[Gobbledock]

'Walker, Texas Ranger'?

By all accounts Walker is meant to be a fairly nice chap. A bit of a Sheriffs role, fair and firm and not prone to pistol whipping his men, but managing them with authority. This is meant to flow down through the Inspector troops and on to industry.....in theory, new blood in the CAsA ranks as part of the change management process.

But I agree with Thorny, what stakeholders? CAsA has done a marvellous job forcing GA to decline to the point that it is about as useful as the waters off Rio. A dead industry, annihilated by red tape and incompetence. Thorny mentions Silvertails staring across the ocean. Yeah, looking at the NZ coastline and dreaming about some better regulations and putting their aircraft on a Kiwi AOC! Hmmm, reminds me of Scott McMillan!!

Gobbles

#bringbackalan

[Peetwo]

UDB! Whatever you do, don't give up your day job -

On Hitch this week the CAsA comedy show just gets better...

The Last Minute Hitch: 5 August 2016
5 August 2016
Comments 0 Comments
    3
I hear a lot of stories from pilots who are frustrated with the condition of aviation regulation in Australia; some of them just make you want to smash apples, and others you can do nothing with but laugh. Yesterday I was told one that I can't put into either category, and so elected to laugh. CASA refused a Class 2 medical to a pilot who wanted to fly his C162 Skycatcher 30 nm. His problem was that the aircraft was VH-registered, not RA-Aus. AVMED apparently wanted more information on the spare tyre around his waist. So, no flying the little Cessna. Had the C162 been RA-Aus registered he could have flown it. Why is he suddenly unsafe because the aircraft is registered with CASA? Ask yourself whether or not this episode constitutes discrimination. Instead, the poor bloke had no recourse but to leave the Skycatcher where it is and go back to his day job of flying an A330 Airbus to Hong Kong, which he could do on his Class 1 and ATPL issued overseas. Not safe to fly an LSA alone, but safe to fly 300 pax on an international route.

Despite vigorous lobbying in Canberra, CASA has never wavered from the 2 February 2017 ADS-B mandate for IFR aircraft. Chairman Jeff Boyd did indicate that the board would revisit the issue, but there were no promises. Since then, the regulator has reiterated the original stance: the mandate stands. Now, we have 181 days to fit-out 1000 aircraft, a rate of 5.5 per day when what we've achieved in the last six months is a rate of only 1.65 per day. This does not bode well. It may be that many owners thought lobbying from AOPA and Dick Smith would result in extra time, so put off getting their aircraft compliant. About now they will be reaching for the panic button. Come 2 February 2017, there is no doubt there will still be a significant amount of IFR aircraft that will be restricted suddenly to VFR ops only.

I am an unabashed fan of the Diamond DA62, which I am pleased to say is touring the country in the next few weeks. This is a brilliantly-designed twin that gives you an armchair ride and scoots along at a very decent clip. The DA62 is an example of what can be done when technology is allow to run unfettered. If you get a chance, find out where this plane is going to be and when, and get yourself a good close look.

The September-October issue of Australian Flying is at the printers and will be at your place before you know it. We've got some great stuff in there for you, so if you're not a subscriber to either the print or digital versions, make sure you get down to the newsagent and don't miss your copy!

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...9Cr336V.99

MTF...P2

[Kharon]

Sensauyma - Zero.

Hitch - "I hear a lot of stories from pilots who are frustrated with the condition of aviation regulation in Australia; some of them just make you want to smash apples, and others you can do nothing with but laugh. Yesterday I was told one that I can't put into either category, and so elected to laugh."

CASA refused a Class 2 medical to a pilot who wanted to fly his C162 Skycatcher 30 nm. His problem was that the aircraft was VH-registered, not RA-Aus. AVMED apparently wanted more information on the spare tyre around his waist. So, no flying the little Cessna. Had the C162 been RA-Aus registered he could have flown it. Why is he suddenly unsafe because the aircraft is registered with CASA? Ask yourself whether or not this episode constitutes discrimination. Instead, the poor bloke had no recourse but to leave the Skycatcher where it is and go back to his day job of flying an A330 Airbus to Hong Kong, which he could do on his Class 1 and ATPL issued overseas. Not safe to fly an LSA alone, but safe to fly 300 pax on an international route.

If the Hitch yarn above was a one off – you could be excused having a laugh; passing it off as typical of the bureaucratic tangles which, from time to time, occur in even the best run of ‘systems’.  We have all been through one or two and with a little patience and time, usually a ‘tangle’ can be sorted out, without loosing your temper more than three times.

But this endless merry-go-round with Avmed is getting to a point where the ‘tangle’ cannot be sorted.  It is in such a mess the medico’s have had enough, the aircrew have had enough; a gut full of the whole system.  Start again is the only answer; there are many, many good models to choose from; the UK and the USA for example, any of the progressive world leading nations system would do – except perhaps for the NZ system which has been ‘Dougalised’ to a fare-thee-well.  

Our very own Pooh-Shambollic aped this system and mantra, then refined it to suit his overblown ego.  Specialist advice denigrated, a court or AAT battle to have ‘specialist’ advice supported over the idiot rulings of the CASA clerical system of medical assessment etc. The tales are many.  But, this tale of woe above serves very well to reflect the lunacy within and the absence of any internal will to fix the glaringly obvious conclusion.  Avmed is out of control and those driving it have NFI how to sort it out.  If it were an animal suffering like that, you would, out of kindness, put it out of it’s misery.  Reformation of the entire Avmed system is overdue, by about 50 years. Avmed have no intention of changing, indeed they believe they are world leaders.  It is time to disavow them of this risible notion.

Start with the fact that DAME’s actually know what they are about, are qualified to and can actually make the determination of whether ‘specialist’ advice is required; they are also responsible enough to accept ‘specialist’ advice; without the oversight of the administrator.  These people are not children, neither are they criminal, certainly not stupid and take their responsibility seriously.  So why not start right there?  Return the authority, trust and decision making to those who are qualified and responsible.

Toot - FDS - toot.

[Peetwo]

Skidmore still in denial...

The latest from Prez De Stoop...

 

A glimmer of hope.

Four excellent items in that report; best of the lot – unity.  AOPA realigned with TAAAF is one of the best things I've read in a long time.  De Stoop is no ones fool; not by a long shot, neither are the ‘names’ in TAAAF and the past differences will matter little to those sensible few.  Congratulations and a salute to common sense is in order.  Bravo and well done.

Nick Xenophon is an asset to aviation. One of the very few real politicians; his team mates on the Estimates committee are, happily, among the best Australia has.  The committee is one of the best, most efficient, effective groups that aviation has ever had in parliament and there can be little doubt that they will continue the good work we have seen in the past.

De Stoop’s involvement with ‘engagement’ initiatives with Boyd is good news.  The Board needs industry ‘friends’, support if you will; and, with recent experience of actually mounting a flying operation, De Stoop is familiar with the ‘process’ of attempting to create work and do business in the existing system.  An asset, with tangible evidence of the impediments, fully supported by the similar experiences of other operators either engaged in business or who have tried to do business in the field.  

External evaluation of the regulator is a two edged sword; we must, I suppose place it in the ‘good things’ pile.  But I, for one, have reservations.  The casual dismissal of the ASSR, the farcical meeting in Canberra and the let down by both Joyce and Whatsisname’ still rankle.  I doubt those invited will become part of the window dressing, but I worry that they will be treated with a view to abrogation rather than reform.  CASA have this game down to fine art and Whatsisname' has NFI, less brains and even less gumption. We shall see.

We will never have a better opportunity or as many effective tools available to rebuild and reform.  So, get behind it and push your heart out, the side-lines are no place to stand and you cannot score runs sitting in the pavilion.

Good work Marc, excellent, Tim Tam quality.

Toot (happy) toot.

In autem ad supra:

 Via the Oz:

CASA concedes: Our red tape stifles industry



Up in the air

• Mitchell Bingemann
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 12, 2016
  

Blah..blah..blah..enough of the bollocks Oliver, either get with the program or get off the bloody pot, industry has had a gutful of your weasel-worded spin,  obfuscation and mealy mouthed platitudes - FFS!  

P2 the sentiments you express regarding a united front are completely relevant to the industries present dilema.

Every facet of the GA industry has its own barrow to push. There is nothing wrong with that,and is to be expected given GA's diverse nature, however there are core issues that affect the industry as a whole. Fixing those core issues must be the priority.

I make the analogy.

Currently each little facet of the industry is trying to fill their wheelbarrow from the CAsA sillage pit with a tea spoon, then push the wheelbarrow full of shit up an endless near vertical slope. As fast as they fill the barrows, CAsA keeps shitting in the pit and CAsA churns out the shit like an elephant with diarrhea. The only chance the industry has is a combined effort to give CAsA a very bad dose of constipation. Stop the shit and there is some hope of emptying the sillage pit, that requires putting differences and competing interests aside and focusing on how to stop the shit.

Courtesy Hitch via the Yaffa's Oz Flying:

Going down: Statistics show that general aviation in Australia has been in decline for some time. (Steve Hitchen)

CASA accepts Long-term GA Decline
12 August 2016

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has accepted that general aviation has been in long-term decline in the wake of statistics released last week by the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA).

A  spokesperson told Australian Flying yesterday that CASA was yet to go into the AOPA figures in-depth, but they didn't believe the decline was solely due to regulation.

"CASA accepts activity in general aviation has reduced over a lengthy period of time, although we have yet to do a comprehensive analysis of the data provided by AOPA," the spokesperson said.

"The reduction in activity is due to many economic, social and technological factors.
"CASA does not accept that the reduction in general aviation activity can solely be attributed to safety regulations or actions by CASA.

"However, as a part of the Australian aviation system CASA acknowledges it needs to do more to remove any unnecessary regulatory burdens to general aviation and to provide efficient regulatory services."

The statement went on to emphasise the changes CASA has made, which it sees as providing benefits to general aviation.

"We have started work on overhauling CASA’s service delivery systems and are working to develop a service culture within our workforce.

"Action is also being taken to provide new and improved training for CASA staff, we are revising and improving manuals, we now have a focus on relationship building and we are streamlining approval processes.

"All these changes will better support the safety regulatory requirements of the general aviation sector.

"CASA is committed to being a constructive safety partner with the aviation community and looks forward to working with everyone in general aviation to build a stronger future for this important sector of Australian aviation.”

Unlike the situation in the USA where the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has some responsibility for promoting the aviation industry, the Civil Aviation Act in Australia does not place a similar obligation on CASA, a situation that GA activists have been wanting changed for some time.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...uFofLxZ.99

Yep time to change/amend/refresh the Act...  

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Skidmore still in denial...

The latest from Prez De Stoop...

 

A glimmer of hope.

Four excellent items in that report; best of the lot – unity.  AOPA realigned with TAAAF is one of the best things I've read in a long time.  De Stoop is no ones fool; not by a long shot, neither are the ‘names’ in TAAAF and the past differences will matter little to those sensible few.  Congratulations and a salute to common sense is in order.  Bravo and well done.

Nick Xenophon is an asset to aviation. One of the very few real politicians; his team mates on the Estimates committee are, happily, among the best Australia has.  The committee is one of the best, most efficient, effective groups that aviation has ever had in parliament and there can be little doubt that they will continue the good work we have seen in the past.

De Stoop’s involvement with ‘engagement’ initiatives with Boyd is good news.  The Board needs industry ‘friends’, support if you will; and, with recent experience of actually mounting a flying operation, De Stoop is familiar with the ‘process’ of attempting to create work and do business in the existing system.  An asset, with tangible evidence of the impediments, fully supported by the similar experiences of other operators either engaged in business or who have tried to do business in the field.  

External evaluation of the regulator is a two edged sword; we must, I suppose place it in the ‘good things’ pile.  But I, for one, have reservations.  The casual dismissal of the ASSR, the farcical meeting in Canberra and the let down by both Joyce and Whatsisname’ still rankle.  I doubt those invited will become part of the window dressing, but I worry that they will be treated with a view to abrogation rather than reform.  CASA have this game down to fine art and Whatsisname' has NFI, less brains and even less gumption. We shall see.

We will never have a better opportunity or as many effective tools available to rebuild and reform.  So, get behind it and push your heart out, the side-lines are no place to stand and you cannot score runs sitting in the pavilion.

Good work Marc, excellent, Tim Tam quality.

Toot (happy) toot.

In autem ad supra:

 Via the Oz:

CASA concedes: Our red tape stifles industry



Up in the air

• Mitchell Bingemann
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 12, 2016
  

Blah..blah..blah..enough of the bollocks Oliver, either get with the program or get off the bloody pot, industry has had a gutful of your weasel-worded spin,  obfuscation and mealy mouthed platitudes - FFS!  

P2 the sentiments you express regarding a united front are completely relevant to the industries present dilema.

Every facet of the GA industry has its own barrow to push. There is nothing wrong with that,and is to be expected given GA's diverse nature, however there are core issues that affect the industry as a whole. Fixing those core issues must be the priority.

I make the analogy.

Currently each little facet of the industry is trying to fill their wheelbarrow from the CAsA sillage pit with a tea spoon, then push the wheelbarrow full of shit up an endless near vertical slope. As fast as they fill the barrows, CAsA keeps shitting in the pit and CAsA churns out the shit like an elephant with diarrhea. The only chance the industry has is a combined effort to give CAsA a very bad dose of constipation. Stop the shit and there is some hope of emptying the sillage pit, that requires putting differences and competing interests aside and focusing on how to stop the shit.

Courtesy Hitch via the Yaffa's Oz Flying:

Going down: Statistics show that general aviation in Australia has been in decline for some time. (Steve Hitchen)

CASA accepts Long-term GA Decline
12 August 2016

Unlike the situation in the USA where the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has some responsibility for promoting the aviation industry, the Civil Aviation Act in Australia does not place a similar obligation on CASA, a situation that GA activists have been wanting changed for some time.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...uFofLxZ.99

Yep time to change/amend/refresh the Act...   

Update via Sandy & Hitch...

The Last Minute Hitch: 12 August 2016
12 August 2016

On Monday AOPA released measures that show quite emphatically that general aviation in Australia is on a downward curve. They did so after a challenge from CASA's Mark Skidmore to prove GA activity is on the wane. Challenge accepted ... and done! CASA has responed by stating that they agree with AOPA's position, but that there's more behind the decline that just unworkable regulation. Here's where I make myself unpopular: CASA is right, partially. Fixing regulation is not going to bring enough new bodies through the door to reverse the downward trend and put energy and mass back into general aviation, which is what is really needed to bolster our industry.

constant swordfighting with the blackhats is preventing us from getting to the damsel in distress

However, constant swordfighting with the blackhats is preventing us from getting to the damsel in distress. We're so busy trying to cope with overwhelming regulatory burdens that don't advance safety that we can't even think about what is needed to attract more people to aviation. It's almost like flying schools and AOCs exist solely to push paper around. However, CASA can open the jailhouse door, but it is up to the industry to walk though it themselves. CASA will not teach us how to market our businesses, nor how to properly evaluate investments, nor fleet planning nor how to make flying instructors realise they have a role as sales people. That's up to the industry itself.

And speaking of statistics, the General Aircraft Manufacturers Association (GAMA) released the latest GA aircraft shipment data this week.The figures are disappointing as they show a continued decline in deliveries over last year, but at least they are up against Q1 2016. The outstanding number is that of the Cirrus SR22 range. They shipped 91 aircraft in the quarter, which is nearly four times as many as all the manufacturers in the high-speed singles category. But exactly what does this tell us? It probably tells us that new aircraft owners are wanting new aircraft, not revamped older models. Cirrus gazumped everyone 20 years ago by showing us the radical new composite design that broke all the established rules; rules that were at least 30 years old at the time. Cessna has since fought back with the TTx, but it's starting from back mark that represents a significant handicap...

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...cDcyU8j.99

MTF...P2

[Sandy Reith]

Hitch is right, CASA will not be the only element in in any move to revitalise GA. However without reform of, quote, "unworkable" regulation then there will not be a viable and growing industry. In other words if government does not take the hand brake off then we go nowhere but down.

Therefore government action is the key to the door behind which the maiden is swooning through lack of oxygen. Hitch says that "swordfighting with the black hats" won't rescue the "maiden". Ok Hitch, what's the plan?

In regard to new sales in the States Hitch says that a slight increase says that people want new planes as against revamped older models. Where's the evidence? Pilot numbers in the States have advanced far more than the few new aircraft being built, this suggests that there are thousands of older aircraft being refurbished and maintained to cater for a new generation. As for Cirrus composite being the be all and end all there are many that would vehemently disagree. I for one!

Back to the main game, we all pursue our freedom to fly in different ways and at long last we have some momentum. Sit back and expect a reasonable regulator to suddenly appear? Been there, won't happen, we will be sadly mistaken and disappointed again. No way, keep the swords out of the scabbard and give no quarter, the maiden is worth rescuing.

[thorn bird]

I've said before Sandy, CAsA refer to us as "Stakeholders", good description, every one in GA should be holding a stake in one hand and a hammer in the other. We should refer to them as vampires, sucking the lifeblood out of the industry.

[Kharon]

Sandy – “Back to the main game, we all pursue our freedom to fly in different ways and at long last we have some momentum.”

Point of order M’lud.  It is not a gifted freedom to fly; it is a right protected by the constitution, bastardised by CASA into a ‘privilege’.  Not freedom – a RIGHT, we seem to forget that.

[Peetwo]

Update via Sandy & Hitch - Part II...

The Last Minute Hitch: 12 August 2016
12 August 2016

On Monday AOPA released measures that show quite emphatically that general aviation in Australia is on a downward curve. They did so after a challenge from CASA's Mark Skidmore to prove GA activity is on the wane. Challenge accepted ... and done! CASA has responed by stating that they agree with AOPA's position, but that there's more behind the decline that just unworkable regulation. Here's where I make myself unpopular: CASA is right, partially. Fixing regulation is not going to bring enough new bodies through the door to reverse the downward trend and put energy and mass back into general aviation, which is what is really needed to bolster our industry.

constant swordfighting with the blackhats is preventing us from getting to the damsel in distress

However, constant swordfighting with the blackhats is preventing us from getting to the damsel in distress. We're so busy trying to cope with overwhelming regulatory burdens that don't advance safety that we can't even think about what is needed to attract more people to aviation. It's almost like flying schools and AOCs exist solely to push paper around. However, CASA can open the jailhouse door, but it is up to the industry to walk though it themselves. CASA will not teach us how to market our businesses, nor how to properly evaluate investments, nor fleet planning nor how to make flying instructors realise they have a role as sales people. That's up to the industry itself.

And speaking of statistics, the General Aircraft Manufacturers Association (GAMA) released the latest GA aircraft shipment data this week.The figures are disappointing as they show a continued decline in deliveries over last year, but at least they are up against Q1 2016. The outstanding number is that of the Cirrus SR22 range. They shipped 91 aircraft in the quarter, which is nearly four times as many as all the manufacturers in the high-speed singles category. But exactly what does this tell us? It probably tells us that new aircraft owners are wanting new aircraft, not revamped older models. Cirrus gazumped everyone 20 years ago by showing us the radical new composite design that broke all the established rules; rules that were at least 30 years old at the time. Cessna has since fought back with the TTx, but it's starting from back mark that represents a significant handicap...

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...cDcyU8j.99

Hitch is right, CASA will not be the only element in in any move to revitalise GA. However without reform of, quote, "unworkable" regulation then there will not be a viable and growing industry. In other words if government does not take the hand brake off then we go nowhere but down.

Therefore government action is the key to the door behind which the maiden is swooning through lack of oxygen. Hitch says that "swordfighting with the black hats" won't rescue the "maiden". Ok Hitch, what's the plan?

In regard to new sales in the States Hitch says that a slight increase says that people want new planes as against revamped older models. Where's the evidence? Pilot numbers in the States have advanced far more than the few new aircraft being built, this suggests that there are thousands of older aircraft being refurbished and maintained to cater for a new generation. As for Cirrus composite being the be all and end all there are many that would vehemently disagree. I for one!

Back to the main game, we all pursue our freedom to fly in different ways and at long last we have some momentum. Sit back and expect a reasonable regulator to suddenly appear? Been there, won't happen, we will be sadly mistaken and disappointed again. No way, keep the swords out of the scabbard and give no quarter, the maiden is worth rescuing.

I've said before Sandy, CAsA refer to us as "Stakeholders", good description, every one in GA should be holding a stake in one hand and a hammer in the other. We should refer to them as vampires, sucking the lifeblood out of the industry.

Sandy – “Back to the main game, we all pursue our freedom to fly in different ways and at long last we have some momentum.”

Point of order M’lud.  It is not a gifted freedom to fly; it is a right protected by the constitution, bastardised by CASA into a ‘privilege’.  Not freedom – a RIGHT, we seem to forget that.

P2 edit: For the sake of continuity for an important discussion posts now strung together...

[Gobbledock]

A little more he said, she said, with a dose of 'but you said' on the side

Oh Skates;

"On Monday AOPA released measures that show quite emphatically that general aviation in Australia is on a downward curve. They did so after a challenge from CASA's Mark Skidmore to prove GA activity is on the wane. Challenge accepted ... and done! CASA has responed by stating that they agree with AOPA's position"

And there's your answer in relation to CAsA's true understanding of our aviation environment - Skid'Mark accepted the challenge. If the idiot actually understood GA he would've never accepted such a challenge in the first place because he would've known the IOS are correct. So instead the arrogant twerp accepts the challenge and is proven wrong, and pulls out the 'it's not all the fault of the regulations' trump card. As Kharon also mentions the collapse of GA cant be entirely blamed on the regulations. I agree with that because there are also some shonks out there and poor business minds. But for every 'issue' there is normally several causal factors. And the Regs are the greater percentage of the root cause of GA's demise, with other factors being contributors.

In fact I would say the Regs, combined with red tape and lousy bullying and incompetent Inspectors are also a large contributor towards GA shrinking.

Greedy airports, often the ones that have been sold off by the government and then bought by the investment sharks, also deserve a large portion of the blame for driving GA out to another region, or out of business altogether. But again, Government (as usual) is mostly to blame for this.

Skid'Mark can pout and sook all he wants, and because he is a military man he is used to having robots agree with whatever he says. But the IOS are a different breed and aren't his indoctrinated Stockholm aligned brainwashed lackeys. When Skid'Mark shouts out 'jump' the Gobbledock says 'go f#ck yourself'!

No Mark, you are wrong. GA is buggered and the regulations, the Authority and Government are predominately to blame. But you wouldn't know that sitting on Level 3 The Circuit, then sitting in the Chairmans Lounge flying to Can'tberra. Crawl out from under your rock you giant piece of doody and start listening to what the external organisations have been telling you, mate.

TICK TOCK

[Gobbledock]

GA's epitaph is being written

As always, Hitch makes a concise, well articulated analysis. There are numerous causal factors contributing to GA's spiralling decline.

But think about this for a moment; you're a chippy and you run a business. You quote, get the work and commence. You know your WHS requirements (seldom changed and not generally open to individual interpretation). You pay tax, complete your Bass, generally same time each quarter and under the same tax rules that generally remain the same and aren't open to interpretation.
When the BSA, ATO or WHS come and audit you, in general, you are audited under the same definitive rules, know where you stand, and have auditors, different ones over the years, audit you against consistent logical rules and regulations that can't be interpreted in a way that bullies you unfairly. (Overall and in general, but there are exceptions).

But in small aviation business the rules and regs constantly change, are unworkable and purposefully not clearly defined. You don't know if you are doing the right thing from one month to another due to different Inspectors reading off different pages with their own perceptions, agenda's and interpretations. The result? You can't adequately plan ahead if you're not sure what you can or can't do from one day to the next, from one 'grey' rule to the next, from one Inspector to the next, from one hour to the next.

Can you imagine Ford successfully producing the GTHO in the 70's if each engineer, mechanic, apprentice and designer decided to work off their own page or interpret how to build the vehicle from poorly written, easily twisted, unclear design specs? Instead of a GTHO you would have a Frankenstein on 4 wheels or worse, no Blue Oval. FORD - goooone.

Well that is the plight of aviation and GA. The industry has been buggered harder than George Michael at the Rio Carnival!
To top it off we have in CAsA a 20+ year veteran of law who personally views aviation law, rules and regulations as his personal plaything to be written, moulded and based upon his own thoughts and personal view of the world. Plus he thinks all aviators are crooks who just haven't been caught yet! Look in the mirror you bearded muthaf#cker - you are a lawyer and a Government stooge. Can't get much more dodgy than that!!! Unless Dr Voodoo has been a realestate agent as well?

TICK T.........yeah, screw it - no Tock. The clock has stopped and the industry has died. R.I.P GA, it was good while it lasted.

[Sandy Reith]

Actually G in my view it wasn't that good in the good old days. It was however just workable. Example, suddenly a C402 problem (Australian specific problem, Steve Swift of CASA explained that his figures reckoned spars would fail between 8200hrs and, from memory, 34,000 hrs) all C402s in excess of 8200 hrs needed new lower spar caps and spar fittings, 2 months grace to refurbish the whole plus 8200 hr fleet. Yes no joke and of course an impossible task in the Australian environment. Find alternate aircraft, find a workshop capable with the time and personnel available, source the parts from the USA, impossible in the time frame. My C402 with over 9000 hours, solution? Hours and hours of research, prove a lower mid weight over years of operation. Book in a new wing strap fix designed by Hawkers in Sydney. All done in the following year including new spar fittings. Later tax dept audit says can't claim as maintenance because it's a modification, oops pay back several thousand to tax dept. plus penalty, clawed back some because the new fittings were claimable.
Another one...one Saturday after lunch, C172 charter Phillip Island to Colac about 90 nm. Phone in plan, can't be done says Flight Service. Why? says I, done this plenty of times. You don't have HF, new interpretation...ok then change plan to private..ok says FS no prob. Then thought better be legal, fit HF several thousand $s. Sell that 172, take it out and install in another, and another. Used it three times total. I could go on and on, suffice to say a small aviation business was still possible. Who would start one now? Very few and good luck, but as I say the good old days weren't that good.

[thorn bird]

Oh Sandy,
could I tell you stories of the good old days!!! They would keep you awake at night.

[Gobbledock]

Tsk tsk Sandy and Thorny, you are both criminals that just haven't been caught yet. I knew it!!!! Dr Voodoo was correct, his contacts in the spirit realm are never wrong.

P.S I guess Gobbles flying a fixed wing over McComicks house and taking a selfie while giving him the one fingered salute constitutes aerial photography? Oops, it's not on my AOC. Tsk tsk naughty Gobbles.

[Sandy Reith]

Oh no, Thorny and I have been outed! I suppose it takes one to know one,

[Kharon]

Sandy – “I suppose it takes one to know one,”

Ah, yes; but the average crim has one distinct advantage.  The average copper may know, full well, deep in his heart, that the crim is a dead set ‘wrong-un’ and good for the charge; no doubt about it.  But, Mr Plod has a minor problem – he must prove it, in court.  How the constabulary must envy CASA, onus of proof reversed; strict liability and no one watching carefully to make sure that all the accused rights are preserved.

A pro criminal, committing a crime, like robbery may or may not get a holiday at Her Majesties guest house; but when that time is done, can go back to the preferred employment and no one can, nor will, prevent that. They do have rights.

A pilot has other problems; guilty until able to prove innocence; no clean cut penalty handed down by judge; no end to the administrative embuggerance.  The administrative penalties can be endlessly enforced – for life; there is no watchdog to protect ‘the guilty’ from the whims and suspicions of those who wield untrammelled power.  Life sentences for all; no argument; no come-back.  Even if a fish manages to wriggle off the hook; the campaign to trap it will continue and retribution will befall any who try to help the poor thing in it’s escape.

It is just about easier to get away with murder than it is to beat a CASA trumped up, double jeopardy play; even the time served is less – with the right brief.  

I wonder; is it too late to change career paths?  Gentleman jewel thief, perhaps, international of course; or, horse thief.  Or perhaps even get into the big league game, join CASA.

Toot (thoughtful) toot.

[Peetwo]

From the IOS Penal Colony: "Not happy Oliver!" 

Used to fly students into Ansett and the then Australian Airlines maintenance hangars at Tulla. Both companies were very cooperative taking us in for educational tours. Made a few of these evening flights, one memorable for watching a Fokker Friendship being towed into one of those hangars alongside something with rear engine nacelles, probably a DC9. Must have been a dozen staff able to watch standing around while we looked on and I thought to myself that F27 wingtip will collide with the jet's engine nacelle. It did. Not too serious, screw drivers out and went to work to change the wing tip. I made a mental safety report on the spot, in one third of a second not three years, that goes like this;  "if you don't look you will not see."

 Reminds me of the chief of CASA who has asked AOPA for the facts regarding the decline of GA and is then shown the CASA figures which do show the disastrous decline that's been obvious for years. Yes you might have your eyes open but if you can't be bothered, or don't want to see, then mind blanking will prevail.

Hmm...Sandy I wonder if it will be the same (non)-response from DAS Oliver when the results of the latest industry survey passes over his desk??

Via Oz Flying:

• Civil Aviation Safety Authority inspector overseeing aircraft operations. (CASA)
  

Close×
CASA Relationship Survey shows Low Satisfaction Levels
19 August 2016

The results of a survey done between 28 August last year and 18 January this year show that the aviation industry has low satisfaction levels when it comes to dealing with CASA.
The survey, conducted by Colmar Burton, comprised of 40 in-depth interviews with aviation people, five mini-groups held with CASA staff and the responses of 1217 stakeholders done on-line. The results were posted on the CASA website this morning, along with a response document.

"Overall stakeholder satisfaction is relatively low compared to similar customer or stakeholder relationship surveys undertaken across other government agencies," Colmar Burton states in its conclusions.

"Notwithstanding CASA’s role as regulator of the sector (which is acknowledged and respected by most stakeholders), the findings suggest stakeholders feel that within this context the relationship between the organisation and industry could be improved.

"While satisfaction with CASA service delivery overall was relatively low, those with direct interactions with CASA staff over the past twelve months provided higher average satisfaction ratings with these interactions, suggesting more recent efforts to improve service are having a positive impact.

"It is important to note that for the majority of more frequent interactions or transactions stakeholders have with CASA – such as licence applications or renewals – the expected timeframe for completion of these interactions was two weeks.

Among other conclusions, Colmar Burton found that stakeholders felt that:

• there is not enough industry consultation on regulation changes
  
• CASA staff don't understand the impact of regulatory changes sufficiently
  
• communication needs improvement
  
• current regulatory settings and best practices are not aligned
  
• CASA is not proactive enough in identifying and communicating best practices
  
• CASA decision-making lacks consistency
  

Colmar Burton also noted that many stakeholder indicated they were unwilling to disclose breaches of air safety regulation because of fears CASA will respond in a heavy-handed manner.

"We believe the findings from this study provide a clear mandate for CASA to reform its current ways of operating to drive an improved relationship with industry," Colmar Burton stated.

Along with the survey results, CASA also released an action plan based on the responses.

Among the actions are:

• training courses for inspectors
  
• targetted competency training for CASA's workforce
  
• updating and revising key manuals to make them consistent
  
• culture change to drive continuous improvement
  
• developing a service charter and improving the service centre
  
• an internal peer review process
  
• invitations to volunteers from the aviation community to help CASA identify unintended consequences from regulation
  
• a new position of Industry Relations Office to liaise with associations and peak bodies
  

"CASA will continue to work to improve its relationship with industry through the activities outlined in this action plan and its ongoing work as the regulator and service provider," the regulator concluded.

"Its progress over time will be measured every two years through the same survey and a comparison of findings with previous surveys. CASA is committed to improving its relationship with industry while maintaining the highest standard of aviation safety."
Both the detailed survey and the action plan can be downloaded by clicking on the links below.

 2016 CASA Stakeholder Relationship Survey
CASA 2016 Stakeholder Relationship Action Plan

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...41e6MDE.99

 
Can you believe what's attached to that 2nd link? - 90 pages of glossy dribble trying to desperately turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.. - Please can someone with authority or political sway get a grip here, the three aviation safety stooges are running amok in the asylum, FDS!

Update & a key for the Tim Tam cupboard for Hitch...

• image: http://res.cloudinary.com/yaffa-publishi...EB208A.jpg
  
  

The Last Minute Hitch: 19 August 2016


So apparently the aviation community is not satisfied with CASA.
That's nothing new; we've being saying that since the moment John McCormick announced CASA would be a regulator with a capital R, and stories rolled out like Jaffas down a cinema aisle about unfair, obstinate and dismissive treatment by flight operations inspectors, lack of consistency, lack of expertise and lethargic responses.

"The DG might be pointing in the right direction, but the leg is long and there are headwinds."

Let's not even mention the AVMED division. So when DAS Mark Skidmore commissioned Colmar Burton to undertake a satisfaction survey he really knew what was coming; the Forsyth Report heralded the issues, so the report really couldn't have said anything else. However, bureaucracies love numbers and this report is full of those. Now not only do they know we are unsatisfied, but also by how much. One positive CASA will take away is that Colmar Burton is reporting increased levels of satisfaction over the last 12 months, which they will take as an indicator that some of their improvements are working. The DG might be pointing in the right direction, but the leg is long and there are headwinds.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...SwzaKMh.99

MTF...P2

[thorn bird]

A snatch from UP.

Leadie posts a doozy.

Quote:
undertake additional research to develop a greater understanding of the issues underlying the rating of ‘dissatisfied’ and ‘very dissatisfied’ ",
- create new positions for "Stakeholder Engagement Group Manager", "Designated Aviation Medical Examiner (DAME) liaison officer", "Industry Relations Officer",
- "A culture change process is underway within CASA to drive continuous improvement and strengthen commitment to consistently meeting service delivery timeframes",
- "CASA will develop a new Service Charter ..."
- "... established the Director’s Advisory Panel to provide him with informed, high-level advice.",
- "... established a Stakeholder Engagement Group that provides dedicated stakeholder engagement functions",
- "... key manuals are being revised and updated to ensure there is standardised, current information on rules, processes and how assessments are undertaken."

Straight out of the Bureaucrat's Big Book of Looking Busy. Chapter 3 of that book, which Chapter is headed Responding to Reports by Looking Busy, is very instructive (reproduced with permission of the copyright holder):

Quote:
As we saw in Chapter 2, there are many "look busy" activities that can be undertaken at a bureaucracy's own initiative - conducting "reviews" and "restructuring" and gathering "data" etc. However, external matters may occasionally produce findings and recommendations that may be inconveniently valid and may require "work" to address. We have used the provocative word "work" deliberately, to focus Busy Bureaucrats on the point that although these circumstances create a threat, they also create an opportunity.

The Busy Bureaucrat will be left with a choice on how best to look busy: Reject and cast doubt on the credibility of the report's author/s, findings, data set, sample group, methodology etc, or accept the finding/s recommendation/s in whole or part and "commit to action". The first option is ostensibly attractive because it does not involve work. However, the second option has not only the advantage of making a Busy Bureaucrat look busier when s/he is not (Rule 2 from Chapter 1), but also provides scope for increasing the size of the bureaucracy (Rule 1 from Chapter 1).

The key to taking the opportunity created by this threat, and thereby to look busier and increase the size of the bureacracy, is to commit to impressive action that includes the creation of positions that have the name of the action that the bureaucracy will pretend to take. Examples of those actions follow. We have added efficiency scores, out of 100, that are usually achieved against the "Bigger Bureaucracy", "Look Busy" and "Delay Tactic" criteria discussed in Chapter 1:

- Create new positions that have names like "Stakeholder Engagement Group Manager" and "Industry Relations Officer" - BB: 100; LB 30; DT 100 [Editor's comment: This "action" is often undervalued as a DT. However, the appointees to these positions will always need many months to settle in and get across the facts and the options.]

- Establish a "Stakeholder Engagement Group" that pretends to provide "dedicated stakeholder engagement functions" BB: 10; LB:70; DT:60 [Editor's comment: meetings are always a good 'look busy' tactic but stakeholder groups generally include stakeholders who eventually realise it's just a 'look busy' tactic.]

- Establish an "Advisory Panel" to provide "informed, high-level advice" to be considered and rejected if inconvenient - BB:10; LB:20; DT:100 [Editor's comment: Low BB if, as is usually the case, the panel comprises 'outsiders'. However, solid DT gold.]

- Pretend that "a culture change process is underway to drive continuous improvement and strengthen commitment to consistently meeting service delivery timeframes" - BB:0; LB:40; DT:70 [Editor's comment: A brave option to take, because almost nobody thinks anything but "BS" when they hear "culture change" and "continuous improvement" these days.]

- Develop a new "Service Charter" and pretend that it means something - BB:0; LB: 40; DT: 50 [Editor's comment: A DT to be used as a last resort. Nobody believes this BS any more.]

- Undertake additional research to develop a greater understanding of the issues - BB:20; LB0; DT: 60 [Editor's comment: A good LB option, but its DT value depends on whether the issues are already obvious to even a moron.]

- Revise and Update "key manuals" to ensure there is "standardised, current information on rules, processes and how assessments are undertaken", so these can be used as "evidence" to "prove" that everything is "OK" - BB:10; LB:100; DT 75. [Editor's comment: A potentially rich source of busy work and delay.]

[Gobbledock]

Government S.O.Ps unveiled, who needs Willyleaks!

Gotta love Leadie's post. Very naughty of him revealing those secrets from the 'Bureaucrats Spin Doctoring Manual, 2016 V2.1'.
Although written 'tongue in cheek', Leadie is actually 100% correct. This is exactly how governments operate. They also receive actual training in the following;

- Wordsmithing; Rev Forsythe review is an example. The government accepts the reviews findings. That is not a commitment to change, it is merely a statement. For example I accept that the sky is blue, Trumps hair is ridiculous, and  Peter Slipper is a shonk. What does this mean? Absolutely nothing, it doesn't actually change anything. Not one little bit.

- Being non committal; Pollies and bureaucrats receive training in lying. They are taught to not answer 'yes' or 'no'. Remain non committal. If unsure just answer 'I don't recall' and 'not to my recollection'. Even better, bury that non committal within an Allen Hawke production glossy brochure for added evasion and herring chasing. Perfect!

- It was not me, it was the one armed man' obsfucation; A seasoned spin doctor will, out of desperation, play the blame game. Gems such as 'my former colleague undertook that', or 'I don't know, I was in Montreal at the time', or 'sorry, I can't comment due to privacy or legal advice'!

Career bureaucrats always head up departments as they are well experienced in the smoke and mirror act that is government. People like Skid'Mark, Pumpkin Head, Dr Voodoo, Hood, Beaker, Houston, Electric Blue, Wingnut Carmody, the whole repulsive lot of them have been raised, nourished and indoctrinated within this deceptive bubble.

"Safe abracadabra for all"

[Peetwo]

Hitch's weekly wrap: Silence comes in shades of black 

Courtesy Oz Flying via the Yaffa:

The Last Minute Hitch: 16 September 2016
16 September 2016

Silence isn't always golden. I can think of at least two situations when it's a very deep shade of blue: when you're over tiger country and there's suddenly silence in the cockpit is one, and the other one is when you're waiting for Canberra to give the GA community some feedback on reforms. It was four months ago in May that AOPA held their Tamworth rally and the department hosted meeting with both AOPA and TAAAF to discuss what amounts to proposals, ideas and–in some cases–demands. Even if we take into account the federal election and the uncertainty in the weeks after as to whether anyone was going to be able to form a government, it has still been a long time. This week I chased some contacts in Canberra and used my official journalist's voice to ask when feedback to the industry might be forthcoming (read: begged). What I have been able to glean is that something is coming in October; a package for the general aviation industry that I believe will outline what the federal government believes it is prepared to do. Ah, but what will be in the package? On one hand it could be initiatives that kick-start general aviation; on the other hand it could be something resembling the Labour Party's Aviation White Paper. Let's hope for the sakes of us and our future flying generations that it's not the latter. In the meantime, we just have to wait out the dark blue silence coming from Canberra.

The death of Hannes Arch in a night helicopter crash is just gut-wrenching. A pilot of supreme talent, the last thing you would expect is that he would perish on a simple transport flight. It mostly seems that people like Arch are destined to meet their end finding the outer edge of some envelope or the other. For me this is particularly poignant. Only three weeks ago I was up on the Sunshine Coast exploring the dangers of flying helicopters visually at night, and came away understanding how skilled you have to be to do it safely. It will be some time before we can say with certainty what happened that night in Austria, except that it highlights that even the best aircraft drivers around are not exempt from one tragic moment.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...yWjJcmw.99

 
MTF...P2