[Peetwo]

Fill in the blank - "It's un-Australian to ____?"

I noted the following tweet from our NFI Miniscule McDo'Naught...  

Michael McCormack‏
@M_McCormackMP
Recent reports show human error contributes to more than 90% of all road accidents so concentrate on your own journey, keep an eye out for others & potential danger & always remember it's un-Australian to ignore road safety.

Read this week’s Op-Ed here

Ignoring road safety is un-Australian - https://t.co/RvAFshaGcC

Never one to miss an A-Grade opportunity, this was my reply...  

@M_McCormackMP ignoring and not warning public safety risk around airports while ignorantly allowing your aviation safety agencies to unfairly pin all blame on the hapless dead pilot is also Un-Australian -  Ref: https://auntypru.com/nevermore/

 

---

Plus:
YMEN DFO accident - Hooded Canary cover-ups & libelous disconnections? https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...04#pid9804 & A duty of care. - Part II https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...66#pid9766 via @Aunty_Pru https://auntypru.com/?s=essendon+dfo+accident @pwhatch @smh @theage @tom_cowie https://www.theage.com.au/national/victo...50t3z.html + https://www.smh.com.au/business/companie...50re4.html #auspol

This got me thinking that perhaps we could create an archive of examples of where this particular useless Miniscule has been typically un-Australian and inept in his duty of care to we the Australian people and essential industries like aviation -  

So to kick it off...Dear Miniscule you are un-Australian for not sticking it to CASA on their un-democratic attempted embuggerance of community service flight charity Angel Flight - reference Ben Morgan today on ABC QLD Radio:   

AOPA AUSTRALIA SPEAKS WITH ABC QUEENSLAND’S JACQUIE MACKAY ABOUT ANGEL FLIGHT

January 30, 2019 By Benjamin Morgan



AOPA Australia Executive Director, Benjamin Morgan, spoke with ABC Mornings host Jacquie Mackay live on radio, Wednesday 30th Jan, to discuss CASA’s proposed changes to community service flights, and how these changes are a direct attack on Angel Flight and the invaluable service they provide to regional Australians.

ABC RADIO NATIONAL

Mornings with Jacquie Mackay
7:15am QLD / 8:15am NSW – Wednesday 30th Jan 2019

Addendum:

Via WIN News Central Queensland FB page: 

Angel Flight Anger

Outrage tonight as plans to introduce stricter regulations for private pilots threatens to cripple Angel Flight.

Proposed changes to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority standards have caught the beloved bush charity by surprise, and are expected to ground eighty per cent of Angel Flight's volunteer fleet.

[Peetwo]

Fill in the blank - "It's un-Australian to ____?"

I noted the following tweet from our NFI Miniscule McDo'Naught...  

Michael McCormack‏
@M_McCormackMP
Recent reports show human error contributes to more than 90% of all road accidents so concentrate on your own journey, keep an eye out for others & potential danger & always remember it's un-Australian to ignore road safety.

Read this week’s Op-Ed here

Ignoring road safety is un-Australian - https://t.co/RvAFshaGcC

Never one to miss an A-Grade opportunity, this was my reply...  

@M_McCormackMP ignoring and not warning public safety risk around airports while ignorantly allowing your aviation safety agencies to unfairly pin all blame on the hapless dead pilot is also Un-Australian -  Ref: https://auntypru.com/nevermore/

---

Plus:
YMEN DFO accident - Hooded Canary cover-ups & libelous disconnections? https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...04#pid9804 & A duty of care. - Part II https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...66#pid9766 via @Aunty_Pru https://auntypru.com/?s=essendon+dfo+accident @pwhatch @smh @theage @tom_cowie https://www.theage.com.au/national/victo...50t3z.html + https://www.smh.com.au/business/companie...50re4.html #auspol

Dear Minister McDo'Naught

 If you needed any further confirmation that your lack of oversight in the Essendon DFO matter is fundamentally UN-AUSTRALIAN and spineless, maybe the following may (just may??) help you understand the huge safety risk to the public and aviation industry that you are allowing the aviation safety bureaucracy to obfuscate and cover-up. All of course in the interest of the big developers and your Department (plus agencies) own self-interest/self-preservation...

First from this DFO Wikipedia reference link:  https://web.archive.org/web/200912080635...ength.aspx 

...Airports have proved to be a strong ally of the outlet centre industry. Developers have taken advantage of the low land costs, good transport infrastructure and the ability to bypass state planning legislation due to the land being owned by the federal government...

And this blast from the past from Ben Morgan AOPA Oz almost 2 years ago...  

Via Studio 10:

    

So not like you and your predecessor weren't given fair warning Minister....

TICK..TOCK goes the DFO Federal Airport(s) clock...


MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Is this

“Sadly, it seems that apart from those directly affected by this accident, no one really seems to care. It would appear to be just another statistic for CASA, ATSB and the Australian Government to ponder on, but to do little to avoid such an accident ever happening again,” Mr Scott’s family said. 

Ref: O&O AAI: AO-2017-057 

Very, very un-Australian Minister?

News Flash – it ain’t; it has become the ‘norm’ along with much other pony-pooh associated with government ‘responsibility’ for public safety. Lot’s of ‘genuine’ talk – little in the way of genuine improvement or even accountable investigation. But, I’m so glad you could interrupt a busy schedule to talk to the Essendon 4 – cup of coffee and a reassurance chat. All will be well, never fear, the man from Wagga-Wagga is here. Ah, the words of a genuine honest man; most reassuring. Bet the local kids could write a load of poems about that, to satisfy your desire for poetical, lyrical twiddles, writ by the local kids. You can give 'em an apple as a token of appreciation - then pray they do not go shopping with Mum in a DFO near you. Bloody Muppet.

On the blotter are several fatal accidents - arguably the direct responsibility of CASA' decisions and edicts. Not that you would understand the complex arguments - but; rest assured, the professional aviation world does. No matter, despite your excellent 'advice' on matters aeronautical to the contrary - those incidents will be examined by 'expert' eyes and a full report forwarded to the Senate RRAT committee in time for the election. The 'press' may even get a look-see before that. Won't that be fun?

P7 reckons you need to fix this, before it fixes your lack-luster 'career'  as a transport minuscule for ever. Albo is panting for the 'report' -I do wonder why though? Anyway......

Toot - (with a very Australian - Up your'es)  - Toot.

Bob's back and taking no prisoners on CASA embuggerance of Angel Flight - 

Via Twitter: https://twitter.com/aopaaustralia/status...2144837632

 AOPA Benjamin Morgan
@aopaaustralia 

QUEENSLAND FEDERAL MEMBER FOR KENNEDY, BOB KATTER, LABELS CASA AS 'SAFETY NAZIS', WHO HAVE DOWNED MORE PLANES THAN THE RED BARON!

From Sally Cripps, via QLD Country Life...  

Link: https://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au...a/?cs=4698

Angel Flight, Aircraft Owners Assn fighting CASA regulation plan

Sally Cripps
@sallyQCL

31 Jan 2019, 8 p.m.News



Baby Lotus and her mother Sarah ready for their flight in Angel Flight board chairman, Bill Bristow's Pilatus jet. Picture - Geoff Marsh.

Rural communities around Australia are outraged at a proposal by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to introduce a new minimum safety standard for community service flights that have the potential to ground Angel Flight Australia.

The charity coordinates non-emergency flights to assist country people to access specialist medical treatment that would otherwise be unavailable because of vast distance and high travel costs, utilising volunteer pilots.

Angel Flight’s CEO, Marjorie Pagani, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia, Queensland’s opposition spokesman for volunteers, Lachlan Millar, and Kennedy MP, Bob Katter, have all condemned the proposal, which they say is a gross discrimination against rural people.

All have demanded that the federal government intervene to prevent the new standards from coming into being.

“What CASA is saying is that I can fly you to Toowoomba any day of the week to go shopping but as soon as you say you’re going there for medical purposes, I’m not qualified to fly you,” Ms Pagani said. “It defies belief.”

She said the proposal, which related to licensing requirements, minimum pilot experience and maintenance-related enhancements, showed CASA had lost confidence in its own licencing system, under which the charity’s pilots and aircraft operated.

“Why else would they place these restrictions on lawfully licenced pilots,” she said.

“The long and short of it is, why are we suddenly unsafe if we want to help a rural person?

“There is no nation in the world that restricts a pilot’s licence according to the needs of their passengers.”

Further unleashing her dismay at the potential the changes would have on what has become an essential service, conducting 4000 trips a year, Ms Pagani was critical of the way CASA had apparently circumvented the usual regulatory process, and what she said was the “invention” of a community service flight category.

She described the standards as a “grab bag” of restrictions that were unrelated to the two fatal accidents, in 2011 and 2017, that are understood to be at the crux of the changes.

She said any improvement to the service would come from safety education, which she had been working with CASA on for 18 months, not aircraft standards.



One of the changes proposed would increase minimum pilot hour requirements, which would preclude some of the volunteers with lower hours.

Another requires aircraft engines to be maintained to commercial charter standards, which could cost $85,000 or more.

In outlining its need for consultation, CASA said a regulatory baseline would provide clarity regarding an appropriate minimum safety standard.

It anticipated most pilots currently conducting community safety flights would meet the proposed new standards.

While CASA said Angel Flight pilots didn’t operate under the safety umbrella of an Air Operator’s Certificate, which commercial operators work under, Ms Pagani said users were comprehensively briefed on procedures and made aware of all aspects, including watching a video, before they were introduced to a pilot.

Benjamin Morgan, the executive director of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia, accused CASA of highlighting two tragic accidents, both found to have been the result of pilot error, from over 46,000 successful flights, to manipulate public perception of the service.

“The elephant in the room is aviation safety, which should be addressed by communication, collaboration and education, not by ramming enforcement regulations through that only cover the backside of a bureaucrat if something happens,” he said. “We have to not overreact to a situation in a way that means we can no longer provide a service.”

Calls for intervention

Mr Morgan called on every Australian to contact their local MP and demand they oppose the changes, saying the next group to be affected could be private individuals transporting people to doctor’s appointments in their cars.

“Will they demand they have motor car engine overhauls or a higher degree of driver training?”

One politician who has called on the federal government, particularly transport minister Michael McCormack. to intervene is Queensland opposition spokesman on emergency services and volunteers, Lachlan Millar.

“I am outraged that an unelected bureaucrat can ground the charity, Angel Flight, with a flick of a pen and no federal parliamentary scrutiny,” he said.

“The Civil Aviation Authority’s plan will ground 80 per cent of the volunteer pilots who take rural and remote patients for non-emergency treatments such as dialysis.

“This plan will cause real pain to rural people. Angel Flight pilots are everyday heroes. They make a major difference and actually help governments by reducing the cost of delivering health care in the bush.

“I am publicly asking the deputy Prime Minister and federal transport minister, Michael McCormack, to intervene and fix this.”

He was joined by KAP leader and federal Member for Kennedy, Bob Katter, in calling out the Civil Aviation Safety Authority for what he called their latest show of incompetence, which he said could kill Angel Flight.

“One of Dick Smith’s finest moments was his attack upon CASA; CASA has downed more planes than the Red Baron,” Mr Katter said, adding the authority had repeatedly displayed its ineptitude.

“To take Angel Flight out of the skies is to remove the mantle of safety put there by Reverend John Flynn and his Royal Flying Doctor Service, and I speak with great passion because both my father and his brother died at the hands of that Australian tyrant – the tyranny of distance.

“When you protect your precious statistics, that conciliatory is costing us lives.

“It is quite clear to me these very generous self-sacrificing pilot-owners cannot afford to take the risks of CASA prosecutions – the safety Nazis – and we will lose this wonderful service.”

Mr Katter said he had contacted the minister for transport and demanded his immediate intervention and asked rural chambers of commerce, flyers, clubs and councils to join the fight on this issue.

The public consultation period, launched after federal parliament rose in December, closed on Thursday.

CASA and transport minister, Michael McCormack, were contacted for comment.

To follow the excellent Sally Cripps article...  

From Ironsider in the Oz: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busines...4a0952d57a

CASA rules to clip Angel Flight’s wings




A service set up to help cash-strapped rural families access non-emergency medical services is facing extinction as a result of a new Civil Aviation Safety Authority administrative directive.

Established in 2003 by Bill Bristow, Angel Flight combined its founder’s passions for flying and social care.

But chief executive Marjorie Pagani said the latest CASA directive would adversely affect at least 80 per cent of the pilots who volunteered their time and aircraft to help others.

Currently all pilots who register with Angel Flight must be CASA-licensed with significant flying experience, and operate an aircraft maintained to CASA standards.

But Ms Pagani said CASA wanted to impose more regulations that she believed discriminated against the people Angel Flight aimed to help.

“According to CASA, if you want to fly passengers all over the country you can, unless they’re rural people in need of help. It’s bewildering,” Ms Pagani said.

“CASA’s reasoning is that ­people who travel on volunteer flights are uninformed, that they don’t know the difference between a private flight and a commercial flight.”

She said in 16 years of operation, 46,000 flights had been operated by Angel Flight pilots, two of which were involved in fatal crashes in 2011 and 2017.

None of the changes CASA was proposing would have prevented those crashes, Ms Pagani said.

“We’ve taken a very proactive approach to safety, with flight mentoring, an online induction course and we’re developing safety management systems,” Ms ­Pagani said.

“We have a very rigorous briefing process before we introduce a pilot to the private person and that includes documentation, a video of the type of plane they’re going to get in and a waiver acknowledging it’s a private flight.

“It’s a slap in the face to rural people to say these people don’t know what they’re doing.”

CASA chief executive Shane Carmody said they believed it was “appropriate to establish a regulatory baseline that provided clarity regarding an appropriate minimum safety standard”.

He said that would relate to licensing and medical requirements for pilots, minimum pilot experience and maintenance-­related enhancements.

“People who use these flights might be surprised there is no standard requirements for private pilot licence holders,” Mr Carmody said. “We are proposing small but significant safety enhancements (because) we want to help these organisations maintain public confidence through improved safety.”

He said a public consultation period that closed yesterday had received about 160 submissions, nearly half of which came from pilots who fly community service flights.

A previous attempt to introduce more regulations for community service flights in 2014 had been unsuccessful. Adelaide-based pilot Harry Wightman said if the CASA directive was adopted he would no longer be able to fly his 1998 Mooney Ovation for Angel Flight.

“My engine just exceeds the 12-year calendar requirement they would impose, and would be required to undergo an overhaul to bring it line with charter aircraft standards,” Mr Wightman said.

“My engine is extremely well maintained, but they would say it’s not suitable for an Angel Flight.”

He said it was the people who relied on the service who would be hardest hit by the CASA changes.

“There’s a lady we brought in from Coober Pedy who’s undergoing chemotherapy (in Adelaide),” said Mr Wightman.

“It’s a nine-hour drive and she was having to do that fortnightly. She’s an 81-year-old lady.”

Federal MP Bob Katter said he had taken up the issue with the Minister for Transport.

MTF...P2 

[thorn bird]

Isn't it strange, Angel Flight is a true "Charity" Its services given unconditionally to those in need,
yet all the bureaucrats want to do is close them down.

Charity, in the true sense, is all Angel Flight does, unlike the big corporations masquerading as charities who ruthlessly exploit their not for profit status to undercut legitimate commercial operators. Snapping up every commercial contract that appears from time to time.
They receive very large largess from government, pay no tax or GST, receive concessions on operational charges like airway fees, landing fees and fuel excise which gives them a very unfair advantage over their commercial rivals.

[Gobbledock]

Better to die on your feet than on your knees

The Guvmint and it’s bloated bureaucratic departments are a blight on society and a thorough disgrace. These grubs are happy to put the kybosh on Angel Flight for no valid reason. Yet they are extatic to approve a DFO building that dangerously infringes on a runways strip width which ultimately and almost certainly contributed to the death of 5 people. Go figure? Perhaps the problem with Angel Flight is that there are no brown paper bag incentives that can be passed around?

I propose this;
1. Miniscule Mc’Do’nothing be relieved of his portfolio.
2. Shane Wingnut be offered an immediate redundancy package.
3. The PM acknowledge the work that Angel Flight does and provide an assurance that it’s operation shall continue unchanged.
4. If the above reasonable requests are not met then a concerted effort by the IOS be put into action which highlights and exposes this farcical state of affairs.

Viva Le Revolution

P7 - Second the motion. Enough is enough.

[Kharon]

CASA has downed more planes than the Red Baron,”


Love it – Quote of the year entry.

Mr Katter said, adding the authority had “[repeatedly] displayed its ineptitude.”

I once had the pleasure of a long ‘chat’ with Bob Katter related to ‘matters aeronautical’. I liked the bloke and the depth of his aviation knowledge surprised me. He actually not only ‘gets’ the shine and spin on the mudguard but completely understands that below the mudguard the dirt and road kill remnants are a thick ugly composite; untended, until a chunk breaks off, to be swept off the road by the ever ready departmental clean up squads.

“One politician who has called on the federal government, particularly transport minister Michael McCormack. to intervene is Queensland opposition spokesman on emergency services and volunteers, Lachlan Millar.”

“I am outraged that an unelected bureaucrat can ground the charity, Angel Flight, with a flick of a pen and no federal parliamentary scrutiny,” he said.

He, by being ‘outraged’ joins the long industry Conga line of the ‘outraged’. Industry has gone over a thirty odd year period from being annoyed, to angry, to furious through outraged to mild, uncomplaining acceptance. This despite the ‘sound and fury’ of occasional political outbursts – begs the question - has anything really changed?

The answer is both Yes and No. The ‘Yes’ element is that in over the three decades of tinkering with the aviation laws, CASA have tuned up the regulations to make themselves essentially unassailable in a legal challenge – provided the challenger can fund such a match against the bottomless pit of public money available to CASA. They have also managed to become completely ungoverned and totally unaccountable. Oh, the Senate committee’s have tried, only to retire, beaten and humiliated when their pronouncements and condemnation is brushed aside. Treated as the irrelevant opinions of those who don’t signify. Dismissed as the barking of a neighbours dog.

The ‘No’ element depends very much on which side of the paddock you stand. From a ‘safety’ perspective very much has changed. We have our share of accidents, incidents and close calls as does every aviation nation. This, despite the ever more complex and convoluted rule sets. Enforced Black letter law has a serious negative impact on ‘safety’. – Everyone involved is unafraid of the inherent risks of air operations, 99% try their utmost to mitigate those risks – within operational and budgetary limitations.  When funds and resources must be diverted from ‘operational’ risk mitigation to administrative compliance then the balance is altered – to the detriment  of ‘real life’ safety. The days of a new fellah having a chat with the chief pilot – admitting a major duck-up are long gone. The unfortunate is left to worry about being caught out, without the benefit of a ‘chat’ and perhaps a bollocking. A ‘law’ has been broken – would you walk into the local cop shop and admit to breaking the road rules; or driving under the influence? Do we still have the luxury of a self correcting system – No we do not. Has ‘real’ safety been improved by the edicts of CASA – No it has not. Has industry benefitted from, or likely to improve, despite the huge sums and decades of time wasted waiting on a better system? No, it most certainly has not.

So, what can the likes of Katter, Millar et al really do? The answer, based on history is Sweet Fanny Adams. The system is dysfunctional, morally bankrupt, steeped in ministerial protection; and IMO operationally ‘corrupted’ to the point where the ATSB is merely a catspaw of convenience. Careful examination of accidents, Senate remarks and operational standards clearly and unequivocally demonstrate this – the facts and circumstances undeniable. Yet, here we sit hoping that some political miracle will solve the problems. Do not hold your breathe; political memories (those which actually function) are short, intentions and promises disappear at the first whiff of bureaucratic ‘advice’ and there is a messy election on the near horizon.

Example – Angel Flight -

Angel Flight chief executive officer Marjorie Pagani slammed CASA’s planned direction, which was delivered just before Christmas and will not be subject to federal parliamentary scrutiny.

M. Pagani – Further unleashing her dismay at the potential the changes would have on what has become an essential service, conducting 4000 trips a year, Ms Pagani was critical of the way CASA had apparently circumvented the usual regulatory process, and what she said was the “invention” of a community service flight category.

Toot – BOHICA – Toot.

[Gobbledock]

Interesting how Lachlan Miller has been so vocal about Angel Flight considering he is LNP, the same party that the Deputy PM, Mc’Do’nothing is. And of course it’s Mc’Do’Nothing who presided over CAsA. So that really tells you something. The tall man is known to be passionate and ballsy and happy to call out anybody who ducks with the Bush. Ken O’Dowd is another LNP member who had also been known to defend aviation interests and speak out against some of the tomfoolery in his own party. Seems the LNP is fracturing and they certainly can’t hold on to their female politicians.

The ‘man in the hat’ is an interesting character. He certainly does dribble some odd things more often than not, but he certainly ain’t stupid. I spoke to Katter once at Toowoomba aerodrome for around a half hour and he is quite knowledgeable about aviation matters. Far from stupid.

The Deputy PM and Wingnut Carmody need to go. The Angel Flight farce is far from acceptable. If anything it proves that these two muppets do not belong, or deserve, to be in their current roles. They are an embarrassment.

TICK TOCK

[Peetwo]

Public anger & opinion droned out by bureaucratic self-interest and corruption -

CASA has downed more planes than the Red Baron,”


Love it – Quote of the year entry.

Mr Katter said, adding the authority had “[repeatedly] displayed its ineptitude.”

I once had the pleasure of a long ‘chat’ with Bob Katter related to ‘matters aeronautical’. I liked the bloke and the depth of his aviation knowledge surprised me. He actually not only ‘gets’ the shine and spin on the mudguard but completely understands that below the mudguard the dirt and road kill remnants are a thick ugly composite; untended, until a chunk breaks off, to be swept off the road by the ever ready departmental clean up squads.

“One politician who has called on the federal government, particularly transport minister Michael McCormack. to intervene is Queensland opposition spokesman on emergency services and volunteers, Lachlan Millar.”

“I am outraged that an unelected bureaucrat can ground the charity, Angel Flight, with a flick of a pen and no federal parliamentary scrutiny,” he said.

He, by being ‘outraged’ joins the long industry Conga line of the ‘outraged’. Industry has gone over a thirty odd year period from being annoyed, to angry, to furious through outraged to mild, uncomplaining acceptance. This despite the ‘sound and fury’ of occasional political outbursts – begs the question - has anything really changed?

The answer is both Yes and No. The ‘Yes’ element is that in over the three decades of tinkering with the aviation laws, CASA have tuned up the regulations to make themselves essentially unassailable in a legal challenge – provided the challenger can fund such a match against the bottomless pit of public money available to CASA. They have also managed to become completely ungoverned and totally unaccountable. Oh, the Senate committee’s have tried, only to retire, beaten and humiliated when their pronouncements and condemnation is brushed aside. Treated as the irrelevant opinions of those who don’t signify. Dismissed as the barking of a neighbours dog.

The ‘No’ element depends very much on which side of the paddock you stand. From a ‘safety’ perspective very much has changed. We have our share of accidents, incidents and close calls as does every aviation nation. This, despite the ever more complex and convoluted rule sets. Enforced Black letter law has a serious negative impact on ‘safety’. – Everyone involved is unafraid of the inherent risks of air operations, 99% try their utmost to mitigate those risks – within operational and budgetary limitations.  When funds and resources must be diverted from ‘operational’ risk mitigation to administrative compliance then the balance is altered – to the detriment  of ‘real life’ safety. The days of a new fellah having a chat with the chief pilot – admitting a major duck-up are long gone. The unfortunate is left to worry about being caught out, without the benefit of a ‘chat’ and perhaps a bollocking. A ‘law’ has been broken – would you walk into the local cop shop and admit to breaking the road rules; or driving under the influence? Do we still have the luxury of a self correcting system – No we do not. Has ‘real’ safety been improved by the edicts of CASA – No it has not. Has industry benefitted from, or likely to improve, despite the huge sums and decades of time wasted waiting on a better system? No, it most certainly has not.

So, what can the likes of Katter, Millar et al really do? The answer, based on history is Sweet Fanny Adams. The system is dysfunctional, morally bankrupt, steeped in ministerial protection; and IMO operationally ‘corrupted’ to the point where the ATSB is merely a catspaw of convenience. Careful examination of accidents, Senate remarks and operational standards clearly and unequivocally demonstrate this – the facts and circumstances undeniable. Yet, here we sit hoping that some political miracle will solve the problems. Do not hold your breathe; political memories (those which actually function) are short, intentions and promises disappear at the first whiff of bureaucratic ‘advice’ and there is a messy election on the near horizon.

Example – Angel Flight -

Angel Flight chief executive officer Marjorie Pagani slammed CASA’s planned direction, which was delivered just before Christmas and will not be subject to federal parliamentary scrutiny.

M. Pagani – Further unleashing her dismay at the potential the changes would have on what has become an essential service, conducting 4000 trips a year, Ms Pagani was critical of the way CASA had apparently circumvented the usual regulatory process, and what she said was the “invention” of a community service flight category.

Toot – BOHICA – Toot.

From Bob Katter's website: https://www.bobkatter.com.au/media/media...a-releases

Katter shoots downs CASA overhaul that could kill Angel Flight

KAP Leader and Federal Member for Kennedy Bob Katter has called out the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for its latest show of incompetence that could kill charity Angel Flight.

“One of Dick Smith’s finest moments was his attack upon CASA; CASA has downed more planes than the Red Baron,” Mr Katter said, adding the Authority had repeatedly displayed its ineptitude.

“The mind-numbing hypocrisy and incompetence of this organisation is clearly demonstrated by the repeated and continuous efforts that we have made to get the warning sounders onto helicopters; because of the mustering, geological and Telstra helicopters, because of the highest mountains in Australia, every North Queenslander is familiar with the chopper industry.”

More than half of six fatalities over a three-year period were attributed to collisions with powerlines, Mr Katter said, which could have be avoided if a couple of hundred dollars had been spent on a $200,000 helicopter to install a warning signal device. And yet, they were still not there.
“One lawyer claims to have won around 70 cases against CASA; it may be because he’s a brilliant lawyer, but it may also be because of the excessive fanatical conciliatory of people who are sick with power, blinded out of doing their job properly,” Mr Katter said.

“To take Angel Flight out of the skies is to remove the mantle of safety put there by Reverend John Flynn and his Royal Flying Doctor Service, and I speak with great passion because both my father and his brother died at the hands of that Australian tyrant – the tyranny of distance. My uncle had a near-fatal rugby league injury, there were no planes handy and by the time fledgling Qantas got a plane from Longreach to Cloncurry and back to Brisbane, near-fatal had become fatal. My father’s scheduled prostate operation was postponed because of pilot strike. By the time he got from Mt Isa to Brisbane for the operation, it was too late; the cancer had spread. So when you protect your precious statistics, that conciliatory is costing us lives. It is quite clear to me these very generous self-sacrificing pilot-owners cannot afford to take the risks of CASA prosecutions – the safety Nazis – and we will lose this wonderful service,” he said.

Research is currently being undertaken but Mr Katter said it appeared the number of light aircraft registered in North Queensland (population over one million) had halved and initial research indicated the major cause was CASA.

“We have contacted the Minister for Transport and demanded his immediate intervention and asked rural chambers of commerce, flyers, clubs and councils to join the fight on this issue.”

-ENDS-

Slight drift here but you'll get the picture very soon...  

The following is a letter to the editor in the Can'tberra times:

 

Drone debate drags on as public anger drowned out

By Letters to the editor
2 February 2019 — 12:00am

The ACT government and Project Wing can put whatever spin they like on its drone operations in the ACT.

The fact remains the people who have been subjected to these drone ‘‘trials’’ have rejected them. The fact is that anyone who hasn’t been subjected to the drones is not qualified to comment. The people of Royalla rejected the drones. The people of Bonython have rejected the drones (80 per cent).

The people of Gungahlin will decide for themselves about the drones.

[img=788x0]https://static.ffx.io/images/$zoom_0.53%2C$multiply_1%2C$ratio_1.776846%2C$width_1059%2C$x_0%2C$y_0/t_crop_custom/w_375/q_86%2Cf_auto/c3d9f59468d726b785790d953ee50e05292883d8[/img]

Drones being tested at Fernleigh Park.

The people of Bonython feel unsafe, violated and angry. They were not asked how they felt about this.

No one is responsible for regulation/compliance enforcement of the noise of the drones. Drone noise has been measured at 80 decibels during a neighbourhood delivery on a weekend.

EPA regulations disallow weekend residential noise over 35 decibels. There is documented evidence of regulatory loopholes and lack of proper government oversight and due diligence in regards to the Project Wing Bonython drone ‘‘trial’’.

The enabling of Project Wing suburban drone delivery operations in the ACT smacks of business and governments running roughshod over the people. Sound familiar?

We live in a democracy: ‘‘government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly.’’

That is why there is now an ACT Legislative Assembly Inquiry into Drone Delivery Systems in the ACT. Because the people have spoken.

Robyn McIntyre, Bonython

'Sound familiar'? Oh yes much like in the CASA 'law unto themselves' embuggerance of Bruce Rhoades...

“And thus I clothe my naked villainy”– AP Forum version.
Late start this morning – much to consider and read; mostly to do with Bruce Roades and his run in with at the CASA gristmill. The story begins with tragedy, a failed engine leading to an air accident, ending with a fatality. A raw day for all concerned; services swung into action and did their usual sterling work (thank you – once again); ATSB arrived ‘on-site’ and began the task of ‘investigation’. This is what we have become used to after an accident; the ATSB attempts to define what happened, why and place, when required, some form of advisory or recommendation designed to prevent a reoccurrence. The CASA often buy in, they are quite entitled to run an investigation; there are matters which they need to be across, matters of law and operational well being. So the scene is set.

---

...; or the embuggerance of Angel Flight once parliament had risen and just before Xmas; or in the case of the Essendon DFO crash, the Hooded Canary's 'blame it all on the pilot' (fraudulent) exercise to provide top-cover for CASA, the Department of Infrastructure and the big developers DFO trough model (racket) around airports...
   

"..DFO centres have traditionally been located around airports: a side effect of the Airports Act of 1996, the Commonwealth Government has planning control over the land, meaning state planning legislation can be bypassed by developers..."

Part II - Hooded Canary cover-ups & libelous disconnections?

 
...while negligently ignoring the very live risk to both public and employee safety everyday that the sun continues to rise over Essendon Fields Airport and the DFO complex....  

Out of all the fire & brimstone rhetoric surrounding the above Angel flight articles..videos..interviews..etc..etc the most telling statement comment IMO came from Carmody Capers:

  CASA chief executive Shane Carmody said they believed it was “appropriate to establish a regulatory baseline that provided clarity regarding an appropriate minimum safety standard”.


He said that would relate to licensing and medical requirements for pilots, minimum pilot experience and maintenance-­related enhancements.

“People who use these flights might be surprised there is no standard requirements for private pilot licence holders,” Mr Carmody said. “We are proposing small but significant safety enhancements (because) we want to help these organisations maintain public confidence through improved safety.”

He said a public consultation period that closed yesterday had received about 160 submissions, nearly half of which came from pilots who fly community service flights.

In other words Carmody fully intends to ignore all the protestations and the normal due democratic processes...  

This brings me back full circle to 3rd of January statement by Angel Flight CEO Marjorie Pagani...

..But I think the real focus is on how they are attempting to bypass proper democratic and legislative processes ( quite apart from lack of consultation with AF and industry). To take away rights or impose restrictions on licence holders, with the stroke of the CEO’s pen, is dictatorial and an abuse of process...  

And from SA RC Commissioner Bret Walker SC - Ref from pg 698 of the report: https://www.mdbrc.sa.gov.au/sites/defaul...1548898371

Discussion

As is evidenced by the discussion above concerning the merits of the NWC, the
findings of the Productivity Commission concerning the failings of the MDBA, including
in the context of lack of transparency, very much accord with evidence heard in this
Commission. These matters are discussed further in Chapter 18. Likewise, the observations
that the MDBA cannot mark its own work, and there must be an independent auditing
function conducted outside of the MDBA, which is currently wanting, are compelling in
their merit and utility.
In its recent report, the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References
Committee recommended that the Australian Government support the Productivity
Commission’s draft recommendation to separate the MDBA into two entities, and that
sufficient resources be provided to the regulator.72

Merely separating functions so as to remove these institutional conflicts will not
guarantee improvement in the present shortcomings in the MDBA’s capacity to critique
its performance, internally and continuously, as a genuinely scientifically guided entity
should. The current and mulish non-disclosure inculcated in the leadership cadre of the
MDBA is, after all, calculated to impede a truly outside auditor. The national need is
therefore a separate audit function by empowered and resourced experts — and also
the maintenance and reinforcement of a frequent, regular and published self-report by
the MDBA, with named senior individuals taking responsibility for the merits of those
reports.

It is concerning, albeit no longer surprising, that neither the DAWR nor the
MDBA appear to have heard or heeded the messages, received loud and clear during
this Commission, of discontent and lack of trust in the MDBA. Perhaps the advent of the

Claydon Review, about which further information was limited as at the date of writing,
may presage some meaningful impact on the issues of MDBA governance.

Conclusion

The pursuit of the objects and purposes of the Water Act, primarily through the
implementation of the Basin Plan, has been and will continue to be a complex process.
The sheer complexity of the inter-connectedness and operations of the Basin and its water
resources necessarily demands that it be so. Given that, a sound legislative framework is
an essential starting point to ensure good governance.

The Water Act provides a unique and sound framework within which to pursue the
implementation of the Basin Plan, but, as with any complex process, must be the subject
of continuous review and, where necessary, reform.

With some readily achievable adjustments to the current governance arrangements,
driven largely through legislative amendment, and provided the political will exists,
necessary improvements will be achievable in the ongoing implementation of the Basin
Plan. Those steps are likely to be essential to the task of rebuilding trust among Basin
communities and stakeholders which have arisen, in part at least, due to failures by the
MDBA to exercise good governance.

---

Ref: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-31/m...s/10766106


Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission slams authority for 'maladministration'
By Marty McCarthy, Kath Sullivan, Sarah Scopelianos and Tom Fedorowytsch
Updated Fri at 12:55am



PHOTO: The former Labor government announced a royal commission after an ABC investigation. (Supplied: Mark Moxham)

"...The Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission has found Commonwealth officials committed gross maladministration, negligence and unlawful actions in drawing up the multi-billion-dollar deal to save Australia's largest river system..."

---

Ref: Federal ICAC NOW!

"..The commissioner described the agency’s “weasel word” claims of being a transparent and accountable organisation as Orwellian in the face of its refusal to cooperate with the commission or the external scientific community. Walker appears to have ample justification for his belief that claims of transparency were disingenuous: the MDBA sought an injunction against the state of South Australia and the commissioner to prevent its people from being summoned to give evidence..."

With a slight flip of some words and with the replacement of MDBA with CASA, it is not very hard to see the parallels. However a quick flick thru the media coverage in recent days on this damning RC report would seem to indicate already that the important Walker findings, conclusions and recommendations have already been consigned to political oblivion in the huge and expensive shelfware archives for Royal Commissions and parliamentary inquiries...

   


MTF I believe in this week's SBG...P2 

[Gobbledock]

Wingnut Comedy said;

“People who use these flights might be surprised there is no standard requirements for private pilot licence holders,” Mr Carmody said. “We are proposing small but significant safety enhancements (because) we want to help these organisations maintain public confidence through improved safety.”

Stupid muppet. If one of my family was laying injured in the bush and bleeding out and I had a choice between ‘supposed higher standards but without Angel Flight and hence my loved one dying in a paddock’ or having ‘an old farm boy in his 152 putter getting my family member to a region with medical facilities which saved their life’ I know which option I would take. In any case, Angel Flight is no hack outfit and play such a vital part in our landscape. Carmody you are a tosser and a ponce.

Get the Angel Flight organisation to print off a bundle of public liability waivers and get the ‘passenger’, carer or responsible person to sign it before being uplifted. Simple. Problem solved. If farmer Bob prangs his ride at least CAsA and Angel Flight won’t be sued. Arses covered. Boxes ticked. Business as usual. Happy now Shane??? Farkwit.

TICK TOCK

[thorn bird]

"CASA chief executive Shane Carmody said they believed it was “appropriate to establish a regulatory baseline that provided clarity regarding an appropriate minimum safety standard”.

Err don't those standards already exist? or are private pilots taking their lives in their hands every time they fly. Perhaps wing nut is trying to say "We have no confidence that our current regulations and standards make private flying safe".

Why not stop beating around the bush and say "Private flying is Unsafe in Australia" you idiot.

Another question for wing nut. What other countries have specific regulations for community service flights?

[Kharon]

Grand Mama’s Knitting.

Never could see the point in it; Gram even tried to rope us boys into it with tales of the ‘men of the Isles’ – cragsmen, shepherds and fisher folk who all could knit. We tried, alas couldn’t get the hang of it, like radio theory it evaded me. She always seemed to have something on the needles which never seemed to look like anything – a minor puzzle. All became clear one afternoon; the ‘big’ table in the dining room was uncovered and we were given dusters and told to get on with making it shine – then the ‘ladies’ of the manor arrived; all carrying what looked suspiciously like ‘Gram’s knitting bag. Curious we hung about, lurking in the gallery amazed by the array of piles of what looked to us to be odd bits or cut off’s of unfinished Christmas sweaters. Nope; a little patience saw a wonderful, bright, patterned blanket materialize in front of our eyes. The ‘ladies’ set to with sewing needles and in no time at all – a lovely patchwork ‘quilt’ (for wont of better) was spread on the big table. Amazing stuff.

Indulge the long twiddle; there is a point. The P2 post above this one –HERE – is a monster; long, far too long for many to wade through. It reminds me of Grand Mama’s knitting; just an unfathomable pile of stuff, of little interest and too big to see past. But; when you lay out all the pieces and join ‘em together – a clear pattern emerges; wondrous, complex and damning.

The whole menu of aviation oversight disaster, from soup to nuts, in one package. Ministerial incompetence is there, which is excusable. No one expects a politician to be an expert on civil aviation; the incumbent must rely on expert advice. However, to continue following ‘bad’ advice in the face of ‘good’ advice and industry wide protest of that 'bad' advice is absolutely, damnably inexcusable. 6G McCormack should resign the portfolio; every item in P2’s monster post is ‘fix-able’ at ministerial level, the methodology and way forward have been clearly defined by industry for the minister. Yet, in the face of ever increasing outrage, he continues to ignore the problems and rightful demands of an industry being decimated through arrogance and incompetence.

Resign Minister; or, get the mess sorted out.

Toot - Toot.

[Peetwo]

Angel Flight Timeline of Embuggerance - 

Ref: AOPA thread.

Via AOPA Oz FB page:

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER MICHAEL MCCORMACK RESPONDS TO CONCERNS FOR ANGEL FLIGHT AFTER CASA PROPOSALS
The Daily Advertiser, Annie Lewis, 5th Feb 2019

The Deputy Prime Minister has responded to concerns that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s new proposal could discriminate against a charity that flies sick children from Wagga to the major cities for treatment.

Angel Flight in the last 10 years, has coordinated more than 1000 flights for Wagga residents to access medical help and has raised concerns about CASA’s proposal.

Changes put forward include increasing minimum pilot hour requirements, which would bar some of the volunteers with lower hours, and requiring aircraft engines to be maintained to commercial charter standards, which could cost $85,000 or up to $120,000.

Benjamin Morgan, executive director of Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia, said the proposal is ridiculous.

“These are changes that are not supported by the aviation industry and community,’ he said.

“I am astounded that CASA has thought they can ram these changes into the system and subvert the standard regulatory change processes.

“If CASA were so confident in their recommendations that they’re attempting to fire through then why didn’t they go through the normal process.”

Mr Morgan said he wanted to know whether or not the Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister will “stand up for families in the bush or will they abandon them”.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development, Michael McCormack, said the policy is far from discriminating against regional people.

“The intent of this policy around community service flights by CASA is to ensure that a suitable level of aviation safety is maintained for regional and rural Australians who need to use these important resources to seek medical assistance away from their home,” he said.

“The proposals being put forward by CASA are as a result of two fatal accidents and following these tragic accidents in recent years, CASA initiated a public consultation on the CSF sector as a whole.

“The Australian Transport Safety Bureau also continues its investigation into the most recent fatal accident and has initiated an investigation into the landing incident in Wagga last week involving a CSF organised by Angel Flight.”

Mr McCormack said no flights have been grounded and operations are continuing while this process is underway to improve aviation safety standards and outcomes.

Mr Morgan said the best, most reliable way to determine if changes in aviation regulations and safety standard is to overlay the proposals against historic accidents and ask if it could have been prevented.

“The answer is, not one of the recommendations has any relevance to any historical accident,” he said.

“What we are seeing is a disgraceful attempt of CASA to fear monger and create emotional reactions to support these proposals.

“They are devoid of safety case and devoid of a risk assessment to justify it and it is a gross abuse of the aviation industry rights and the rights of Australians.”

He expected, Mr McCormack said, CASA to take a pragmatic approach to ensure aviation safety is maintained whilst taking into consideration the importance of operations such as Angel Flight and Little Wings, especially in rural and regional Australia.

“I have been in contact with both the CASA chief executive officer Shane Carmody and Angel Flight chief executive officer Marjorie Pagani to discuss the proposed changes and I will continue to monitor the consultation process closely,” he said.

“CASA believes most pilots currently conducting CSFs would already meet the proposed new standards and that these proposed changes will not exclude many of Angel Flight’s volunteer pilots.

“The proposed approach is comparable to that taken by the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States in response to similar safety concerns following a number of fatal accidents with pilots conducting CSFs on a charitable basis.

“The FAA introduced additional requirements in 2013 and the charitable medical flight sector has continued to provide these services.”

---

Comments: 

Brett Pulford - Well that's a disappointing response. Comparing CASA to FAA is not valid or useful considering the costs involved in flying in the USA are substantially lower than here.

Out of curiosity does anyone know what the 'additional requirements' introduced by the FAA were? I tried to find them but couldn't.

For me the real kicker is that the proposed rules wouldn't have prevented the two accidents, so it can't be claimed to be being introduced as a result of them. It's really as simple as that. That's without even looking at the impact it'll have on the services provided.

---

Mark Westcott - What a pathetic political response.

Nothing in the new restrictions from CASA would have prevented the two accidents.

They are out of touch and so is our deputy prime minister.

Hemophobia – And the political backbone.

6G McCormack -  (Back-flip specialist) “The intent of this policy around community service flights by CASA is to ensure that a suitable level of aviation safety is maintained for regional and rural Australians who need to use these important resources to seek medical assistance away from their home,” he said. I say - BOLLOCKS.

The whole thing is disgusting; RESIGN minister, save what little internal integrity and self respect you have for the day when you understand what it is to be a ‘grown man’ with responsibilities. Having sold your soul once – you need to find a way to break the deal you made with the Devil. The Styx River ferry awaits your arrival with the patience borne of long practice; don’t forget the two bob – we still charge full rates. De-luxe service 24/7, you bet.

Toot - toot..............

P7 - (beg pardon) “[The] intent of this policy around community service flights by CASA. etc. Uhm - CASA do not conduct community flights - do they?

Now let's rewind to about this time 4 years ago in the lead up to the Senate Additional Estimates where the former Senator NX received the following answer to his written QON to the 1st attempted embuggerance  by CASA of Angel Flight:

CASA AQONs

Example from the ATSB AQONs:  

Senator Xenophon asked:

I understand that CASA has put forward a discussion paper in relation to community service flights, which cover organisations like Angel Flight and so on.

1. What prompted the issuing of this paper?

2. What concerns have been raised in relation to the safety of these flights?

3. How many community service flights have been involved in incidents in the last 12 months?

4. Does CASA have a view on whether people choosing to use community service flights have a full understanding of the safety regulations such flights are required to meet?

5. Depending on the outcome of the discussion paper, is it likely to have an impact on the regulation of medical charter flights?

Answer:
 
1. The growth in the number of community service flights prompted CASA to take a proactive approach to examining future options for the appropriate level of regulatory oversight for these flights.

2. CASA determined a number of significant potential risk factors needed to be considered; including pilots with varying experience and qualification levels and the variable types of aircraft potentially involved and their maintenance standards.

3. None reported.

4. The discussion paper has appropriately raised the importance of the Australian public having a good understanding of the safety regulation of community service flights.

5. Medical charter flights are regulated separately from community service flights. The Discussion Paper did not seek to examine medical charter flights.

  
Now given that last week CASA put out a presser through the DAS Skidmore - indicating they have backed down on the NPRM Charity flight thing - wouldn't you think the miniscule's office would have got CASA's answer to reflect the good news story before releasing the AQONs to the Senate committee??

I'll be back with MTF...    

Off the UP here is a post of mine (15 September 2014) that fleshes out the background to the last attempted embuggerance of AF: https://www.pprune.org/8656532-post1167.html

...It comes after Angel Flight, an organisation that uses volunteer pilots to provide air transport for rural and regional people to access medical care in larger centres, raised concerns it could be grounded by unworkable and expensive red tape imposed by the aviation watchdog.

"CASA is looking at imposing an additional regulatory layer of bureaucracy on Angel Flight, with the charity required to be responsible for pilot training and licences, aircraft certification and maintenance checks, not to mention a possibly unattainable burden of insurance," the charity said in a statement.

Angel Flight founder and CEO Bill Bristow said CASA in 2003 gave the charity it's "blessing" in written approval to start operations but was now seeking to impose new rules to "regulate" Angel Flight in the future. He said flights co-ordinated by Angel Flight were no different to private general aviation flights in Australia.

"All of our 2700 volunteer pilots who generously give their time to assist struggling families must adhere to the rules and regulations already imposed and rigorously controlled by CASA," Mr Bristow said.

"When we first heard about CASA proposing regulatory changes, I presented our grave concerns to Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss's chief of staff David Whitrow in March this year. However, it seems that those concerns have fallen on deaf ears."

He said he was worried the cost of complying with "onerous federal regulations" would financially cripple Angel Flight.

CASA rejected suggestions it was planning to impose crippling red tape, saying all it had done was start a discussion about aviation safety issues relating to community service flights.

A discussion paper on options for safety standards had been released for public comment so the public could understand them and consider whether there might be ways of managing safety more effectively, CASA said.

It said at the moment community service flights were considered to be private flights and pilots had varying levels of qualifications and experience and the aircraft involved differed in size, power and sophistication.

"If any changes to the safety standards covering community service flights are proposed in the future there would be further and comprehensive consultation before any action was taken," a CASA spokesperson said...

 
And from the Cairns Post in November 2014: https://www.cairnspost.com.au/lifestyle/...a5a5a275b9

THE Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has reassured rural and regional communities it is not moving to close down community service flights such as Angel Flight.

It comes after Angel Flight, an organisation that uses volunteer pilots to provide air transport for rural and regional people to access medical care in larger centres, raised concerns it could be grounded by unworkable and expensive red tape imposed by the aviation watchdog.

"CASA is looking at imposing an additional regulatory layer of bureaucracy on Angel Flight, with the charity required to be responsible for pilot training and licences, aircraft certification and maintenance checks, not to mention a possibly unattainable burden of insurance," the charity said in a statement.

Angel Flight founder and CEO Bill Bristow said CASA in 2003 gave the charity it's "blessing" in written approval to start operations but was now seeking to impose new rules to "regulate" Angel Flight in the future. He said flights co-ordinated by Angel Flight were no different to private general aviation flights in Australia.

"All of our 2700 volunteer pilots who generously give their time to assist struggling families must adhere to the rules and regulations already imposed and rigorously controlled by CASA," Mr Bristow said.

"When we first heard about CASA proposing regulatory changes, I presented our grave concerns to Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss's chief of staff David Whitrow in March this year. However, it seems that those concerns have fallen on deaf ears."

He said he was worried the cost of complying with "onerous federal regulations" would financially cripple Angel Flight.
CASA rejected suggestions it was planning to impose crippling red tape, saying all it had done was start a discussion about aviation safety issues relating to community service flights.

A discussion paper on options for safety standards had been released for public comment so the public could understand them and consider whether there might be ways of managing safety more effectively, CASA said.

It said at the moment community service flights were considered to be private flights and pilots had varying levels of qualifications and experience and the aircraft involved differed in size, power and sophistication.

"If any changes to the safety standards covering community service flights are proposed in the future there would be further and comprehensive consultation before any action was taken," a CASA spokesperson said.

And then the back down by the newly fledged (former) DAS Skidmore...

Via Oz Aviation online: https://australianaviation.com.au/2015/0...e-flights/

CASA TO KEEP CURRENT GUIDELINES FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE FLIGHTS
written by Australianaviation.Com.Au February 13, 2015



Mark Skidmore promised to make listening a priority ( http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/10...-priority/) when he took over as the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s (CASA) new director of aviation safety (DAS).

And in his first CASA briefing note, Skidmore highlighted listening as one of his five key principles and promised the regulator would communicate clearly, simply and effectively ( http://australianaviation.com.au/2015/01...rinciples/ ) with the community.

So CASA’s decision on the question of how community service flights are regulated is perhaps the first sign of this emphasis on listening to community views.

CASA said on Friday people power had persuaded the regulator to maintain the status quo on how not-for-profit community service flights were regulated, with the present guidelines guidelines sufficient for now.

“We have listened to the feedback to CASA’s preferred option and we accept this is not the way to proceed,” Skidmore said in a statement.

“CASA is not proposing any changes to the existing regulatory requirements for community service flights at this time.”

A CASA discussion paper released in August – before Skidmore’s appointment as the new DAS – outlined a number of options that would change the way community service flights were regulated.

The regulator’s preferred option was for charity groups to be given the responsibility to “ensure that the pilots and aircraft meet specified standards when conducting such activities under the organisation’s auspices”.

This would mean they would have to, among other things, assess pilots, monitor pilot currency, assess and approve aircraft for their operations and conduct regular pilot proficiency checking as an Approved Self-administering Aviation Organisation (ASAAO).

Charity groups such as Angel Flight strongly opposed CASA’s preferred option ( http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/09...a-changes/ ), citing the cost and complexity of managing such a scheme.

CASA received 65 submissions to the discussion paper.

Skidmore said CASA would continue to look at the topic of how charity flights are regulated, given the discussion paper had 10 options for consideration.

However, the new CASA DAS – Skidmore started in the role on January 1 – said there would be additional consultation with the aviation community and the public should the regulator explore any of those options further.

“CASA recognises the importance of community service operations such as Angel Flight to rural and regional Australia,” Skidmore said.

“Given the community clearly values the benefits of these flights CASA will not take any action that unnecessarily limits their ability to operate.”

So my question is - unlike last time - what happened between the former DAS statement in February 2015 and now, that convinced Carmody and the CASA Iron Ring to initiate, completely out of the blue,  a underhanded process (i.e 6 days before Xmas etc..) of supposed consultation on a rule change to the oversight of community service flights? ref: https://consultation.casa.gov.au/regulat...804os-1-1/

...CASA is committed to supporting CSFs to maintain public confidence through improved safety.

We acknowledge the work being done by CSF organisations to improve pilot and safety education and we are committed to continuing to work collaboratively on these important initiatives.

 While some actions have been undertaken by the sector, CASA considers it appropriate to establish a regulatory baseline that provides clarity regarding a minimum safety standard.

Previous consultation
In 2014 CASA sought comment on safety standards for CSF operations via a discussion paper. The responses to the discussion paper, indicated a significant lack of support for any regulatory intervention. In response to the feedback on the 2014 paper CASA decided not to take any immediate action, although CASA indicated it would monitor the sector and take action in the future if necessary.

Now
CASA has also engaged with the relevant charitable organisations to encourage the sector to improve safety themselves. While some actions have been undertaken by the sector, particularly in the area of safety education, CASA considers that it is appropriate to establish a regulatory baseline to provide a minimum safety standard.

Before anyone mentions the June 2017 accident near Mount Gambier, that is simply a furphy because we all know that if CASA truly had serious safety concerns/opinions about that tragic accident, they would have acted almost immediately to shutdown Angel Flight. However there is a takeaway from that Hooded Canary investigation that does raise my curiousity bump -   
Reference: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...-2017-069/

Updated: 27 June 2018

The investigation into the fatal collision with terrain near Mount Gambier in June 2017 is continuing.

ATSB investigators have examined the aircraft components recovered from the accident site and pilot transmissions from the common traffic advisory frequency for Mount Gambier Airport as well as GPS data and CCTV footage from the airport.

Investigators have also reviewed the aircraft’s maintenance documentation, pilot qualifications and experience,  and pre-flight planning as well as the weather conditions at the time of the accident.

In addition to a review of other similar accidents, investigators are currently reviewing all existing aviation safety data related to community service flights - for non-emergency medical purposes by voluntary or charitable organisations.

This involves a review of all available safety information from the ATSB aviation occurrence database and information on flight planning, coordination and oversight from the voluntary and charitable organisation.

Information from this review, along with other data from the investigation, is currently being analysed.

A final report will be released at the end of the investigation. Should a critical safety issue be identified during the course of the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify those affected and seek safety action to address the issue.

      
From the investigation page it is indicated that the investigation has since moved onto the Final Report: Internal Review phase:

Final report: Internal review

Final ATSB investigation reports undergo a rigorous internal review process to ensure the report adequately and accurately reflects the evidence collected, analysis, and agreed findings of the Safety Factor Review. Final investigation reports also undergo other technical and administrative reviews to ensure the reports meet national and international standards for transport safety investigations.

If a review identifies any issues with a report, such as information that needs to be expanded or findings that need to be modified, investigators will look to collect new evidence or conduct additional examination and analysis of existing evidence.

This would appear to indicate that the ATSB review into CSF charity flight operations has been concluded, therefore I believe it would be safe to assume that CASA (through the terms of reference for cooperation in investigations from the March 2015 CASA/ATSB - https://www.casa.gov.au/file/102606/down...n=6kTrX4QY ) have already been privy to that part of the ATSB investigation. However given that the ATSB always state...

"...Should a critical safety issue be identified during the course of the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify those affected and seek safety action to address the issue..."

...then it is a fairly remote possibility that CASA are reacting to the shared findings from the ongoing investigation into the Mount Gambier Angel Flight accident.

Still chasing the dots and following the dashes but it still beggars belief that a Minister of the Crown is so scared of the CASA Iron Ring and his own shadow that he would respond with this obviously regurgitated bollocks statement:

 “..The intent of this policy around community service flights by CASA is to ensure that a suitable level of aviation safety is maintained for regional and rural Australians who need to use these important resources to seek medical assistance away from their home..” 

Again I reflect on this exchange between Sterlo and Carmody Capers...  

Ref: https://auntypru.com/and-the-angels-wept/

Senator Glenn Sterle with the 'mystique of aviation safety' in a nutshell - "CASA has an incredible power over ministers. You must have some fairy dust that you sprinkle on them, because they all believe every word that you say. The minister was put under the pump and so you say, 'Okay, minister, will do an inquiry. She'll be right. Go and announce it.' You have not even done the terms of reference and you are trying to tell us that it is going to be done in a couple of months. I have no faith in you..."

MTF...P2 

[Gobbledock]

Sterle the legend;

Comment from the super coach;

”Senator Glenn Sterle with the 'mystique of aviation safety' in a nutshell - "CASA has an incredible power over ministers. You must have some fairy dust that you sprinkle on them, because they all believe every word that you say”.

No Senator, not fairy dust, it’s a bit more simple than that; the Minister and his fellow politicians are dumb. Pure and simple. They have no idea, their life has revolved around lying, deceiving, buying off, paying off, dealing, selling promises and backstabbing. That is their skill set, that’s why they are politicians, that is their trade. So, no, fairy dust doesn’t enter the equation, quite simply you have a bunch of slimey used car salesmen who care only about themselves. They wouldn’t know a flight deck from a Qantas lounge. Fools.

[Peetwo]

Letter from Anderson 

Sterle the legend;

Comment from the super coach;

”Senator Glenn Sterle with the 'mystique of aviation safety' in a nutshell - "CASA has an incredible power over ministers. You must have some fairy dust that you sprinkle on them, because they all believe every word that you say”.

No Senator, not fairy dust, it’s a bit more simple than that; the Minister and his fellow politicians are dumb. Pure and simple. They have no idea, their life has revolved around lying, deceiving, buying off, paying off, dealing, selling promises and backstabbing. That is their skill set, that’s why they are politicians, that is their trade. So, no, fairy dust doesn’t enter the equation, quite simply you have a bunch of slimey used car salesmen who care only about themselves. They wouldn’t know a flight deck from a Qantas lounge. Fools.

Fair call Gobbles, I do believe you've nailed the problem with our gormless NFI Miniscule McDo'Naught -   

Speaking of 'nailing it' -   While trolling through old media links that referenced the 1st attempt by the CASA Iron Ring (2014-15) to embugger Angel Flight, I noted a comment in reply from Anderson to this Oz Flying article - http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/...hreat-casa - that 4.5 years later barely needs an edit/update...  

 

Anderson • 4 years ago

CASA serves only the
interests of CASA.

First and foremost -
self-perpetuation.

Closely followed by
reaching its claws into the pocket of every GA participant to extract
the maximum bounty to fund said self-perpetuation.

It long ago
became an unwieldy beast that shed even any sort of pretence it might
actually serve the aviation community that funds it through the
regular extortionate gouging, both direct and indirect.

CASA certainly does
"make no apologies" - never has, never will (if past
behaviour is any guide)...

Why then does it
expect anyone with a brain and even the slightest modicum of
historical fact into aviation in Australia to believe anything the
self declared non-apologist has to say on any topic?

It has
been proven time and time again to be untrustworthy on almost every
level (secret collusion to influence ATSB investigations and doctor
accident reports - anyone, anyone...?).

An organisation that
simply lacks credibility within the real aviation community (ie, not
the segment that benefits from the largesse, corporate favours and
behind the scenes political shenanigans) cannot be taken at face
value.

Bureaucratic
regulation for all is the panacea for everything.

By now it is
clear the regulatory behemoth seeks to destroy GA and everything
associated with it, to not only bite the hand that feeds it but to
chomp, mangle and swallow to the GA armpit and beyond.

Whatever any new
purported "safety measures" might be from CASA for the
community service flight sector, it will be a rocky transition to yet
more rules that will do nothing to protect anyone.

The only new
protection needed is for the selfless humanitarians in the community
service flight sector (and GA generally) from the CASA
bureaucrats.

The "safety measures" will come with
some new fee or charge associated - nominal at first of course so as
not to create too much resistance - and given some fashionable
newspeak name to allay any unease, which will of course be
simultaneously denounced as “misplaced concerns” when the CASA PR
machine swings into action.

We all know by now
where “nominal” fees end up down the track – the next CASA cash
cow.

Remember this all well folks, for what will be sold out
of both sides of the CASA mouth in the months and years ahead will be
nothing but a wolf in the guise of a sheep. Harmless at first, only
to reveal a savage bite when it's far too late to fully comprehend
what really occurred.

Given the behaviour of CASA over the
past years, one really does need to wonder whether they are a
completely delusional bunch (given the continued expectation we will
blindly accept anything they broadcast), but more importantly whether
there is indeed a hidden agenda to completely rout GA - to destroy it
so completely that nothing remains but empty crown land, devoid of
the now GA aerodromes and ripe for redevelopment – which will all
be a sheer coincidence of course.

This latest little trojan
horse from CASA is undoubtedly but the next distraction to interfere
where none is needed and to spew forth but more needless regulation.
This time it will be aimed squarely at those who provide a tremendous
service and benefit to the community.

A type of actual
service that CASA would not recognise if it were placed directly in
front of its bloated waistline.

Hmm...MTF - P2  

Finally a word from our sponsor - 

[Gobbledock]

China link possible in cyber attack on Australian Parliament computer system, ABC understands

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-0...s/10792938

Good grief, what could China possibly want by hacking into our Guvmint’s network? Perhaps they were looking for;
- Christopher Pynes Grindr profile?
- Footage of Pentecostal Morrison speaking in tongues?
- CAsA’s blueprint for GA reform?
- Julie Bishops business class tickets to the next UN Ollie jollie?
- Information on which beauty salon McCormack and Chester attend weekly?

Either way, our Guvmint is a dysfunctional train wreck and couldn’t manage a chook raffle.

Dear China, don’t waste your time on our inept Can’tberrian wankers.

Tick tock

[Peetwo]

Letter from Anderson 

Sterle the legend;

Comment from the super coach;

”Senator Glenn Sterle with the 'mystique of aviation safety' in a nutshell - "CASA has an incredible power over ministers. You must have some fairy dust that you sprinkle on them, because they all believe every word that you say”.

No Senator, not fairy dust, it’s a bit more simple than that; the Minister and his fellow politicians are dumb. Pure and simple. They have no idea, their life has revolved around lying, deceiving, buying off, paying off, dealing, selling promises and backstabbing. That is their skill set, that’s why they are politicians, that is their trade. So, no, fairy dust doesn’t enter the equation, quite simply you have a bunch of slimey used car salesmen who care only about themselves. They wouldn’t know a flight deck from a Qantas lounge. Fools.

Fair call Gobbles, I do believe you've nailed the problem with our gormless NFI Miniscule McDo'Naught -   

Speaking of 'nailing it' -   While trolling through old media links that referenced the 1st attempt by the CASA Iron Ring (2014-15) to embugger Angel Flight, I noted a comment in reply from Anderson to this Oz Flying article - http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/...hreat-casa - that 4.5 years later barely needs an edit/update...  

 

Anderson • 4 years ago

CASA serves only the
interests of CASA.

First and foremost -
self-perpetuation.

Closely followed by
reaching its claws into the pocket of every GA participant to extract
the maximum bounty to fund said self-perpetuation.

It long ago
became an unwieldy beast that shed even any sort of pretence it might
actually serve the aviation community that funds it through the
regular extortionate gouging, both direct and indirect.

CASA certainly does
"make no apologies" - never has, never will (if past
behaviour is any guide)...

Why then does it
expect anyone with a brain and even the slightest modicum of
historical fact into aviation in Australia to believe anything the
self declared non-apologist has to say on any topic?

It has
been proven time and time again to be untrustworthy on almost every
level (secret collusion to influence ATSB investigations and doctor
accident reports - anyone, anyone...?).

An organisation that
simply lacks credibility within the real aviation community (ie, not
the segment that benefits from the largesse, corporate favours and
behind the scenes political shenanigans) cannot be taken at face
value.

Bureaucratic
regulation for all is the panacea for everything.

By now it is
clear the regulatory behemoth seeks to destroy GA and everything
associated with it, to not only bite the hand that feeds it but to
chomp, mangle and swallow to the GA armpit and beyond.

Whatever any new
purported "safety measures" might be from CASA for the
community service flight sector, it will be a rocky transition to yet
more rules that will do nothing to protect anyone.

The only new
protection needed is for the selfless humanitarians in the community
service flight sector (and GA generally) from the CASA
bureaucrats.

The "safety measures" will come with
some new fee or charge associated - nominal at first of course so as
not to create too much resistance - and given some fashionable
newspeak name to allay any unease, which will of course be
simultaneously denounced as “misplaced concerns” when the CASA PR
machine swings into action.

We all know by now
where “nominal” fees end up down the track – the next CASA cash
cow.

Remember this all well folks, for what will be sold out
of both sides of the CASA mouth in the months and years ahead will be
nothing but a wolf in the guise of a sheep. Harmless at first, only
to reveal a savage bite when it's far too late to fully comprehend
what really occurred.

Given the behaviour of CASA over the
past years, one really does need to wonder whether they are a
completely delusional bunch (given the continued expectation we will
blindly accept anything they broadcast), but more importantly whether
there is indeed a hidden agenda to completely rout GA - to destroy it
so completely that nothing remains but empty crown land, devoid of
the now GA aerodromes and ripe for redevelopment – which will all
be a sheer coincidence of course.

This latest little trojan
horse from CASA is undoubtedly but the next distraction to interfere
where none is needed and to spew forth but more needless regulation.
This time it will be aimed squarely at those who provide a tremendous
service and benefit to the community.

A type of actual
service that CASA would not recognise if it were placed directly in
front of its bloated waistline.

Hmm...MTF - P2  

Finally a word from our sponsor - 

I see that Hitch has allowed a response to Anderson (4.5 years later) from Sandy to be published...  

Sandy Reith  Anderson • 18 hours ago

The comment and sentiments expressed by Anderson and his jaundiced view of CASA about their attempt to regulate Community Service Flights I’m sure would be unchanged today. 

Isn’t the internet amazing? here we are nearly five years later and we have the same regurgitated CASA beat up to regulate CS flights right in front of us. 

This obvious assault on our freedoms, and what would be the suffering of so many ill people that benefit from CS flights like Angel Flight provides, seems to have had little or no weight in the minds of the CASA bureaucracy.

I well remember when CASA adopted the twelve year rule mandating this maximum period from engine overhaul for charter aircraft. This one mooted new condition for CS flights would certainly be a killing move for a large portion of CS flights. Several points about this ill advised move are even more pertinent today.

This twelve year rule was inappropriately adopted in Australia from the manufacturer’s recommendation without any evidence based rationale. The manufacturer has obvious vested interests, liability and sale of parts for two particular items. The operating environment for aircraft engines in Australia is more benign, our climate being less severe and fewer aircraft put away for long periods during the severe winter weather in large areas of the USA. In addition the expense of engine overhauls in Australia is far higher compared to the USA.

It really is time for a total reform of CASA, one element is clearly urgent and that is the need to insulate it from the risk of litigation. The current structure is wrong because it encourages behaviour of CASA which is inimical to a healthy and prosperous General Aviation industry.

http://disq.us/p/1zkjbjy

[Gobbledock]

Blackall couple among many concerned at impact of CASA changes on Angel Flight

https://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au...the-worst/

Comment;

“Angel Flight in an administrative sense are absolute sticklers for the rules – we need a medical certificate each time we need to travel, sign waivers and have to comply with every regulation they ask for.” Twice they have been in situations in the air that didn’t go to plan but they said the professional attitude of the pilots had been totally trustworthy. One occurred in March 2018 when summer storms were building up. They were advised they may not reach their destination and may have to overnight in Roma. In fact, they had to put down in Mitchell at the pilot’s discretion after constant communication with the Bureau of Meteorology and contact with Angel Flight to advise of the change to the schedule. “We arrived in Toowoomba the next morning with 20 minutes to spare before our first appointment,” Lindsay said. “They’re not looking to kill themselves, they’re very careful pilots.”

Dear CAsA, did you notice that comment; “They’re not looking to kill themselves, they’re very careful pilots.” That’s the crux of the matter - good pilots, caring people, performing a life saving service. They don’t want to die any more than their passengers want to die. Yet two accidents that don’t even marry up with the draconian regulations that have been ‘snuck in’ over the Christmas period are the catalyst for change? WTF??

And on a final note, if the Government is so hell-bent on making sure people don’t die;
- Why do they allow shit roads like the Bruce Highway in Queensland, which kills dozens each year, to remain in a single lane mess most of the way from Gympie to Cairns?
- Why does the Government allow the outback rural hospitals and health services to be so poorly supported that an estimated hundreds die each year?
- Why does the Government refuse to ban cigarettes which kill thousands each year through direct smoking and passive smoking?
Why is there no concerns over these matters which results in thousands of deaths every year???? Yet CAsA, a Government bureaucracy that costs us well over $150m annually is allowed to prioritise chasing down Angel Flight out of existence???

I cannot believe that the fool Mc’Do’Nothing thinks he will still be in Government later this year!! It’s back to running a fake media pissy local newspaper for you numbnuts. You really are living on cloud nine aren’t you.

ROYAL COMMISSION INTO CASA REQUIRED RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW!!!!

[P7_TOM]

Responsible government.

There are two choices – pick the one you relate to best.

“[the] state or fact of having a duty to deal with something or of having control over someone”.

“[the] state or fact of being accountable or to blame for something.”

Whichever hat you choose; at the day’s end – we are all, in one way or another, 'responsible’ for something or someone. Undeniable fact of life – even if it is only yourself, your happiness and wellbeing. Some folk can and do take that option – which is fair enough – provided no one is dependent ‘on-you’. I don’t mean in a purely fiscal way -  say, for instance, you keep one the most insignificant creatures of this earth as a pet - a frog (which don’t do much) or; an Ant farm – (No GD that’s Ants not Aunts, your mind – honestly). At the end of the shift – you and only you bear the ultimate responsibility for their wellbeing.

Now then, when you strap an aircraft to your arse – the ‘responsibility’ matrix goes off the charts. “You and only you” carry that burden – not too many excuses; slim chance of legally disavowing the law – even if you survive the ‘accident’. I’ve known many pilots who have said (over an Ale) that they’d much rather be on the ‘lost-in action’ list than face the inevitable ‘inquiry’ – sad, but very true. So what has all this waffle got to do with responsible government? Well; this for a kick-off:-

"Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives, that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honoured dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Abe Lincoln.

Lincoln at full throttle: he felt the great responsibility of the trust innocent and not so much folk placed in his hands – their hope for a better future; without strife and war; to raise a family and educate it; to eventually own a home and pass it on; to be free of disease and poverty; to live freely as suited their gods and nature. It is (IMO) all the ordinary folks could ask; or, even hope for. A job, even a humble one, help for the kid’s when they got sick, the simple ability to walk home after a few Ales without being assaulted – safety, security and a way to hold your head up. Pride comes in many forms – but the simplest of all is to be able to earn your own way forward. A quote from a dear friend “never would I be a great musician – I am but a humble piano tuner – but I pay my bills, my children are well and; in all, I am content with the hand life dealt me”.

So – WTD has this got to do with the current rabble skulking in the bowels of Canberra? SFA and everything. Every tenet of ‘elected’ responsibility is either abrogated, begrudged, cancelled, diluted, eased, falsified, glibly avoided, etc. etc…..In short they not only betray the trust and hope ordinary folk place in their hands; but piss on it; deny it, take the money and bugger off back to Wagga. FDS The ‘responsibility’ for this nations well being lays in their hands; they are more that adequately compensated for that responsibility.

My question – When, for love of a cold beer on a Friday night, will the 'elected' accept the ‘responsibly’ - for anything: good or horrendous?  Essendon DFO – start there. No fear – tear it down. It is wrong – you all know full well it is – Do something. The attack on Angel Flight is plain wrong – do something.

Of course! The majority of those ‘in power’ will take the easiest no blame path; then, hide behind the ‘advice’ of a moribund, defunct administration; claim ignorance along with their allowances and scamper off to try and regain their seats in the Houses of Responsibility. Which are different to the Houses of Parliament – by a Pagans prayer.

“Yes dear heart; ignore my tirade – but I am old, have seen it all before and it wearies me.” Yes, I will have another, nurse it carefully, then wander home trying to fathom the sheer gutlessness of our elected officials – those who publically swear – to take responsibility (along with the money) for this once proud, independent nation of ours. A nation for which our forbears fought so hard to preserve.” “They’d turn in their graves – bless ‘em all.”

Rolly Polly Sam is a relative; as is Spinning Jack. If the dead could talk eh? Time to wend my weary way home methinks. Rant -  FWIW - over.

[Gobbledock]

Brilliant article from Our GayBC;

“Welcome to the 45th Parliament's leaving do, and it's going to be a belter”.

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-1...o/10794742

I’m not sure how I can possibly add to this well written, succinctly articulated, thorough analysis of our Government, the opposition, the Greens and a large part of the Senate. They are a joke, an absolute joke.

The scariest thing is that the only vestige of Government that has remained untouched, non-corrupted and still able to cut through malaise and bullshit to reveal a semblance of truth is the powers of a Royal Commission, for now. I wonder how much longer that will last until even the powers and processes of Royal Commissions become just formalities from which the outcomes have already been predetermined well in advance?

Tick Tock

[Cap'n Wannabe]

From the UP, posted by Ex FSO Griffo..

The "Angels Flights Saga' continues...…Note the last sentence, first paragraph...….

Received this morning 0850WST.....0050Z.....


Dear Angel Flight Supporter

You will be aware that the government agency, CASA, has taken steps to restrict our volunteer pilots, and to ban helicopters, to the extent that the viability of the charity may be placed under threat. Despite repeated requests, the agency has declined to give us, or the Australian Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPS), any safety case, or risk analysis, to support these restrictions. Importantly, CASA has deliberately bypassed its own policies, protocols and ethical standards, by failing to adhere to its regulatory reform criteria. Instead, the CEO of CASA has issued a Direction, simply a ‘law’ which is signed by him. I have repeatedly asked the CEO why he has done this, and the response was, firstly, ‘because I have the authority’, and then when pressed further, ‘because it’s easy’.

I have asked the National Operations and Standards Exec Manager, what the new rules have to do with the two volunteer flight accidents which have occurred in the last 16 years (both involving bad weather), and his answer to me was to effect that they bore no relationship to the accidents. The ATSB (Safety Bureau) has not yet released its report into the last of these accidents, in 2017.

These accidents (two in 46,000 flights) are attracting unprecedented attention from CASA, and in particular, when compared with the high number of fatal accidents which have occurred in commercial operations in Australia during the same period. Initially, CASA was underpinning its rules on the basis that our passengers are ‘uninformed’ (that is, they don’t understand that they are not travelling on an airline or commercial operation, or understand the differences). We have provided CASA with our entire suite of documents which the pilots and passengers (and drivers) must read, sign and acknowledge, and the videos which the passengers must watch prior to flying. We are perplexed as to why CASA thinks that our disadvantaged rural passengers cannot understand what they read, see or sign.

They are also implying that they have no confidence in the training, testing and licensing of their own pilots. You all know that we only accept as volunteers, those pilots holding CASA licences, and flying CASA registered and maintained aircraft for private flight in Australia. Many of our volunteers are airline pilots, commercial pilots, and of course, private pilots. Their new rules do nothing to address CASA’s training or licensing issues – they merely seek to restrict those pilots, after issuing their licences, so that they can fly anyone else in Australia subject to the provisions of their licences, but not rural people coming into the cities with Angel Flight volunteer pilots for scheduled non-emergency medical appointments.

Angel Flight does not know why there has been such a concerted attack on these volunteer pilots and aircraft – given that it is CASA’s responsibility to ensure a proper level of training before issuing the licence – it is not Angel Flight’s job to take responsibility for training under CASA regulations: we rely on them to give licences only to those who have qualified.

After first alleging that they were introducing these rules, with what seemed undue haste just before Xmas, to improve safety (although they don’t relate to the two accidents since 2003), it then moved to relying on the ‘uninformed’ argument, then changed its thrust to ‘ we are doing what the USA is doing’. That is also grossly misleading, as the private flights in the USA are not regulated in this fashion. They only regulate what they regard to be commercial operations and give an exemption if they are flying for a charity. Finally, last Friday, the chair of the CASA board said we are not ‘technically private flights’. How that relates to their restrictive proposals is perplexing- particularly as CASA has never challenged our private status, and the statement bears no relationship to the proposed restrictions.

A very worrying event occurred last week – CASA called a regional TV station, offering them an exclusive statement if they would embargo the story until this Wednesday. That statement was from the chair of the CASA Board, Tony Matthews, who said CASA was going ahead with all but one of the rules. He alleged they were to table it in parliament on Tuesday, but not release that information until Wednesday – thereby limiting the time within which to lodge a Notice of Motion to Disallow the Directions. More worryingly, they did not tell Angel Flight about this – merely advised a TV station. Quite alarming behavior from a government agency, particularly that it issued the statement on 7 February, a mere 5 working days since the close of the brief public ‘consultation’ – there were 230 submissions, many of them being lodged on the last couple of days. It is difficult to see how they could come up with this decision if they were taking these submissions into account (and Angel Flight has privately received many copies of these). The leaked exclusive was then conveyed to The Australian newspaper, and published on 8th February : again, neither the CASA Board, nor CEO, nor anyone else from CASA, had advised Angel Flight of either its decision or its intention to make a statement or table the proposals, : there was no communication from the agency of any kind, nor to AOPA, represents thousands of general aviation pilots, and who had been communicating with CASA over the issue.

Angel Flight takes a proactive position in relation to safety, but does not accept that CASA should bypass proper regulatory reform procedures to rush these changes through, knowing they will have an adverse effect on these valuable services, and that they are unsupported by any safety case or risk analysis. This should be workshopped by industry and the submissions properly evaluated, and a safety risk analysis conducted and released, before reforms are proposed, and these should be done by regulatory amendment – the proposed administrative directive cuts across many regulations, pursuant to which the pilots achieved their licences. CASA appears to be saying that Angel Flight is responsible for CASA’s own licensing standards. This administrative directive both restricts the rights of pilots to fly under their CASA licences, and could jeopardise valuable volunteer work. Even more extraordinary is that CASA has banned helicopters from flying for Angel Flight, although there have been no heli accidents in the volunteer service,: more astounding is that CASA say it is acceptable to get the total aeronautical time required, in a helicopter, but then ban helicopters! This is particularly unfortunate when many of our rural people in flooded communities may need help getting their families to medical treatment when airfields are flooded. They have offered no explanation for this ban.

We urge you all, and your colleagues, to urgently contact both your local Member of the House of Representatives, and all Senators, requesting they lodge a Notice of Motion for Disallowance, so that the issue of safety can be assessed in a measured, educated, and fact-based fashion, adopting the usual protocols and industry input. There is only a brief window of opportunity to do this -the Notice must be lodged this week, possibly Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, on the basis that CASA will deliver it on Tuesday (but again, they have not allowed us this information – we are relying upon what the chair of their Board has said to a television station).

Let’s all pull together to help people in the bush have a better quality of life – contact all federal members of parliament now by email or phone (link to a list attached).

Senators: https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Memb...gen=0&ps=0
Members: https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Memb...gen=0&ps=0


Thanks for your support,
Marjorie Pagani CEO
Angel Flight


No Cheers Here....NOPE!! None at all....