An aviation researcher, writer, aviation participant, pilot & agricultural researcher. Author of over 35 scientific publications world wide.


Good reads

Oil Prices


pprune and Regs


14th Oct 2013, 15:19   #201 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,480
I had a rather productive meeting with my local MP today who is certainly very interested in the issue. He is also going to link up with Sen X to discuss further both the Senate sub-committee report and what further action may be taken.

May I suggest that a similar approach be taken by others. Yes, you may get the generic brush-off letter but you may also get something more positive. We can continue to whinge and moan on this forum or we can get off out backsides and try to generate something. Its really our choice.

PLovett is online now Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 10:28   #202 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 460
Warren Truss response to the Industry

This was released yesterday:

Warren Truss
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development

Opening of the Safeskies Conference
Hotel Realm– Canberra

16 October 2013

Thank you Peter Lloyd, President, Safeskies, and David Forsyth, Chairman, Safeskies and the Safeskies Executive Board for the invitation to open this conference today.

I would also like to thank all of you for attending this event, from near and far, to share and learn from each other’s aviation safety experiences.

Safeskies provides an excellent opportunity for all of us committed to best practice in safety to exchange our views and ideas about how to enhance aviation safety in Australia – and throughout our rapidly growing Asia-Pacific region.

It is a pleasure for me to address this important international aviation safety event as the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development.

I am very glad to return to a Ministerial portfolio that has truly engaged me through a lot of the time in Parliament.

And aviation is a critical part of my portfolio – and of Australia’s future development and economic growth.

Aviation Growth and its implications

Australian aviation has achieved strong and sustained growth over the past decade – and this growth underlines the importance of aviation safety.

More people are flying within Australia, and in and out of Australia than ever before.

Over 142 million passengers moved through Australian airports in the 12 months to 30 June 2013.

A record 57 million passengers were carried on more than 640,000 regular public transport flights around Australia within this time.

Sydney remained Australia’s busiest domestic airport with over 25 million passengers movements, followed by Melbourne with nearly 23 million passenger movements and Brisbane with nearly 17 million passenger movements.

Fixed-wing charter operators carried an additional 2.4 million passengers in 2012-13. More than one third of all charter passengers took flights either to or from Perth Airport – reflecting the strong growth of Australia’s resource industries.

However, although the aviation industry has expanded overall, this growth is not evenly shared around the country.

While parts of regional Australia have benefitted from strong growth associated with the resources sector or coastal migration, traffic levels at some smaller regional airports have declined.

International aviation continues to grow with over 30 million passenger movements into and out of Australia in the year ended June 2013 – an increase of over 5 per cent over the previous year.

Significantly, 11 million passenger movements were between Australia and South-East Asia and over 5 million between Australia and North-East Asia.

Together, these two regions contributed more than half of all passenger movements into and out of Australia.

This is a clear pointer to the future.

Asia-Pacific passenger kilometres already represent about 30 per cent of global traffic.

And the most recent International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) forecasts indicate that the Asia-Pacific region will continue to be the fastest growing part of an expanding international aviation market.

ICAO forecasts that the current 3.0 billion global passenger traffic movements will have more than doubled to 6.4 billion movements by 2030.

These levels of global and regional growth create challenges and opportunities for virtually every aspect of Australian aviation, including maintaining the safety of our skies.

We recognise that the Australian aviation industry is highly diverse.

The industry includes international and domestic passenger and freight carriers, smaller regional operations, charter and business services. It also includes aerial agricultural operators, emergency services, general, sport and recreational aviation.

These front-end services are complemented by other vital parts of the industry – including aircraft manufacturing, aircraft maintenance and flight training for both domestic and international flight crews.

Above all, the Australian Government is committed to providing an aviation governance and regulatory framework that helps ensure Australia’s aviation industry operates in a safe, efficient and reliable environment.

Aviation Safety

The Government’s aviation industry policy reflects the realities of the industry’s diversity.

Our policy also shows that we have listened to the issues which concern aviation stakeholders.

Our response to their concerns includes several key aviation safety and air traffic management commitments which I will briefly outline today.

We are committed to undertaking a strategic independent review of aviation safety and regulation.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority is well advanced in rewriting Australian aviation regulations – a process that has been underway for more than 20 years – and it is not without its critics and controversy.

This review will help ensure Australia maintains best practice in aviation safety.

Australia’s aviation safety record is internationally recognised as a very good one.

However, I believe that it is time to examine our aviation safety framework and identify where improvements can be made.

The future success of Australian aviation fundamentally depends on maintaining its impressive safety record and improving on it wherever possible.

The aviation safety and regulation review will be undertaken by a qualified and experienced member of the international aviation community, who will be assisted by my Department.

The Review will be expected to consult with all interested parties to make sure we achieve the best possible outcomes.

The review will examine:

* the structures and processes of the Government’s aviation safety agencies, and how they work together;

* the outcomes and direction of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s regulatory review process; and

* the benchmarking of our regulatory framework against international best practice.

I expect to release further details, including the final terms of reference and timing of the review, before the end of this year.

When the review is completed and the Government has considered its recommendations, I will issue CASA with a new strategic direction under Section 12A of the Civil Aviation Act 1988.

The Government is also committed to delivering improvements to CASA’s structure and governance arrangements to enhance the organisation’s role as Australia’s aviation safety regulator.

We will appoint two additional members to the CASA Board –and strengthen its aviation skills and experience to ensure the Board is well-placed to oversee CASA’s new strategic direction.

We will also enhance the role of the independent CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner (ICC) and improve the ICC’s reporting and resourcing arrangements as required.

The Government is also aware of significant pressures being placed on the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s resources.

We will ensure that the Chief Commissioner of the Bureau can request additional funding, on a needs basis, to ensure a high standard of investigations is maintained, particularly when a large number of investigations are required.

Air Traffic Management

Nothing is of course more welcome in any industry than growth – but we clearly need to ensure that growth in air traffic is safely managed in our skies and on the ground.

We are experiencing delays at our major capital city airports – especially Brisbane and Perth – as they struggle to meet growing international and domestic demand.

And of course the resources sector will continue to create challenges for our air traffic management system – especially peak period demand associated with fly-in and fly-out operations.

These and other air traffic management issues demand an integrated response from airport and airline operators and Government agencies.

The Government’s aviation policy has outlined several areas where we can help improve Australia’s air traffic management system.

Undoubtedly, the single most significant step for air traffic management in Australia in the future will be the implementation of a new national air traffic control (ATC) system.

This project is being progressed jointly by Airservices Australia and the Department of Defence and a request for tender is currently out with industry.

A harmonised civil and aviation air traffic system will not only provide greater operational efficiencies, but ensure seamless compatibility with other systems in Australia’s regional neighbourhood.

These harmonised systems will accommodate future air traffic in the region – which is expected to grow by more than 50 per cent over the anticipated life of the new air traffic system platform.

Defence is clearly a key stakeholder in Australian aviation.

I am looking forward to working with my colleague, the Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon David Johnston, in supporting our agencies joint commitment to a harmonised national air traffic system.

As part of the broader response needed to improve air traffic management, I also welcome and support Airservices’ efforts, through its Airport Capacity Enhancement program, to enhance the efficiency of airport operations especially at Brisbane, Perth and Melbourne.

I look forward to the program’s extension into other major airports – including Sydney.

Future development at Sydney Airport will of course be informed by the Sydney Airport master plan due to be provided to the Government for consideration in December this year.
Infrastructure investment is a key part of improved air traffic management – and hence a priority for this Government.

Aviation Security

Aviation security is a close companion of air safety.

The Government recognises that the ‘one size fits all’ approach in aviation security does not always produce the best outcome.

We will therefore work to ensure that security measures are appropriate to the level of risk – without imposing unnecessary cost burdens or affecting the viability of services.

Requirements should be implemented in a practical and common sense way – while of course ensuring that aviation security is not comprised.

Regulatory reform in this area will allow compliance resources to be better directed to higher-risk infrastructure as the industry continues to grow.

The Government is also committed to ensuring all agencies work collaboratively and cooperatively with industry to, where possible, remove duplicated and unnecessary regulatory requirements.

Where practicable, we will also explore the use of non-regulatory approaches. After all, this government is committed to reduce the cost of government red tape on industry by $1 billion a year.

I expect my Department to play a strong role in assisting industry to implement security requirements in a common sense manner that is fit for purpose.

General Aviation (GA)

As a regional Australian I am well aware of the importance of a healthy general aviation sector.

The sector provides a very diverse range of services – ranging from charter flights, search and rescue, surveying and aerial photography, aero medical services and pilot training.

These are all important parts of our diverse Australian aviation industry.

We note industry concerns about the state of general aviation in Australia and at the same time recognise the potential opportunities for the industry to generate jobs, stimulate economic growth and create investment opportunities.

We are committed to establishing a regulatory regime that reflects best practice safety arrangements and is appropriate to the risks.

To this end, the Government will re-establish a regular dialogue with the GA sector to address industry issues – and agree on priority areas as part of a revitalised GA action agenda.

People and Technology

The continuing growth in Australian and international aviation means that Government and industry will need to continue to invest in our people and in technology to meet future demand.

Hence the theme of this conference – People and Technology – could not be more appropriate.

This Government supports a competitive and innovative aviation sector and the vital economic role in plays in Australia particularly for our tourism and other export industries.

It is through a skilled and well trained workforce and that workforce’s effective use of technology, that we can ensure our Australian aviation industry can meet future growth in the international and domestic aviation market.

I have therefore asked my Department to undertake a study into the state of the workforce in the aviation industry to inform future skills development and training policies.

A review of skills and workforce requirements across the aviation industry will provide an evidence based and coordinated approach to training and workforce development to meet industry needs.

The review is likely to encompass a broad range of aviation occupations including pilots, cabin crew, air traffic controllers, aircraft maintenance and engineering, avionics manufacture and repair, aviation security and airport operations.

It will also assist the aviation training industry in taking advantage of international opportunities presented by the strong aviation growth in the Asia-Pacific region.

The future is likely to be challenging, and we need to ensure that we plan effectively — but we cannot do this without workforce planning and training programs to provide us with a clear overall picture of the industry.


The Australian Government is determined to play its part in ensuring that Australia has a safer and more competitive aviation sector – and one that will continue to advance the national interest in the years and decades ahead.

We will work with our Government agencies, all sectors, and our international partners to support best practice in aviation safety.

I wish everyone involved in Safeskies 2013 a successful and rewarding conference.

Thank you very much – and enjoy the next two days.


Brett Heffernan
Senior Media Advisor
Office of the Hon Warren Truss MP
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development
P: 02 6277 7680 | M: 0467 650 020


This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.

Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 11:04   #203 (permalink)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 1,458
So basically he’s saying nothing will change. I love all the weasel words over GA’s role & future:

We note industry concerns about the state of general aviation in Australia and at the same time recognise the potential opportunities for the industry to generate jobs, stimulate economic growth and create investment opportunities.

We are committed to establishing a regulatory regime that reflects best practice safety arrangements and is appropriate to the risks.

(My underlining)


We’ve heard all your whinging, but the new rules are coming and they aint changing. So bend over.


Horatio Leafblower is offline Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 11:42   #204 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 1,841

Like the previous government, this government does not intend to do anything substantial to change the regulation of aviation in Australia.

Creampuff is online now Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 13:51   #205 (permalink)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 669
What a load of wank. The speach was written by some bureaucratic footstool in a darkened room, and delivered by Truss at a conference attended by some of the worst culprits of aviation decline in this country’s history. Is it April 1?
The first few weeks of this new governments term has seen a repeat of the arrogance and ineptitude shown by Labor, and is a good indicator of what is to come – NOTHING. These guys are just as pathetic as the crappiest of pathological airlines, hell bent on sweeping everything under the biggest piece of plush pile carpet they can find.
Although I am just a mere commercial pilot and only deal with the occasional FOI, I feel for those in my airline who have to meander through the regulator maze of crap on a daily basis. Comments from creampuff, horatio, lookleft and up-into-the-air pretty much sums up the feeling of where we are headed, and it isn’t pretty.
So you know what, let the government and its regulatory bodies continue to apply lipstick to the pig. Let them sit back, lie and deceive to their hearts content because one day a large metal tube will end up in a firey ball in one of their electorates and lets watch them sweat it out then. I don’t want to see that but I reckon it is becoming more likely by the day. We should rebrand the ICAO risk matrix and call it the Australian aviation risk matrix and see where CASA sits on the likelihood scale? Anyone thinking the red zone, at a 5A……
Cactusjack is offline Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 16:31   #206 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 679
It is about votes, now they are in the object is to stay in power, so nothing controversial, keep all things that might impinge on public safety well tucked away from the public at large don’t rock the boat.

Safety Road, Rail or Air will not change under Truss, it will get the same treatment as Albo did and all before him Anderson et al.

No change means no political commentary in the general press , who cares what the operators of small aircraft think.

T28D is online now Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 18:27   #207 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Godzone Land
Age: 45
Posts: 5,659
WE should all get FAA licences, register a company inTexas/Delaware or somewhere convenient, Cayman Islands……hey now ya thinking Jaba….and remove the entire (or as much as possible) the GA fleet to N rego.

Would do us and CASA a favour

By the way my FAA paperwork is in. Probably in a pile of 2 weeks worth of mail in OKC


Jabawocky is offline Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 21:10   #208 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 768
I think the main stumbling block is FAA licenced LAME’s
Old Akro is offline Report Post Reply
Old 18th Oct 2013, 11:01   #209 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 995
“Yes Minister”–head bureaucrat regaining control!

Warning long post!

The Truss speech has the Kingcrat’s grubby (and probably bloody) little paws written all over it. What it shows is that now all the rhetoric of the election campaign is over the time for getting down to governing is here and the DoIT head sherang has got the rope around the neck of his minister and is herding him towards the top paddock.

Who can blame him after all he has an awful lot to lose (namely his job) if he was to simply adopt the government stated policy as writ and allow the IOS direct control of his minister. The Kingcrat if nothing more is a true survivor, he has survived in the top job through various changes of government and has been a loyal servant to Truss before.

The DoIT head has also been around for a good chunk of the much criticised reg reform program and it would be suicidal for him to simply administer the wishes of the growing and unruly masses of industry who have the audacity to suggest that we now adopt the NZed regs….no bureaucrat could survive being partly responsible for wasting 200 million plus of taxpayers money.

That is the conundrum facing Truss because, much like FF’s exploitation of the ‘mystique of aviation’ as a tool to bluff and keep government’s on side, so too does the Minister rely on the entrenched head of DoIT. If real change was to ever occur with strong ‘political will’, then the Coalition should have been sourcing and then grooming a top bureaucrat for the job a long time before the election. When they took back government and first announced the standard be-headings of head bureaucrats,Kingcrat should have been one of them.

Well that chance has been lost but it isn’t all bad news because although watered down the Truss speech does show a shift in the Kingcrat’s standard spin and that he is accepting of the fact that there needs to be change and soon. He also knows that the dirt file is growing on him (e.g. QON 1 of the last Senate Estimates) and that he is still facing a hostile group of Senators that could continue to grow in numbers come July next year. {The Senators and Minister also know that the effect of the PelAir enquiry was to put all of them on notice and the clockis effectively ticking.}

And then there is Senator Fawcett (and despite what Creamy says about him being a Liberal stooge and beholden to party politics), a Senator is a different animal not so obligated to holding the party line and more free to speak their mind in regards to national and state interest. {Example of this in recent years would be Doug Cameron and more in the past Bill Heffernan.}

DF has already shown his intentions in numerous Senate Estimates hearings and of course in the introduction to the Senate of the PelAir report… Australia’s travelling public and our aviation industries deserve better….I look forward to the reforms that either this government or the next will bring.”

There is also the small subject of the previous government’s aviation white paper, which the DoIT head will have some serious concerns about because he knows that the Coalition government will be amending it with some major policy changes…remember this from last Estimates:

Senator FAWCETT: In broad terms, dealing with the regulation that CASA oversights specifically, particularly in the context of a regulatory process that has now stretched over a decade, and with changes of CEOs or directors of aviation safety there has been quite a change in approach to that, not just the current but previous. I am looking to understand what strategic guidance, as in long-term vision, comes from the policy area of your department, Mr Mrdak, that guides the people who are involved in regulatory reform in how the government wishes that go forward? Which stakeholders are involved? Can you talk me through how you set the policy directions for that?
Mr Mrdak: The first priority of the aviation white paper is to bring a lot of that regulatory reform process to a conclusion. You are absolutely right, it is a process which started almost a decade and a half ago with various guises. It has been through various iterations. The white paper actually set out an intention to bring some of the key suites of regulatory documents to a close. What we have been involved with is trying to do that.
The stakeholders involved are diverse depending the regulatory package involved be it maintenance, pilot licensing or whatever. There has been a diversity of industry interest. The big elements like the maintenance suite for the heavy end of the industry will come into play on 1 July with the changes. There are other suites which will come together.

The drafting process is nearly complete for just about all of the packages now. We threw additional resources to pay for drafters and the legal processes to expedite that. I think the bulk of the package is now due to be completed by the end of this calendar year. They have been through various consultative processes.

You are right, what we have tried to do is get a suite of modern regulations that get the right balance for CASA in terms of industry behaviour and the like. We try to be prescriptive where we need to be but less prescriptive wherever we can. We certainly involve ourselves in that element. Much of our work over the next two years has to be trying to keep that suite of regulatory reform documents coming to a conclusion.

Senator FAWCETT: One of the issues we have seen is that under Mr Byron, for example, there was very much an approach saying industry are the current practitioners and they probably know best so let them bring forward a solution. If CASA has a safety case as to why that should not be adopted then they can argue that out. It appears now from feedback we are getting from industry that that focus has swung more to ‘we will consult but at the end of the day CASA will do what it sees fit’. That is a fairly substantial change in direction. I am wondering was that direction set by policy from your level or was that left largely to the discretion to the director of aviation safety?

Mr Mrdak: To be honest I suspect some of the change of focus has come through industry consultation. I know in some of the regulatory suites certain segments of industry have sought greater certainty including in the maintenance suite. They were looking for much more prescription around some of the elements to end what they saw as some uncertainty for them in how the regulations will be implemented. I think that process has come from industry feedback from certain parties about what they want to see in the regulatory focus. The simple adoption of a safety management system approach in certain areas was not going to meet the needs of some levels of the industry.

Senator FAWCETT: The concern, though, is what I am hearing from certain sections of the industry—and EMS is one, on the rotary side. I did not get time to confirm this with Mr McCormick today, but my understanding is that the person in CASA who is writing the regulatory reform has a general aviation fixed-wing background and a light helicopter conversion, but no experience in multi-engine IFR helicopters or in the EMS industry, and yet is now trying to tell operators throughout that industry what their future regulations and operating standards are going to look like. They are very unhappy with that. So my question comes back: why has there been this change to basically have CASA dictating what is going to occur as opposed to constructively engaging with industry? Is that a policy that has come from government or is it something that has just evolved with changes of personality?

Mr Mrdak: I do not know the specifics of that particular regulatory regime. I am just not familiar with that level of detail. I would have to seek advice from Mr McCormick in relation to that matter. I would say it is problem in more likely to be the latter. It probably has evolved as the circumstances of the consultation, industry views and CASA views have formed. But I cannot comment on that specific example, I am sorry.

And then there is possibly the most revealing AQON from the last Estimates that, although appearing as a full and comprehensive answer, really is just another carefully constructed, obfuscated (with no real substance) answer. This answer goes directly to the performance of the department under Albo and Labor’s aviation white paper:

QON 81 Aviation & Airports
Senator Fawcett asked:
Senator FAWCETT: When can the parliament expect to see some of the updates that you have been saying the minister has been getting about the various implementation of the white paper?

Mr Mrdak: We can certainly provide you some advice on the status of the measures. They range, as I said. We have been implementing many measures, such as our approach to bilateral negotiations, right through to the suite of regulatory measures and NASAG. There is a lot. I think today legislation was introduced to the House of Representatives concerning particular elements of protection of assets and the like. A range of legislation has been introduced. We are well progressed in most elements of the white paper. Also, the real achievement of the white paper was to bring together for the first time the comprehensive policy positions around the full suite of industry measures covering aviation and provide a range of objectives going forward. That is where the white paper has served a very good purpose.

Senator FAWCETT: Certainly, either individually or as a committee member, I would welcome a more detailed update or briefing.

Mr Mrdak: We would be happy to do that for you.

Here’s a link for the weasel worded (lots of them) answer:AQON 81 pg 5

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 18th Oct 2013, 12:59   #210 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 1,841
And then there is Senator Fawcett (and despite what Creamy says about him being a Liberal stooge and beholden to party politics) …

I don’t think I’ve ever used those words to describe Senator Fawcett.

That said, the fact is that Senator Fawcett and his fellow coalition members (like Senator Heffernan) are obliged to support party policy, except in relation to the rare issues on which the party permits a conscious vote. That’s not being a ‘stooge’. That’s being a member of a political party.

But let’s assume they start ‘freelancing’. Other than huffing and puffing at Senate Committee hearings, what do you think the likes of Senators Fawcett and Heffernan are going to actually do to bring about actual change?

Creampuff is online now Report Post Reply
Unread 18th Oct 2013, 16:18   #211 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 54
Posts: 26
The legacy of inaction and contempt continues

What a joke. The Skulls initial comments ‘indicated’ the amount for Sky Sentinel was $37,500. But now we see the real costs totalled $2, 419,157! Again it has been mentioned that the WA Inspector who sold this lemon to CAsA is in fact a very close mate of TF, who we of course know is a robust member of the GWM. Toot toot all aboard the gravy train!
What makes matters worse is that Sky Sentinel was a knee jerk reaction to PelAir, and CAsA tried to cover their crooked as#es by rushing in a crap system. The system, to put it bluntly, is complete pony pooh. It is inefficient, doesn’t work, everybody complains about how lethargic and useless it is (much like a CAsA executive) and of course this is just another example of taxpayer money wasted by an inept bunch of trough gorging CAsA executives, and at least one of them in this case has made sure a mate is well looked after. Would love to see where the money trail finally ends??
FFS this shonky mob of self made millionaires is completely out of control. Forget pot plant expenditure. Try I.T contracts which weren’t tendered, yet given to ‘mates’. Oh the humanity, does their moral compass know any bounds? No, I didn’t think so.
And by the way, how is TF’s brother-in-law going now he is the QA manager in Melbourne? Removed from the position of field office manager due to harassment charges, which HR buried of course. No worries, we will reward the brother-in-law with more money and extra travel instead. After all, he is related to the GWM! If you doubt the validity of this, don’t. It is a 100% fact.
These executives are averaging $400k per year yet their greed and love of taxpayer perks governs and dictates everything they do. Mr Truss, why not just hand them the keys to the reserve banks money printing machines and let them fill their pockets, its what they do anyway? Besides Mr Truss, we all know what your approach on this matter will be don’t we? Yup, grab the broom, sweep it all away and place a type of ‘media blackout’ on the reporting of Casa matters, much like with the boat people!

And as for Hempel. Another joke! Gerrard C (who is now a CAsA executive trough swiller) was a supporter of Hempel at Archerfield when he was running the place. An element of Hempels doctors who used to supply his medical certificates were signed off by Hempel as pilots. Plus Hempel enjoyed sharing some of his ‘extra curricular’ activities with a CAsA employee who coincidentally was walked out the door by the Feds one robust day at CAsA’s old Brisbane office for being involved in those same activities as Hempel. And coincidentally that employee was very close to Hempel and he influenced CAsA’s turning of a blind eye to Hempel overall! Oh dear, the cat is out of the bag, Flyingfiend (Hi Adam) will be scrambling to bury this information. Sorry MODS, CAsA fireworks inbound and on short finals!

Hmmm, what next. Oh yes, Transair and R.Collins. Now that is an interesting story indeed. But to be told at a later date. For now I would suggest those in a position to do so grab the shovel, open the CAsA cold case up wide and start digging again. The evidence is out there, it’s just that it will take a forensic expert (or perhaps an astute Xenophon) to dig through all the protective barriers to reach the treasure below. Lockhart is an open wound. Collins and Wright were ‘besties’ and there is a monumental cloud, a thunderhead of doubt that still shrouds this accident.

P.S. Jmac, I have been accurately told that you have been sending the employment feelers out around town! Good work mate. I am sure somebody, although stupidly, will hire you come March 2014. Maybe you can go and consult with Quinn and Collins? Although I would say kick boxing or UFC is more your style.

Creampuff, you offer more huff and puff than anybody. No solutions, no ideas, just criticism. Lame my friend, lame and pure tautology.

Anyway, must go check the fax machine, 1659 is rolling around shortly. And I might check Seek Executive and Linkedin for the new aviation adviser position, or one of the two board positions.


Last edited by CASAweary; 18th Oct 2013 at 16:21.

CASAweary is offline Report Post Reply
Unread 18th Oct 2013, 16:32   #212 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n’est nulle part
Posts: 1,792
Anyway, must go check the fax machine, 1659 is rolling around shortly

You probably beat them to it.

You seem to have covered it all.

Frank Arouet is offline Report Post Reply
Unread 18th Oct 2013, 17:31   #213 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 60
Posts: 401
the problem is that anyone can point out that there is a problem.
what is needed is for people to point out the solution.
dubbleyew eight is online now Report Post Reply
Unread 18th Oct 2013, 17:35   #214 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 1,841
Creampuff, you offer more huff and puff than anybody. No solutions, no ideas, just criticism. Lame my friend, lame and pure tautology.

Having reviewed your post twice (which will be removed shortly, to avoid liability for defamation), I still see all criticism and no solutions.

I was going to use that metaphor about pots and kettles, but I anticipate you wouldn’t understand it and, in any event, it’s not applicable. I have posted, on numerous occasions, my suggested solutions.

Creampuff is online now Report Post Reply