[Peetwo]

But, only in the eye of the beholder.

TB – “In other words CAsA is a joke internationally, very embarrassing.”

Not so, according to Skidmore.  He is actually bragging, to all and sundry that administrations from all over the world ring him to discover, for themselves just how the Australian system works; it seems, according to Skidmore, that they all want to throw out their simple, ICAO compliant rule sets and follow the sterling example.  This, boys and girls is not a tale of my imagining.  Nope, I have had this now from several who I would count amongst the sane; they always look either slightly stunned or bemused when they tell the tale.

If, and it is a seriously big IF; anyone from overseas a rings OST to discuss ‘Australian’ aviation regulatory reform it is because they either (a) cannot believe the stories of wrack and ruin are true and need to hear it from the horses arse; or, (b) they want to know how to extort the serious amounts of money the scam of regulatory reform provides

I have little doubt that the reports of Skidmore repeating this fairy tale to any who question the shambles are true.  This leaves us with a man clearly not only out of his depth, but one who is quite happy to be the front man to one of the greatest rip-offs ever inflicted on the tax payer. The story also casts serious doubts over probity – if this is the yarn being flogged, hand over heart, to a hapless minister, dumb enough to believe it; then we are all in serious trouble.

This is not even mildly amusing: nothing like an aging maiden Aunt who talks to the ‘wee folk’ at the bottom of the garden, believing that fairy pooh make the sprouts grow better.  This is not remotely funny.  What we have here is either a venal, gross deception, a fraud perpetrated on ministers of the crown; or, someone who should be introduced to your Aunt.   Either way, the road to reform is not only blocked by those who make a living from it, but by the person who is; or was, expected to remove the blockage.

It is not only my opinion – Skidmore must resign or be put out to pasture on the grounds of diminished responsibility; not only being a danger to himself, but to others. You need look no further than his treatment of CVD or the Part 61 fiasco to find unequivocal evidence. His response to the ASRR beggars belief and answers all questions of intent.  The sad part? Well, I believe he actually believes all is well and he can bluff his way out of the unholy mess.

Selah.

Just someone else's OP - Part I

Yet another slap in the face for the Rev Forsyth & his esteemed, fully 'independent' crew:

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

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

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

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

Via Oz Flying:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Among the actions are:

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

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

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

 2016 CASA Stakeholder Relationship Survey
CASA 2016 Stakeholder Relationship Action Plan

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

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

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

The Last Minute Hitch: 19 August 2016


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

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

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

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

Sandy follows up, via one of the PAIN email chains, with what I believe is intended to be a posted comment on the Oz Flying article:

It beggars belief that taxpayer and industry money has been wasted compiling this report. Not to mention an insult to three distinguished Panel Members of the Forsyth report. It is true that the Forsyth report recommended that stakeholder surveys should be made alongside KPIs to be indentified. Their report made it abundantly clear, from an independent viewpoint, that General Aviation had an extremely poor regard for the regulator, the spendthrift CASA. CASA chose to largely ignore Forsyth, but then Director of Air Safety Mr. Skidmore declared that the Forsyth report was just an opinion. 


The real question is simply what's the point until and unless there are substantial reforms in place and then measure the success or otherwise? 

There was no need whatever for the C B report to restate the 'bleeding obvious' and a state of affairs that has existed and grown worse over many years. Can't help wondering what was the cost of this report and how was this firm selected? The costing should have been be reported along with the findings. 

Anyone with any interest in aviation should alert their Parliamentary representatives to the shameful actions of CASA, the ongoing destruction of small aviation business, waste and extraordinary mismanagement, AVMED, SIDs, ADS B, the tip of iceberg. Talking to CASA will not bring about any meaningful reform. 

Sandy Reith

 
&.. This AM Thorny cribbed a Leady post from off the UP - HERE - and of course the "K" Sunday ramble over on the Dazzling Dazza's shame thread - Irresistible force paradox.

...The latest, expensive, touchy-feely, vomitus ‘report’ -  (HERE) - produced at CASA’s behest, on the industry credit card is an expense we could well have been spared. It is not only insulting to the Rev. Forsyth and his ‘expert’, independent team; but assumes the industry is as green as it is cabbage looking. The CASA response to the report – classic, copy-book stuff; more time, more money, more shuffling, more window dressing, Oh, and new ‘statement’ neckwear for the top deck.  This, all to support the deceit in a text book bureaucratic smoke and mirrors charade...  

TBC..therefore MTF...P2