’Donnell said.

“Brooke also has significant experience with flight operations which are crucial to safety.”

 
[b]Adding to local expertise
[/b]
“I think it’s clear our two new Directors will bring outstanding industry and government knowledge to the board table, to add to the excellent local expertise and experience already there,” Mr O’Donnell said. “A strong board has just become stronger.”

Long-time Board member Ross Lake did not stand for re-election due to his outside business commitments.

Which led to these BRB running notes on both Ms Curtin and Mr Angus:

Brooke Curtin CV: (note adviser to the Minister since 2017 - to present) https://www.linkedin.com/in/brooke-curtin-a58800b6/
Also note she left CASA in 2016 to have a crack at running for Parliament as Liberal candidate in the ACT : https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6...ts-battle/
Now refer to this article: https://aviatormag.com.au/new-directors-at-mildura/
Also note the CV details for Mr Angus:

Mr Angus is Airservices Australia’s Executive General Manager of Air Navigation Services, managing 1,800 staff to deliver safe and efficient air traffic management services. He is a qualified Air Traffic Controller with 27 years’ experience in the industry.

Both are still listed as Directors of the Mildura airport board: https://milduraairport.com.au/corporate/

Conflict of interest?

  In addition to above it should be noted that Mr Angus has now left ASA (February 2019???). I also believe that Mr A was the individual that took over the Hooded Canary's position (see youtube vid above) in June 2016.

In regards to Ms Curtin, she is still listed as senior adviser (aviation) to McDonaught.

As ScoMo is quoted as saying a lot lately - "it is all (probably -   ) totally legal" and above Board...  

However one must admit it does have a 'certain' Murky stench about it, especially when you consider the ongoing 'sports rort' saga?...  

MTF? - Yes definitely...P2        

ps Moral of the story, for all those regional airports looking for funding for an ILS, is get hold of Ms Curtin/Mr Angus and sign them up for your Board ASAP...

[thorn bird]

P2. Headline in Wed Australian.

"MickMack paddywacked, what's the damage?"

Interesting, as I wasn't aware Mick Mack or Barnaby had Irish roots, nevertheless as a headline
it has a nice ring to it.

The second line of the old kids song went 'Give a dog a bone' which brings me to your insightful twiddle above.

I wonder who or whom got a juicy bone? and we wonder why Australia slides down the International scale
of perceived corruption.

[Peetwo]

ScoMo/Mick Mack Govt pork barrels & rorts - cont/-



A podcast from 'New Politics' well worth the 2 coffees to listen to: https://soundcloud.com/newpoliticsaustra...-political 

The New Year Of Political Corruption And Solutions For Parliamentary Reform

February 12, 2020 NPA News Podcasts



Listen to our latest podcast! The contents:

Another year, another round of political corruption to deal with. Scott Morrison claimed “a miracle” caused him to win the 2019 election but, as with most claims of divine intervention, that old human frailty of vice and corruption proved to be the real answer. The Liberal–National Government had a cash splash fund of almost $500 million dollars to throw at marginal and Coalition-held seats – funding programs that had no guidelines, no application forms, little oversight, and a rorting scheme that Vladimir Putin could be proud of.

And if that wasn’t enough, the Australian Federal Police dropped the forgery case against Angus Taylor: nothing to see here, please move along. It’s obvious the Liberal–National Government is too close to the AFP – the AFP investigates the issues that are favourable to the government, but ignores the issues that are unfavourable to the government. It’s not the way an open and democratic system should operate, and trust in government is plummeting even further.

So what can be done about this? We commence our series on solutions to a sick democracy, and make suggestions for how to improve accountability in the parliament: an independent speaker and ditching the Dorothy Dix questions. That would be a good start.

Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-27-10-19-the-bu...bull-dust/

Ref: Wikipedia - Pork Barrel.

Senator CORMANN: Thank you very much, Mr Acting Deputy President. As I have indicated, this is a document that was prepared for the consideration of the public governance committee of the cabinet, which is part of the deliberative processes of cabinet. As is well recognised in the Westminster system, it is in the public interest to preserve the confidentiality of cabinet deliberations to ensure the best possible decisions are made following thorough consideration and discussion of relevant proposals within cabinet. Disclosure of the document subject to the motion is not in the public interest, as it would reveal, and therefore harm, cabinet deliberations.

However, as I did also note in my letter, the report was the subject of a press conference from the Prime Minister on 2 February 2020, which is on the public record. Further, Mr Gaetjens has advised the Prime Minister that he intends to make a public statement in due course; in fact, I understand that he will have the opportunity to appear in front of the select committee established by the Senate to inquire into these matters.

(P2 comment: From OBS of the whole debate the whole body language and demeanour when Senator Cormann issued this bollocks statement and then scurries off speaks volumes IMO..  )

From Parlview  (via Youtube) Sen Jacqui Lambie in reply...  

 

...I find it very shameful. What a sorry, sorry affair this is, and what a poor show from our government. Australians deserve an explanation. You can tell us whatever rot you want to in here. This is why there is no trust from the Australian people. Senator McKenzie stepped down because she had not declared her membership of a shooting club that received $36,000 under the Community Sport Infrastructure Grants Program to pay for new toilets. The government still maintains that she didn't do anything wrong in targeting the sports funding to marginal electorates that the coalition wanted to win in the 2019 election.

It was the right thing for Senator McKenzie to resign—well, better late than never! I said within 12 hours she had to go, and I had no problem in texting her and telling her that either. Her behaviour was disgraceful. But, by pinning her resignation on a conflict of interest, the government are trying to pretend that using taxpayers' money to bolster their re-election campaign is acceptable behaviour. They're saying that pork barrelling is acceptable behaviour. They're saying that using a supposedly independent $100 million grant scheme as a slush fund is, once again, acceptable political behaviour. They're telling us that they don't see a problem with using a spreadsheet colour-coded by electorate to overrule the independent advice of Sport Australia. They don't see any issue with the fact that worthy projects missed out on funding because they weren't in electorates that the coalition needed to win and knew they did haven't the numbers to win...

Also from Sic'em'Rex:

...To inform us in relation to that fact, we have to go to some of the statements made by the Prime Minister when he announced that this document was being formed. He basically stated that he had asked the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet for advice in relation to any action in the application of the statement of ministerial standards. The Prime Minister is awaiting the secretary's advice and will continue to follow due process. That's what the Prime Minister indicated. There is nothing in there that says this was for cabinet. I will read from section 109 of the latest version of the Cabinet Handbook to give a feel of how important this dominant purpose is. It says:

If an attachment or supporting document has been brought into existence for the dominant purpose of submission for consideration by the Cabinet, then the attachment or supporting document must clearly state this. This ensures each document is appropriately identified as a Cabinet document and handled in line with the security requirements for Cabinet material.

I would like the government to return to this chamber some evidence—because we're dealing with a question of fact—that this document was intended at birth to be a cabinet submission. That should be very easy. If, indeed, there is no evidence of that then they must table the document.

I've FOIed this. I've been through the FOI process before and I have managed to have released to me documents that were purportedly cabinet documents. I know this space really well. As I said, I have FOIed this document. Won't it be a shame, when I get to the end of the two-years the process is likely to take me, if it's revealed to me that Mr Rex Patrick can get it, under FOI, but the Senate couldn't? We'll see how that pans out...

Here is a link for the Hansard: Report on Ministerial Standards and Sports Grants

While on barrels of Pork and political rorting; I note the following extensive PDF document from RRAT Supp Estimates and provided by Mick Mack's Dept in regards to questioning from Sen Sterle: 

Ms Pip Spence PSM, Secretary, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development 

Responses to questions from Senator Glenn Sterle 21/10/19 (PDF 13.7MB)

---

There follows 61 tabled pages of absolutely staggering amounts (billions of dollars) of government expenditure into regional grants and community funding which I'm sure is mostly above board and genuine. However after the ongoing ScoMo Govt sports rorts imbroglio you do wonder??? 

Ref: #SBG 19/01/20 – As the man with a wooden leg said;



MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Via the Weekend Oz...

---

Coalition leaders expect Michael McCormack to stand aside

EXCLUSIVE
DENNIS SHANAHAN
POLITICAL EDITOR

GEOFF CHAMBERS
FEDERAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
@Chambersgc



Rebel Llew O’Brien, left, with Nats leader Michael McCormack at the opening of the Sunshine Beach surf club on Friday. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen

The top levels of the Coalition ­expect Michael McCormack will make way for his deputy David Littleproud to take over the ­Nationals leadership in an orderly transition of power.

Leading Nationals and Liberals now believe the Deputy Prime Minister must step down ahead of the next election to ensure the survival of the country party and maintain stability inside the ­Coalition.

The Weekend Australian ­understands a change in Nationals leadership — following Barnaby Joyce’s failed move against Mr McCormack — would see Mr Joyce not challenge for the top job and instead work as a minister in Mr Littleproud’s team.

While no formal agreement or timetable is in place for the proposed transition, Coalition leaders have concluded a clean change is required after talks in Canberra.

Following the collapse in support for Mr McCormack’s leadership, Scott Morrison was forced to seek backing for the government from rogue Nationals MPs and ­respond to concerns in Liberal ranks that the budget agenda could be derailed.

Senior Nationals and Liberal sources told The Weekend Australian the best way to ensure stability for the Coalition and within the Nationals was for Mr McCormack to work on a transition of leadership beyond him and Mr Joyce.

Mr McCormack told The Weekend Australian: “I intend leading the party to the next ­election.”

But he also said: “The leadership is the gift of the Nationals partyroom. A week is a long time in politics.”

Keeping a longstanding commitment, Mr McCormack travelled to Llew O’Brien’s Queensland electorate of Wide Bay on Friday to open the revamped Sunshine Beach surf club, which received a $2.5m grant two months before last year’s May 18 election. Mr O’Brien, who moved a spill motion against Mr McCormack in support of Mr Joyce, quit the Nationals on Monday. The government suffered a rare defeat on the floor of parliament after Mr O’Brien teamed with Labor, the crossbench and rogue Coalition MPs to win the Deputy Speaker’s job ahead of Mr McCormack’s pick Damian Drum.

Standing alongside Mr McCormack on Friday, Mr O’Brien said voters in Wide Bay had backed him as a Liberal National Party candidate. “That’s what they bought, that’s what they got, that’s what they’ve still got. I’m a proud member of the Coalition government,” he said.

As Nationals MPs duelled publicly and baited Liberals over coal-fired power stations during the first parliamentary sitting fortnight of the year, Nationals party president Larry Anthony and former Nationals leader and deputy prime minister John Anderson held private talks and made public appeals for peace and calm.

Across two weeks of turmoil for the Nationals, two cabinet ministers resigned, Mr McCormack narrowly fended off a challenge from Mr Joyce and Mr O’Brien resigned to sit as an LNP MP inside the joint partyroom.

The Prime Minsiter was dragged into the dispute when warned by Mr Joyce that rebel Nationals MPs may cross the floor to defeat government legislation.

A senior Nationals source said that if no orderly transition was put in place, MPs would maintain their destabilisation campaign against Mr McCormack. “It won’t stop. The past two weeks have damaged both ­Michael and Barnaby. There is now a feeling that a compromise leader is needed possibly sooner rather than later,” the source said.

With Mr Morrison and Josh Frydenberg responding to budget pressures sparked by the coronavirus and bushfire recovery, senior government figures want an end to the brawling. Concerns have also been raised about the potential for the internal warring to spill into Liberal ranks after moderates complained they had been told not to antagonise Nationals MPs over climate change and energy.

Despite rebel Nationals publicly declaring their “support” for Mr McCormack, most consider his leadership to be “terminal” after he rewarded colleagues who voted for him and shut out rivals.

A plan by McCormack supporters to entrench his leadership by requiring two-thirds of the ­Nationals partyroom to back a spill was shelved within hours after backlash from Joyce backers.

---

Classic Barnaby moment courtesy of AlboMP, via Twitter/FB: https://twitter.com/AlboMP/status/122677...11394?s=20

Anthony Albanese
@AlboMP

Don't worry, Barnaby. The feeling is bipartisan.

LUV IT! 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

ScoMo/Mick Mack Govt pork barrels & rorts - Part III

By Jommy Tee, via Michael West :

---

Pigs might fly: electioneering an airport at Cohuna

by Jommy Tee | Feb 23, 2020 | Featured, Government

An unregistered lobbyist, a ministerial breach of the Lobbying Code of Conduct and a $2.6 million grant awarded during the election campaign minus pesky guidelines. Jommy Tee and Ronni Salt clear the pigs for take off.

The deputy prime minister, Michael McCormack, struck a pre-election deal with an unregistered political lobbyist and former Howard Government adviser, Andrew Gibbs, for a $2.6 million airport upgrade ahead of the launch of the Regional Airports Program (RAP). McCormack’s direct intervention mirrors Senator Bridget McKenzie in using taxpayers’ money for electioneering. He also breached the Government’s Lobbying Code of Conduct...

---

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Airports and Aviation Division: Supp Estimates AQON.

The following answers, from the Dept's A&A division, IMO once again provide clear examples of how our completely spineless and useless miniscule Mick Mack totally duck shoves all responsibility and leadership in oversighting matters aeronautical - FFS! 

QON 314

QON 315

QON 316

QON 317

QON 318

Example AQON 317 (Note the delaying tactics and the shirking responsibility in the following -  ):

Answer:

1. There are 322 aerodromes in Australia that have been Certified or Registered under Part 139 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.

2-3. The Department of Home Affairs (Home Affairs) is responsible for aviation security matters, including passenger and freight screening. Home Affairs is responsible for implementation of the Australian Government’s $50.1 million commitment to assist regional airports with upgrade costs.

4. Yes however, questions related to details on implementation arrangements should be directed to Home Affairs.

5-9. These questions relating to details on implementation and funding arrangements and feedback from operators should be directed to Home Affairs.

10. The Regional Aviation Association of Australia (RAAA) wrote to the Deputy Prime Minister on 4 October 2019, regarding mandatory screening of domestic air freight. The Deputy Prime Minister responded on 4 November 2019 recognising the importance of domestic air freight and encouraging the RAAA to continue its engagement with Home Affairs.

11. These questions relating to details on implementation and regulatory arrangements should be directed to Home Affairs.

12. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development is preparing case studies on the impacts of changes to passenger screening requirements at six regional airports. As part of this process, the Department is consulting with each airport and relevant airlines. The Department will provide details of the advice provided by stakeholders when the case studies are finalised. The case studies will be provided to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee.

Sic'em'Rex sounds the regional aviation drum for Estimates - 

Sen Patrick adjournment speech, from 27/02/20 Senate Hansard:

Aviation

Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (17:52): The federal coalition government have introduced regulations into the parliament that will require security screening at regional airports. They've offered to pay for the equipment but not for the much more significant cost of the ongoing employment of security guards and, indeed, maintenance. I'm quite happy for there to be security screening at regional airports. If that's what Home Affairs says is required then that is what is required, but it must be the government that pay the cost. National security is a national responsibility, not a local council responsibility. It is the local councils that own the airports and will be charged this cost, and they, of course, will have to pass it on to passengers.

The former Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development did a case study on Whyalla—I'll just point out that Whyalla is serviced by both Rex Regional Express and Qantas—and found that the new requirement will increase a per person flight by $53 or $69. If the screening is only carried out on the Qantas passengers, the cost will be an extra $69. Now, clearly, if it costs an extra $69 to fly Qantas, fewer people are going to accept that option and, in fact, Qantas will end up pulling out of that route. If it's carried out on both Rex and Qantas passengers, the cost will be $53. This will just reduce people's willingness to fly. They'll go back on the roads.

In this instance, it'll reduce loadings on the aircraft and it will reduce the viability of the routes and again will result in flights being cut. So the two best options are that flights are cut or routes are cut completely. The government have botched this up. They've failed to do proper due diligence from the beginning and they're only now discovering what devastating impacts this proposal will have on regional communities. Whyalla and Port Lincoln will be seriously affected by this bungle. However, it is the thin end of the wedge—Kangaroo Island and Mount Gambier will likely be next.

When bureaucrats in the Canberra bubble first dreamed up this policy, they thought the annual operating costs of the equipment would be somewhere between $530,000 and $760,000. They were wrong. We now know that the numbers are something around $1.2 to $2 million. How do we know that? Because the RRAT committee conducted an inquiry and caught on to the idea that this was going to happen and asked a lot of questions. Amazingly, again, the government had done no analysis on the effect. I can tell you that regional air travel is the lifeblood of these regional cities. It's how people get to education services. It's how they get to medical services. It's how medical locums get into a local community. It's how we support agriculture, business and tourism. And it just allows families to travel to see one another. It is their lifeblood. If you start taking away flights, it will have an impact on communities. In the analysis, the department actually claim that the increased costs might not be passed directly on to ticket pricing. That just shows how hopelessly out of touch the government is. I can assure you that the costs will get passed on.

I have moved to disallow this regulation. The Senate will get to vote on this on 12 May this year. It's not just Whyalla that will be affected, and it is not just Port Lincoln. The department conducted case studies into other airports—Rockhampton, Geraldton, Wagga, Longreach and, indeed, Kangaroo Island, which is not even on the list. They're looking at that, and I'm now trying to get some more information on that. When this disallowance motion is voted on, it will be a real test for coalition senators who often claim to represent regional Australia. So I'm going to give them the opportunity to buck the system and vote with me on the disallowance.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Ref: https://www.msn.com/en-au/video/sport/de…p-BB10dIiG & https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph…3#pid11103 & https://www.sbs.com.au/news/michael-mcco…n-victoria

---

Quatrains, rail trains and a certain sadness. – AP Forum version.

The following was learned as a boy:-

“Be still, sad heart! and cease repining;

Behind the clouds is the sun still shining;

Thy fate is the common fate of all,

Into each life some rain must fall”


Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-1-03-20-quatrai...n-sadness/

---

The witless, wonder from Wagga does it again -   
 
Keeping with this week's SBG theme (see above), the following was a short segment extracted from last night's RRAT committee questioning of the ARTC in relation to the tragic XPT train derailment at Wallan:

(Refer from 04:30 minutes)

This is a link for the press conference transcript to which Sterlo refers: https://www.michaelmccormack.com.au/medi...ruary-2020

Quote:

JOURNALIST: 


Are you happy with the efforts to get the line back up and running after the Wallan accident?

MICHAEL MCCORMACK: 

Well, yes, I am and of course, what we always needed to do, what the ARTC's first and foremost mission was, was to make sure the line was safe.  No authorities would ever send a train down an unsafe track and I know that the National Rail Safety Regulator, I know that the Australian Transport Safety Bureau are investigating the accident that sadly took the lives of two train operators last week and we mourn with them, our condolences go out to their grieving families.  Of course, a 54-year-old driver, John Kennedy, and the pilot, 49-year-old from Castlemaine, Sam Meintanis, we mourn with them, we mourn their loss and we will make sure that the proper answers are found by state authorities, Victoria, of course, where the accident occurred, near Wallan, New South Wales, of course, because it was an XPT New South Wales train and the ATSB, the National Rail Safety Regulator and of course, there's a coronial inquest going. P2 comment - Code for the ATSB and the regulator will run topcover O&O exercises until the next election but the 'independent from Federal interference' Coroner's inquest could be the thorn in the side of Australian taxpayer funded O&O process...  

So what we need to do, I don't want to pre-empt anything that may or may not have been done or happened, what we need to do is let the proper investigators take the right amount of time to fully investigate this accident and come up with the answers as to why it occurred. 

JOURNALIST: 

Are you satisfied the line is safe?

MICHAEL MCCORMACK: 

Well, the line won't reopen until it's safe. 

Also of interest in that transcript was another reference to a coroner's inquest in relation to the release of ATSB C130 large air tanker accident prelim report:

JOURNALIST:

Is it satisfactory that the C1300's voice recorder was not working?

MICHAEL MCCORMACK: 

We mourn for the loss of those three American firefighters who came to our country to fight the fires in and around Cooma, in New South Wales and indeed, they did a very fine job.  Anything to do with that particular crash, of course, is being investigated by the proper authorities and I know that not only the Australian National ATSB, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau are investigating, but also, as you would expect, American authorities are very interested in what went wrong and to make sure that we avoid these sorts of things in the future. 

A very, very sad accident, a tragic loss of life.  Three men in their prime helping out, reaching across, reaching across the ocean to help their friends in need here in Australia.  We mourn with their families.  I've spoken to their families, I've attended two memorial services for them and I know how much of grieving is going on overseas, over in America for these losses.  And, of course, we want the answers as to what went wrong that day. 

It's very dangerous work that they do.  If anybody has ever seen one of those fire bombers in action, it's very dangerous work.  They fly very low, they're very brave and I know one of those pilots, indeed, he was very experienced in Afghanistan, had flown dozens of sorties across war-torn Afghanistan and the Middle East and to think he's come here to Australia and sadly lost his life in that accident, in that crash, is just heart breaking.

JOURNALIST: 

Will you seek change in the rules to make sure that all aircraft will have voice recorders working?

MICHAEL MCCORMACK: 

Again, I say this will be part of the investigations, part of the recommendations and I know the full coronial inquest will look at all matters, what went wrong and what needs to be fixed for the future.  Thanks so much.

Talking about recommendations and inquiries, on the same day that Mick Mack made some of those bizarre (seemingly unscripted) foot in mouth comments, his department and AMSA have taken note of the WA Coroners findings and would appear to have preempted the findings/recommendations of the RRAT committee's ongoing inquiry into the performance of AMSA:

NEW PASSENGER SAFETY RULES FOR AUSTRALIAN COMMERCIAL VESSELS
The Australian Government has announced new measures to improve the safety of passengers on Australian commercial vessels.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development Michael McCormack said the changes strengthened requirements to ensure passengers were accounted for throughout their journey.

“These changes take a holistic approach to passenger safety and follow extensive industry and public consultation to deal with the complexities and careful consideration of the diverse needs of our commercial vessel sector,” Mr McCormack said.

“These changes include mandating the recording of passenger counts at the end and beginning of every voyage. Higher-risk vessels such as cruise boats and tourism vessels will be required to count passengers whenever they get on and off the vessel – not just at the start and end of a voyage.

“We have clearly defined the responsibilities for operators to have effective procedures to monitor passengers and to have evidence of their safety and emergency procedures for a missing passenger, recorded in their Safety Management System. This will ensure the regulator, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA), can verify their compliance with these new rules.”

Based on industry feedback, the changes will enable operators to use the best safety systems and technology for their individual operations – whether that is on/off counting, electronic wristbands, CCTV monitoring or other tools – to ensure their crew can respond to passenger safety incidents as quickly as possible.

The next step will be educative, helping owners and operators in the industry to comply with the rules that take effect on 31 May 2020.

MTF...P2 

Ps Hmm...I wonder how much influence a certain head of the AMSA Legal Services Division had in that proactive measure to mitigate the safety issue identified? Perhaps now would be a good time to put fwd CM's CV to take over the role of CASA's LSD?  -   

[Peetwo]

Ref: https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...8#pid10828

36 pages –

(Advertorial). - To say what? Once you wade through the overarching condescension, eliminated the platitudes and the ducking obvious - and have finished with the bucket – what are you left with?

Aviation was always a ‘risky’ investment, a million bucks on the over night money market will keep you living very comfortably – a million invested in an aviation outfit will keep you awake at night. The staggering cost of having an Air Operator Certificate run through the approval process is enough to deter a smart investor, let alone the time and effort which is required to get an application over the line. Then of course, the real costs kick in – servicing the ‘compliance’ requirements.

This leads the unwary into a legal and operational minefield. But we all know this for fact.

Regional Aviation is a victim of government negligence – it is that simple. Successive governments have avoided their duty of care and responsibility by hiding behind the CASA skirts, holding hands and screaming ‘bipartisan’. Government ministers have allowed a regulator untrammelled power, without check, balance or audit. Successive governments have ignored, for three decades, clear warning from industry that the regulatory burden and the behaviour of the regulator is unacceptable and unsupportable. How many more times must this be stated – in clear language.

Aye, there’s non so deaf as them as don’t want to hear.

The ‘new’ placebo is just another scam – it will meet the same slow death the ASRR did at the hands of the same crew which created today’s monstrous pile of shit – known as the CASR; with government bipartisan blindness.

Got to dash – need the bucket – again. The obscenity and hypocrisy is overpowering.  (Retch).

Toot – toot.

Ref: Woh-hoh-oh, his nose is gettin' bigger

---

P2 OBS: On Mick Mack's release of bollocks Regional Aviation Issues advertorial - 

Sorry to say it "K" but you may need the bucket again -   

This was the actual hard copy bollocks Media missive from miniscule Mick Mack's office:

Regional Aviation Policy Issues Paper release

Regional aviation must be at the front of innovation and technology advances in order to soar to new heights.

The Liberal and Nationals Government stands ready and committed to work with the aviation industry to offer dynamic, new ways for Australians to travel across our great big country.

Looking to the next decade and beyond, Government and industry must face the challenges and seize the opportunities by adapting to new technologies.

That's why we are supporting major infrastructure investments at airports right across the country, including expanded terminals and upgraded runways at Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide, Avalon and Hobart.

After 50 years of debate, it's the Liberal and Nationals in government who are finally building the Western Sydney (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport with a $5.3 billion investment. But we're not just looking at our cities, we are squarely focused on delivering for the regions too.

For many communities in regional, rural and remote Australia, air services are essential for providing mail, supplies, transport and medical services.

Improving safety and access to these airstrips is a core priority for the Government because all Australians have a right to these services.

The Liberal and Nationals Government's $100 million commitment to safety, maintenance and upgrade work at our regional airports will also create more tourism opportunities in the regions.

These are all things governments should do - and I believe we are doing more in aviation than any government before us but we want to do more. We can do more and we need industry leaders to partner with.

Today, the government has released an Issues Paper, the first step in preparing our Regional Aviation Policy Statement.

The Paper will help all stakeholders assess the challenges and opportunities for regional aviation operators and the communities in which they operate.

The roles of the different tiers of government and industry in regional aviation will be canvassed, including the provision of aviation services and airport infrastructure, as well as opportunities for better coordination in aviation programs operating in regional Australia.

We are keen to hear from the regional general aviation sector who are vital connectors for our smaller regional towns. Whether it is aerial mustering, spraying or charter operations, we want to hear what this government could do to ensure this vital sector can continue to contribute to our regional communities.

The Regional Aviation Policy Issues Paper will be the first in a series of steps to identify and address key issues impacting the aviation industry.

We are looking to collaborate with industry to ensure Australian aviation continues its rich tradition of connecting our regional and remote communities, with even better transport connectivity.

This policy work will form part of a number of initiatives we will be working on over the coming year, to help prepare Australia for the aviation opportunities that are already with us or not that far away.

Think ridesharing apps in the sky, autonomous aircraft, biofuel, electric aircraft and so much more.
The days of the Jetsons are here.

As we look to the next 10 years, the 10 after that and the 10 after that, we want Australians to be at the front of the queue when it comes to benefiting from innovation and new technology.

The government is doing a lot and the industry has come a long way but we need to be even more ambitious and fly even higher.

So next time you board a plane, whether it's to a major city, a regional hub or even a small charter aircraft, pause for a moment to consider how you think the experience could be better - because your government is listening.

The sky is (NOT) the limit!

 
Of passing interest is that the above bollocks missive and the two social media posts do not include a link to the actual issues paper?? It is not until you actually Google: 'Regional Aviation Policy Issues Paper release' - that you discover the departmental webpage associated with the issues paper.

The next point of interest is that the PDF version of the glossy bollocks advertorial was only produced 2 days ago, combine this OBS with the lack of links and the fact besides the social media posts and above 'opinion piece'/Media release ( ), there was no other official press and/or public exposure of the issues paper adds up to evidence of reactive Govt policy made on the run. - 

But wait there's more to come...

"The Regional Aviation Policy Issues Paper will be the first in a series of steps to identify and address key issues impacting the aviation industry.."

I also find it fascinating that for a Minister that is normally always looking to publicly spruik the positive achievements, plans and policies of the Government, that Mick Mack is not out there positively promoting the government's agenda in regards to the aviation industry??


Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-15-09-19-weltschmerz/

MTF..P2