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


Good reads

Oil Prices



More Reading

November 2013:

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30th Oct 2013, 09:32   #1601 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 396
Kharon, you got there first. atsb has it’s own version of reality.

Beyond reason!Senate estimates going to be interesting. The inquiry wasn’t very kind to mr beaker.

halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline Report Post Reply
Old 31st Oct 2013, 07:14   #1602 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,209
Willyleaks special report.

There is the official version:-

We can expect to continue to work in a resource-constrained environment during the foreseeable future and will need to be creative in finding ways to deliver the high quality expected by the government and the Australian public. Our responsibilities have grown in the rail sector and we are also acutely conscious of the effect on our available resources of the demands of one or more complex investigations. [“atsb statement”]

Then, from deep within the tin bins laden with writing department drafts; Willyleaks anonymously received what some be believe to be the ‘original draft’. While we are unable to verify that the document was indeed found in a tin-bin at ATSB HQ, were able to identify the writer through DNA analysis of the drool patches about the $$$ signs.

We intend to spend as little as possible while maintaining the facade of investigating air accidents. We do need to be ‘creative’ in order to do this successfully. This can be effectively achieved by grabbing the first available straw then massaging it as the foundation for a brief technical analysis. As very few of the general public or our political masters are capable of understanding any of the issues, we can make a considerable saving by minimising the research and maximising the creative writing initiative.

We intend to focus on spending the railways budget; the boys over at CASA have a bigger budget for aviation. We can provide significant savings by continuing to work with CASA and allowing them to complete the few aviation reports we eventually finish. This proven system also avoids the need to make those nasty, expensive embarrassing safety recommendations. To achieve this end; we shall continue to comply with our agreed mandate and only use the Wodger wecommended weport writing system.

Safe bonuses for all..

Sponsor: the IOS chapter for ‘A Thriving Surplus Budget’…..

Last edited by Kharon; 31st Oct 2013 at 08:05. Reason: [Ap] plausible deniability ?, anyone.

Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 31st Oct 2013, 08:37   #1603 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 485
The ATSB has never been resourced to undertake investigations into every accident or incident that occurs.

Rather, it is necessary for us to be strategic, investigating those accidents and incidents that are likely to yield safety improvements for transport operators and the travelling public.

Really Mr Dolan?

Here’s some of the Aviation safety investigations & reports from the ATSB website:

– AO-2013-194 Wheels up landing involving a Rockwell 114, VH-AYH, Camden Airport, NSW on 27 October 2013 (Unknown type of operation according to the ATSB website – WTF??????)
– AO-2013-188 Loss of control on ground involving Air Tractor AT-502B, VH-FLH, near Deniliquin, NSW on 21 October 2013
– AO-2013-191 Wheels-up landing involving Beech Baron aircraft, VH-TLP at St. Helens aerodrome, Tas. 20 October 2013 (Private Operation)
– AO-2013-174 Collision with terrain involving Rand Robinson KR-2, VH-CTE, 14 km W Tumut Airport NSW on 5 October 2013 (Private Operation)
– AO-2013-158 Collision with terrain involving Lancair Legacy, VH-ALP at Geraldton Airport, WA on 18 September 2013 (General Aviation according to the ATSB)
– AO-2013-168 Total power loss involving a Piper PA-28-161, VH-CCQ, 9 km N of Cunnamulla Airport, QLD, 1 October 2013 (General Aviation according to the ATSB)
– AO-2013-190 Ground event involving DH-82 Tiger Moth, VH-RAY, 19 km NNE Coffs Harbour, NSW, 23 September 2013 (Private Operation)
– AO-2013-164 Total power loss involving a Piper PA-28-140, VH-RVJ, Kilcoy (ALA), Qld., 22 September 2013 (Private Operation)
– AO-2013-092 Total power loss involving a Mooney M20J, VH-NFP, at Canberra Airport, ACT, 2 June 2013 (Private Operation)

As far as I can see, the ‘travelling public’ wasn’t involved in any of these events.

Last edited by SIUYA; 31st Oct 2013 at 08:39.

SIUYA is offline Report Post Reply
Old 31st Oct 2013, 21:31   #1604 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,029
A.R.R.T rhymes with F.A.R.T.(S)!

Seems that the IOS are not the only ones strolling through the 192 page ATsBeancounter Beaker’s spinneaucracy….but I’m a little miffed by what the article from the MMSM (Murdoch mainstream media) is actually attempting to highlight….Australia’s air accident rate revealed in new report

…maybe SC is just trying to help us out by summarising and deciphering the Beaker spin???

Speaking of m..m..m..mandatory reporting!! And as it is that time of the year for government agencies to have completed their annual reports (31/10/13)…where oh where is Fort Fumble’s AR?? The mind boggles with all possible permutations!

Oh well..while we’re all waiting Para 377 on the Hempel thread drew my attention to a recently released 2054 page FF FOI doc (DAME’s Handbook). Now I’ve no doubt that the DAME Handbook (handbook if you’re a Giant ) is a most absorbing informative read but a read that for now I’ll put on the backburner (till tomorrow at least).

However what caught my attention on FF’s disclosure log was an entry for July: f13-4067

Now this document may have been dredged up elsewhere on here (and is probably more relevant to Creamy’s Reg Reform thread) but many of the findings and recommendations of the ARRT in 2007 have a familiar theme to this and many other threads.

Here is a couple of examples:

The Taskforce agreed that the Government’s aviation agencies can learn from these specific examples and should enhance existing or implement new procedures to ensure transparency and adequate industry awareness of new initiatives. In addition, the consultation models of leading overseas aviation countries should be considered when developing a best practice model


Recommendation 4: The Government’s aviation agencies review and enhance existing consultation arrangements and implement new procedures where warranted to ensure transparency and adequate industry awareness of new initiatives.&
The Taskforce also considered the broader effectiveness of the SCC itself and took advice from Mr Graham, who has chaired the Committee since 2006. The Taskforce agreed there would be value in CASA monitoring its regulatory development processes and the use of joint CASA/industry project teams to develop regulatory policy proposals followed by more focused consultations through the SCC. The Taskforce further considered views on the role of the full SCC that meets in plenary three or four times per year.

The Taskforce considered that the regulatory development process should be the subject of on-going review and evaluation in order to make the best use of the knowledge and abilities of SCC members and enhance the interaction between the CASA/industry project teams and the SCC subcommittees and working groups. The Taskforce noted that the role of the full SCC could also be reconsidered in this light.

Recommendation 6: CASA monitor the regulation development process using joint CASA/industry project teams and continue to review the role of the SCC in this process, in order to achieve further effectiveness and efficiency gains.

Here is a finding and recommendation that is particularly relevant to a recently released ATsB report on LOS [Loss of Seperation] incidents and the thread ATSB Concerned over Military Control Loss of Separation Events

Military Airspace
The Taskforce discussed an issue raised by various sectors of the aviation industry in relation to military aerodromes and civilian access to military airspace. The airspace and air traffic control service provision for civilian aircraft at Williamtown air base near Newcastle being a case in point.The Taskforce Members agreed that this had been an issue for quite some time and the risk profile of the aerodrome was increasing, noting the matter was complex with numerous significant stakeholders. The Taskforce agreed that the matter should be raised at very senior levels with the RAAF to ensure that a solution could be agreed and implemented as soon as possible.Given the history of this matter a solution will only be forthcoming if the respective Ministers oversee and reach agreement on a new approach. As part of these discussions, the safety of the travelling public at aerodromes such as Williamtown needs to be considered as the first priority, without limiting Regular Public Transport growth or necessarily changing the status of the aerodrome.

Recommendation 10: The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government raise concerns about air traffic and airspace management at Williamtown and other military aerodromes with the Minister for Defence, to ensure that safe and reasonable practices are implemented to protect civilian aircraft and fare paying passengers in accordance with existing safety principles.

Well I’m sure there are others on here that can mine some other gems from this comprehensive and historical ARRT report…so fill your boots (or not)!

Q/ Wonder who (and why) FOI’d the ARRT report??

Observation: The ARRT report also makes you realise how much the previous Labor governments were totally in the wilderness when it came to actually governing. Six years of stagnation within the industry while the Minister let the bureaucracy run rampant and totally unaccounted for.

Former Labor Senator Richo sums it up best in regards to accountability…” Keep political power where the buck stops: with the elected minister “…


One of the hallmarks of pretty well all of those ministers was their capacity for overruling departmental advice. The minister is the elected person, with the end result of all decision-making resting with them. The buck should stop with the minister.On many occasions I rejected the advice I received from my various departments. I recall writing “rubbish” or “nonsense” on the tops of pages sent to me.

A good minister should not abrogate the responsibility of office. If a minister simply chooses to tick the box on every piece of advice received then there has been a power shift to unelected, unseen and indeed faceless people. Bureaucrats are not elected. Their job is to advise the minister and they will sometimes get things wrong.

A minister should not feel constrained in treating that advice.

Sage advice…so Trusster take heed mate and perhaps refer to the ARRT report after taking advice from the Kingcrat??

Last edited by Sarcs; 1st Nov 2013 at 12:31.

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 1st Nov 2013, 18:24   #1605 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 488
casa avoids scrutiny

Good catch sarco: It appears here as well:

Aviation Regulation Review 2007 | Assistance to the Aviation Industry

It won’t last long on the casa disclosure log.

Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 1st Nov 2013, 20:52   #1606 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,029
Fort Fumble 200pg AR slides in the back door!

Warning short post coming while I reach for a bucket..Well FF have finally put out their spin fest for 2012-13 and if you can get past page one without feeling sick you’re doing better than me :

Goal 1:Comprehensive,consistent and effective regulation to enhance aviationsafety CASA achieved 84 per cent of the measures against this goal, anda further 16 per cent are progressing with managed delays.

CASA enhanced aviation safety through comprehensive, consistentand effective regulation by:

+implementing the certificate management team structure and theintroduction of a new CASA Surveillance Manual in all regional offices
+using a new fast-time simulation tool to support futureAustralian airspace modelling
+completing the first phase of transition to new maintenanceregulations by regular public transport operators and associated maintenanceorganisations and the completion of the maintenance personnel licensing suiteof regulations.

See pages 34 to 44 for detailed information outlininginitiatives, measures and progress against this goal.

Goal 2: Good governance andcontinuous improvement of organisational efficiency

With 78 per cent of the measures against this goal achieved, and19 per cent progressing with managed delays, CASA exercised good governance andcontinuous improvement by:

+completing the final stage of the organisation’s learningmanagement system with the introduction of Aviation Worx (see page 115).
+introducing new fraud and ethics, records management, workplacehealth and safety, and equity and diversity e-learning modules for completionby all new staff
+achieving an 8.9 out of 10 rating in the Comcover riskmanagement benchmarking survey.
See pages 45 to 52 for detailed information outlininginitiatives, measures and progress against this goal.

Goal 3: Effectiveand appropriate relationships with the wider aviation community

CASA has achieved 97 per cent of the measures against the goalof effective and appropriate relationships with the wider aviation communitythrough:

+enhancing CASA’s suite of user-friendly applications andinteractive multimedia products, with the introduction of a YouTube channel anda project to increase use of tablet technology
+continued participation in International Civil AviationOrganization panels and study groups
+increasing international engagement, including memorandums ofunderstanding signed with China and Singapore.
See pages 52 to 60 for detailed information outlininginitiatives, measures and progress against this goal.

Ahhh…bollocks! No comment..

ps Page 102-103 (if you must) deals with External Scrutiny i.e. those pesky Senators, Coroners etc.

Last edited by Sarcs; 1st Nov 2013 at 21:16.

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 4th Nov 2013, 06:42   #1607 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,209
Sarcs 1 – “K” 0.

Now, the infamous soft white paper was at least useful and would burn nicely. But this new shiny stuff is of no practical value whatsoever.

When it was published I thought, Oh ho, here’s a bit of fun, there has got to be some howlers within which can be strung together, for the amusement of the fellahin, the hoi polloi and the IOS. Nope – sorry: by page 14 I was slightly nauseous; at page 15 reaching for a bucket and I lost my lunch at the end of page 16.

After a short recovery I gamely cherry picked between pages 77 and 102, but alas, the feeling of nausea and ennui returned. Hence the search for a more practical application.The ATSB report was at least bearable and worthy of some attention; the ATSB troops will try to wright the ship and will, with qualified leadership revert to a world class safety authority.

But, if Truss swallows any of the CASA rubbish, his advisors need to be fired or handed over to the AFP for perpetrating serious fraud. Never has a printed document revealed the absolute hopelessness of attempting to recover an expensive department to a point where it can be useful. The bare faced deception now published at great expense, the complicity of those who wrote it and the perfect arrogant contempt for government, industry and the taxpayer beggars belief (or reinforces it). Gods help the next DAS who turns up with less than a SWAT team, and a bus load of new faces, to start again.

CJ# 247 –”But of great humour was the CASA spin, the performance measures (complete load of poo) and the ‘delays being managed’ including percentages, oh my god, you have to be kidding us right?”
CJ # 247 –”If they consider Certificate Management Teams and the completion of the 12 year re-write of the crap SPM to be a success then our industry is in worse shape than even the most diehard critic realizes. (my bold).

Someone should tell the senior Truss, caveat emptor, very very heavy emphasis on caveat. Guilty by association is still on the statutes.

Wiki – Caveat emptor is Latin for “Let the buyer beware” (from caveat, “may he beware”, the subjunctive of cavere, “to beware” + emptor, “buyer”).


Sarcs # 1604 “However what caught my attention on FF’s disclosure log was an entry for July: f13-4067
Now this document may have been dredged up elsewhere on here (and is probably more relevant to Creamy’s Reg Reform thread) but many of the findings and recommendations of the ARRT in 2007 have a familiar theme to this and many other threads.

When I first read the quote, it was of passing interest; but it may be the catch of the year. Something is going on; had a beer with P7 on Saturday (I.O.U.) he mentioned some of his crew had telephone calls from the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office, seeking permission to release documents under FOI.

While the stuff wasn’t ‘ancient’ history, it was not ‘fresh’. As Al Capone said, once is circumstance, twice is happenstance, three times is enemy action. I wonder what’s going on???. Someone is digging deep. Insert Kelpie::: endit……

Last edited by Kharon; 4th Nov 2013 at 07:16. Reason: Add a forgotten bit.

Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 4th Nov 2013, 07:51   #1608 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Not Brisbane
Posts: 48

Often come up away (indeed mostly) from #Kharon posts (and his/her coterie) bemused, bewildered and mystified. I think of his/her posts as Churchill said in another context: “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”.

But, just when I thought this unintelligible series of in-jokes and code-words could get no worse……to see on these pages one of the said coterie quoting Richardson as some guide to Ministerial probity was a new low (or high if we’re looking at the farce levels”. An absolute joke.

You may have valid points…..even by accident some of what you’re saying could be right….but PULEEEEZE, get real both on both readability and believability so the rest of us can see what you’re on about. Might even end up a supporter!!

Algie is offline Report Post Reply
Old 4th Nov 2013, 08:30   #1609 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,209
Drift – with moderator indulgence.

It really is very, very simple Algie; just don’t read my twiddles, if they offend thee so much.

But, if you must, then read everyone’s posts on the page. Then, you will see that the current topic is the CASA report; recently published, read by and commented on by those with an intelligent interest of how aviation is managed.

Despite your endless, tedious, easily ignored personal attacks, achieving nothing apart from making you appear slightly fatuous, you could use that energy, actually do the reading and contribute to the topic.

As for your support; well, there must be a place somewhere on your planet where the sun don’t shine; apply therein.

Churchill’s potent spirit of perseverance and determination is best summed up in one of his own maxims: “We must just KBO.” The initials stood for “Keep Buggering On.”8 Churchill understood the dangers of defeatism and poor morale as a soldier and leader, so he set the example needed to inspire others around him… and he kept “buggering on.”

Drift off – Ta,…

Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 4th Nov 2013, 09:52   #1610 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 656

Algie be reassured that you are not alone in your requests for Plain English Postings, even the Moderator has requested them! The big difference is that the Mods have the ability to lock the thread if they think that the twiddles have become twaddle.If you want to take the advise to read back through the thread, start with post #1521 it might assist with yours (and others) understanding of what is expected.

Last edited by Lookleft; 4th Nov 2013 at 09:54. Reason: Tennis anyone?

Lookleft is offline Report Post Reply
Old 4th Nov 2013, 13:15   #1611 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 488
casa anyone?? what is their obligation?? in this

I have looked at the casa Annual Report.  Come on casa!!

For example, at Page 20:

Parliamentary engagement and accountability

During the reporting period, CASA welcomed the opportunity presented by the parliamentary committee process and its participation in the Senate Standing Committees on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Inquiry into Aviation Accident Investigations in October 2012 and February 2013 to provide our organisational experience and perspective to parliamentary representatives on the 2009 accident at Norfolk Island.

Although no lives were lost in the accident, there is no doubt that the experience has left a lasting legacy for those involved. In my role as Director of Aviation Safety, the safety of all air travellers is paramount and the lessons learned from all accidents and incidents are given the highest priority when making further improvements to the system of aviation safety..

And from this, only the following words answer the Senator’s:

…. on the 2009 accident at Norfolk Island.Although no lives were lost in the accident, there is no doubt that the experience has left a lasting legacy for those involved.

Just 30 words explain away why the committe in part said :

The committee was understandably troubled by allegations that agencies whose role it is to protect and enhance aviation safety were acting in ways which could compromise that safety.It therefore resolved to take all appropriate action to investigate these allegations in order to assure itself, the industry and the travelling public that processes currently in place in CASA and the ATSB are working effectively.

No answer Fort Fumble.

Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 4th Nov 2013 at 13:19.

Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 4th Nov 2013, 14:52   #1612 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n’est nulle part
Posts: 1,814
More Twaddle for Algie!

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 4th Nov 2013 at 14:58. Reason: Twaddle!

Frank Arouet is online now Report Post Reply
Old 6th Nov 2013, 14:11   #1613 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,029
ARRT, Albo’s GWEP and DoIT..(or DIRD) Show Cause Notice!

Trolling through the 61 submissions in the infamous (go nowhere) 2008 Senate Inquiry and while sorting the wheat from the chaff (some good stuff in there from some wise old boffins ), I came across a reference to the ARRT report in James Kimpton’s submission (my bold):

There is the question of the regulatory review, which is keenly awaited by industry. Delays are understood to be due to a shortage of drafters, preventing legal drafting of proposed rules, even though there is apparently a ‘queue’ of regulatory proposals ready for that step. As a stop-gap CASA has sensibly implemented some changes via Civil Aviation Orders.

The Minister’s release of the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review Taskforce’s report in the last few days suggests that thought has been given to expediting the Regulatory Review’s completion and a plan exists for finalising rules the Taskforce considered as ‘priority areas of focus’ within three years, provided the shortage of drafters is overcome. The Taskforce has recommended accordingly.

The Minister’s acceptance of the ‘broad thrust of the recommendations’ is welcome and hopefully this means that the resources which the report acknowledges are required, particularly in the legislative drafting area, will be made available as soon as possible; as the report implicitly acknowledges this will require cooperation from OLDP in the Attorney-General’s Department.

The CEO’s directives with respect to rule-making appear to cover relevant issues and, assuming they are followed, the resulting rules should be well received

So after a bit more digging around I was able to track down Albo’s missive..err press release : Report of the Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce


The Hon Anthony Albanese
Minister for Infrastructure, Transport,
Regional Development and Local Government
Leader of the House
Member for Grayndler
June 26 2008
Today I have released the Report of the Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce. The Taskforce was established by the previous government in response to concern by some aviation industry participants that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority regulatory reform program was not achieving the desired objective of lower cost, less prescriptive and more effective regulation.

I extend the Government’s thanks to the Taskforce chair, Dr Allan Hawke, and Taskforce members Mr Bruce Byron, Mr Jeff Boyd, Mr Rob Graham, Mr David Cox and Mr Dick Smith.

The Taskforce has made recommendations to the new Government on the way forward. I accept the broad thrust of the recommendations and believe the Taskforce’s Report will make a practical contribution to improving aviation safety.

In April, I announced the Government would deliver Australia’s first National Aviation Policy Statement, or White Paper, to chart the future of aviation policy in this country.

This Report will be taken into account in the development of a ‘Green Paper’, to be released in the second half of 2008.

Aviation industry participants will have an ongoing opportunity to comment on regulatory issues as the National Aviation Policy Statement is developed.

I also expect the current Senate inquiry into CASA’s governance will find the Report useful in its deliberations.

The Report is available on the CASA website: http://casa.gov.au/arrt.

Information about the development of Australia’s National Aviation Policy Statement can be found at: www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/nap/index.aspx.

Okay so Albo did acknowledge the practical contribution of the ARRT report and he said that the findings/recommendations would be incorporated in the Great Green Elephant Paper and then onto the GWEP, so did it..??

Well if we go to the Dept(of whatever it is these days) dedicated GWEP website page…err??..it appears that it is gone, obliterated…or shelf-wared perhaps?? Hmm interesting wonder if that is a Trusster or Kingcrat initiative?? Never mind managed to find it here: Aviation Publications.

So looking for a reference to the ARRT report…looking…looking..OK here we go from the GGEP(page 57-58):

Improving CASA’s interactions with industry

CASA consults extensively with industry and this consultation is important in ensuring that industry and the regulator are on the same page with regard to CASA’s regulatory role. The Government’s clear expectation is that CASA’s consultation with the aviation industry will be broadly based, focussed and constructive.

CASA’s current consultative arrangements are, however, time consuming and industry and CASA share a view that entrenched disagreements exposed in the consultation processes should not impede timely regulatory action, including the development of new regulations.

The Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce, chaired by Dr Allan Hawke, addressed the issue of the pace of CASA’s regulatory reform program, which has been underway for close to a decade. The Taskforce, whose report can be accessed at<http://www.casa.gov.au/newrules/taskforce/index.htm>,made a number of recommendations in this area to expedite progress. Many of these are already being addressed and some significant progress has been made recently in finalising important regulations.

The Government is committed to implementing the Taskforce’s key recommendation that the regulatory reform program be completed by 2010-11 and, in consultation with CASA’s management and the new Board, the Government will support reforms to CASA’s consultation with industry that lead to effective, quicker and more transparent safety regulatory outcomes. The aim of these reforms will be to allow industry views to be collected and timely regulatory decisions to be reached that meet the balance of public interest

And the GWEP (page105):

Recognising the importance of regulatory certainty and clarity to the industry, the Government places a high priority on finalising the reform of these three suites of regulations. In response to the findings of the Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce (the Hawke Taskforce), the Government is taking action on a number of fronts to expedite the development of these core regulations and other elements of the current regulatory agenda.

Okay so the ARRT report was referenced and incorporated into the green and white paper, so all good so far! It is also interesting to note that the 2008 Senate Inquiry report was also referenced in the GWEP:

Senate Committee report


The Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (the Senate Committee) conducted an inquiry into the administration of CASA and related matters during the Issues Paper consultation period, and reported publicly on 18 September 2008. The Committee supported the introduction of a CASA Board and revision of CASA’s funding arrangements, and recommended the regulatory reform program be concluded as quickly as possible.

The Committee also recommended that the Auditor-General, an independent statutory officer, consider auditing CASA’s implementation and administration of SMS.

So combine all that lot with Albo’s statement of expectations of the Fort Fumble Board (at appendix C of the GWEP), everything was going along swimmingly…so what happened?? Perhaps we need to issue a Show Cause Notice on the Department (of whatever) as there would appear that there is a number of non-compliances by Kingcrat & co in failing to administer government policy (that had industry goodwill and backing) over a period of at least 5 years…

Hint Senators/Minister: For reference start with the ARRT report recommendations and then the three Senate Inquiry recommendations/findings since.

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 7th Nov 2013, 06:52   #1614 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,209
Great research – Nicely done.

The clever, cunning rubbing out of 2008 inquiry was a masterpiece, sketched in disappointment, painted in heartbreak and sealed with the disappearance of some great submissions.

It’s passing strange though, the same arguments, recommendations and advice keep cropping up, year after year; only to be ground under heel.Keep digging Sarcs, there is a constant factor, join the dots and soon or late, the pattern will emerge from under the rubble; a hint, look at airport management.

Tough question number 1 – Will isolating the pattern help to restore matters aeronautical to where they were six years ago?

TQ 2- Do people like Kimpton, Basket et al remain interested enough to dust off their still valid submissions?

TQ 3- Is there the political courage, horsepower and will to finally implement the repeatedly provided recommendations?

Or will we continue to limp along, denigrated, despised and the butt of some very funny, though painful jokes….


Ben Sandilands – Plane Talking.

A first class example of the problems we face, valid, lucid and timely.

The inherent difficulty for the Australian regulator and airlines is that whatever the merits and strengths of Australian rules and standards, they might not be expressed with the simplicity or unambiguity of the US rule changes, which always seem to be pack more meaning into a smaller number of words, and leave less wriggle room for ‘interpretation’ for want to a better term.

If, stress if this means Australia goes with what is perceived to be a weaker, or less committed, or more convuluted set of rules to address the same requirements as the US rules, there could be some very bad outcomes.

It is strongly in the interests of the flying public, and Australian airlines, and the Minister of the day, to avoid such outcomes.

Don’t worry Ben, it’s all been covered in the soft white paper response to the Senate inquiry. You know, the one before the last, where our aviation interested Senators were covered in it.

“It’s on our to do list”. etc.etc. Tick tock, indeed..

Last edited by Kharon; 7th Nov 2013 at 07:23. Reason: Addendum

Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 7th Nov 2013, 18:48   #1615 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 54
Posts: 30
As transparent as pooh

What? I am shocked. CAsA removing, burying, hiding recommendations or committments made previously from public view, and more worryingly from the Senators?
Treating the Senators, again, with contempt. And all levels of CAsA including the ministers office would have been part of this and would have agreed upon this little sideways sneak.
Looks to me like all the hallmarks of a 20 year veteran intellect and a fat bloated board member have their DNA all over this. Oh so naughty.
Indeed, sneaky sneaky. These crooks will stop at nothing to deflect the truth, hide fact, deceive anybody and everybody and do it with contempt, malice, and total disregard as government employee’s. Shame shame shame.
This is yet another example of how disgraceful they are. The executive level requires rapid removal. All the top dross, the Board, the Ministers footstool, the entire lot of them. Transparency is a word they use, but a word they use in jest.
They sneak current documents into old files and classify them as ‘released’, they make promises vanish and they lie about due process and due dilligence.
They make a mockery of absolutely everything aviation and in return are awarded fat paychecks, bonuses and worldwide business travel. Every single person paying any form of aviation fee or charge should take notice as this is where your hard earned money goes.
Mr Truss, by default and due to your absolute refusal to take the axe to these individuals you are now officially also in contempt of Australian aviation. Mr Albanese’s shoes fit you very well.
CASAweary is offline Report Post Reply
Old 7th Nov 2013, 18:58   #1616 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,029
Devil The ARRT of bureaucratic obfuscation!

Speaking of addendums Ben has one of his own in that last article (my bold)…”This is CASA’s initial response to the new US rules.
We’re in middle of introducing new flying training rules – Parts 141 and 142 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations come into effect on 4 December 2013. These go to the same standards the US are talking about. But we always review our standards in the light of relevant international developments, so it will be part of the normal processes.
Info on new regs here: http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD:c=PC_101716“….Never fear Fort Fumble is here!

Before we launch into writing up the Department SCN, of what appears to be obfuscation of the former government’s aviation policy (the Great White Elephant Paper) and the RRP, we need to first complete a chronology of events leading up to the alleged offending by the Dept.

IMO the initiation of the Hawke Taskforce (ARRT) should be our starting point for the SCN investigation chronology. So any handy intel, titbits, witness statements, etc (that is fully documented of course ) that could be significant to the chain of evidence would be greatly appreciated.

As an example here is a dusted off article (2008) by SC from the Australian:

FORMER Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman Dick Smith has returned more than $10,000 paid to him for taking part in a federal government aviation review, in a protest against the Transport Department’s failure to release “the important, urgent safety recommendations” it produced.

Mr Smith was part of the Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce set up by the Howard government to provide policy advice on the best way of reforming Australia’s aviation regulation over the next five years and what should be done first.

It was chaired by Australian National University chancellor Allan Hawke and included CASA chief Bruce Byron as well as Mr Smith and industry representatives from Qantas and Brindabella Airlines. The taskforce completed its report in December, but it has yet to be released.

In a letter to Transport Department secretary Mike Taylor, Mr Smith said he was refunding the money because “keeping it would be dishonest”.

“I have my copy, which contains important, urgent safety recommendations, but it is stamped ‘under embargo’,” Mr Smith said. “Just why such an important safety document would be embargoed is beyond comprehension to me.”

Mr Smith was reluctant to elaborate on the urgent safety recommendations, but it is understood they include issues such as the need for enhanced ground proximity warning systems and collision avoidance alarms in smaller passenger planes. The report is also believed to have recommended speeding up the slow pace of aviation regulatory reform.

The millionaire aviator believes at least $500,000 was spent on the review and said it now appeared to have been an incredible waste of resources.
He said he understood the report had not been released because Mr Hawke had not been able to meet with Transport Minister Anthony Albanese.

But a spokesman for Mr Albanese said last night that Mr Hawke had met staff from the minister’s office. “Minister Albanese has received the report … and is giving it appropriate consideration,” the spokesman said.
“The Government’s response to the report will be announced in the near future.”

Mr Albanese has ordered the nation’s first white paper on the aviation industry and a Senate committee will conduct a formal inquiry into CASA’s administration next month. The inquiry will look at the effectiveness of administrative reforms undertaken by CASA since 2003 as well as the effectiveness of the authority’s governance structure.

Hmm familiar theme this… “Transport Department’s failure to release “the important, urgent safety recommendations” it produced.

Addendum: Continuing on with thoughtful quotes from the 2008 Inquiry:

(AFAP’s Capt Bryan Murray {sub 40} on the subject of the RRP)

With regard to CASA’s Regulatory Reform Programme (RRP), progress has been slow. The time, energy and money (both public and industry) that have been invested in this project are disproportionate to outcomes. The reasons why there has been such little return on this investment are varied and complex.

We support Bruce Byron’s move towards appointing small specialist working groups for future policy development.

We could learn from our counterparts in New Zealand when they undertook to recast their aviation rules in FAR format. They set a goal to complete the project and did so.

Another common theme…

Last edited by Sarcs; 7th Nov 2013 at 19:48.

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 7th Nov 2013, 20:56   #1617 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by Sarcs View Post
We could learn from our counterparts in New Zealand when they undertook to recast their aviation rules in FAR format. They set a goal to complete the project and did so.

Sorry to repost what I have previously said in this thread, but I do think it is timely… My previous post is now well over 2 years old…

Originally Posted by NZScion View Post

There is a simple solution to this entire mess, and would ensure that the political and legislation issues within CASA are dealt with, and would ensure a uniform high standard in aviation between both Australia and New Zealand.Simply sack everyone at CASA, and expand CAA NZ to have jurisdiction over both countries.

Former CASA employees could apply for new Australian positions within the new Trans Tasman CAA, naturally with their previous experience and performance taken into account when selecting the best people for the job. The poorly written, incomplete and confusing regulations in Australia would be superseded by the New Zealand rules, which are IMHO far clearer and more sensible than the mess of Australian CARs, CAOs, and CASRs.

It has been done before (see Food Standards Australia New Zealand), and could quite easily be done again if there were the political will. There would be natural synergies by having one regulatory structure, delivering savings on costs, and providing a more efficient service to the aviation industries and general public of both Australia and New Zealand.

Then again, I’m just a pilot, what would I possibly know about aviation?

NZScion is offline Report Post Reply
Old 8th Nov 2013, 07:24   #1618 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,209
Somewhere, under the haystack.

“I have my copy, which contains important, urgent safety recommendations, but it is stamped ‘under embargo’,” Mr Smith said. “Just why such an important safety document would be embargoed is beyond comprehension to me.”

‘They’ appear to be jolly good at this, or at least someone is. No matter how much money, time and effort goes into a project or inquiry, no matter how lucid or intelligent the submissions, no matter how important or urgent the topic; the burial is never far away. It’s almost as if any inquiry were a dummy given to a querulous child to shut it up while mummy is busy with the gin bottle; anything to stop the noise, even for a while.

Somehow the minister is always convinced (or advised) that it’s all the rumblings of a minority (IOS) and is really neither urgent or important. Once the minister is pacified, comfortable with the degree of top cover the good work gets shuffled away, under the nearest pile. In this manner when questions are asked, ( e.g. coroner or Senate) there is a container delivered, full of boxes, packed with paper; and somewhere, under the haystack a needle.

The 2008 event not only buried the needle but managed to extinguish the work of some very canny minds which would have made. back then, a significant contribution toward taking Australian aviation into the 20th century. It’s time to acknowledge that the majority of submissions were not provided by the Ills of Society. The time, care and effort required to produce a submission reflects the integrity of the advice made by highly competent, qualified people like:-

Baskett; 50 years at the coal face and providing simple, elegant practical solutions to the identical issues raised today. (get well soon mate).

Kimpton: Intelligent, sound advice from a legal mind. Qualified opinion, clearly framed, cleverly drafted, sane, competent, practical solutions to the identical issues raised today. See here – All his own work.

McKeown: A balanced, polished submission which just keeps hitting nails on the head. Drafted to be comprehended by all, first class sound, competent (free) legal advice.

There were some 40 odd submissions provided in 2008, all made in good faith with a realistic expectation of change.

Someone, somewhere dismissed and disappeared the good work and orchestrated the complete multi handed stropathon we see today, where episodes like Quadrio, Hempell, Pel Air, Canley Vale and important Senate inquiries can, with impunity be ignored or treated with open contempt.

Will the real puppet master stand up, so we may applaud a truly Murky, Machiavellian mind. We loved the glove puppets, but now, your spotlight awaits.


Last edited by Kharon; 9th Nov 2013 at 06:01. Reason: Five by Five NZS

Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Nov 2013, 09:02   #1619 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,209

There were 61 submissions provided in 2008, not 40 odd; eight of those were ‘confidential’. I have not as yet had the time to fully research and read the remainder. Some of those read are just a shameless attack on Byron, some are clearly self centred, a couple just plain silly.

One of the stars (IMO) is the Agricultural boys submission; articulate, on the money and for mine, fair. You could dust this off and whack it into an inquiry tomorrow and it would be equally, if not more valid now, than the day it published.

Samples provided for your general entertainment and amusement.AAAA-2008 :

CASA does not have aviation problems – it has management problems.

P. Rundle-2008. (1)…(2). Both submissions have validity, they are quite hard to read and patience is required, but patience is rewarded. The phantom of the real Venn report, not the CASA embuggered version raises it’s hoary head once more. I reckon finding a copy of the ‘real’ report is job for PAIN. (Waits for blast from P7.a.k.a. TOM.. ).

Anyway, if you can spare the odd half hour, download the submissions grab a coffee, comfy chair and have a read. Note: some of the submissions will not open on screen, on the black screen you get, look for the download button, that works just fine.

Erratum complete. endit…

Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Nov 2013, 18:10   #1620 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 387

Kharon the AAAA 2008 submission makes for very interesting reading.Five years has past and what’s changed?

The same gripes appear in virtually every post concerning CAsA on this website and in almost every publication you pick up, despite what appears to be concerted cyber warfare, whether instigated by CAsA or not, by certain individuals to either, get a thread shutdown, or muddy the water by diverting the discussion off topic.

Some interesting snippets:

“Key Issues Summary”

  • Independent review of CASA’s functions required, drawing heavily on industry input.
  • Current governance arrangements do not appear to be supporting or encouraging transparency, accountability or performance.
  • Industry consultation mechanisms at the technical level may be adequate (for example on regulatory reform working groups), but at the strategic level they are either non-existent or in need of review. Asking industry what their view is and then ignoring it completely is frequently dressed-up as ‘consultation’.
  • CASA needs a central policy making function that binds all staff to a single interpretation that has been developed with industry consultation. This must be a central feature of any attempt to improve CASA’s culture.
  • CASA must develop a systems-based approach to managing interactions with industry that are currently piecemeal and treated as ‘once-offs’.
  • Cost recovery must be based on establishing CASA’s essential functions and priorities (see independent review above), identifying any functions that can be transferred to industry while maintaining safety integrity and removing any requirements that do not deliver a safety outcome that addresses an identified and significant risk.
  • CASA must be directed by Government to pursue aggressively an efficiency and cost-cutting program that reduces the burden on industry.

Seem to have heard much of the same stuff recently

“In many ways, reform has been compromised by current governance and management structures, a lack of drive for urgent change from the top of CASA and an ongoing combative approach from some in CASA towards industry.”

The angry man in charge?

“Trying to work with CASA is akin to prolonged guerrilla warfare, where success goes to the industry person or organization that can build an alliance with competent staff within CASA and assist them to defeat the other retrograde forces at work within CASA to protect turf, retain power, resist change and to stifle industry.”

Sounds a tad like Wodger Wabbit territory

“It is industry that leads and daily implements aviation safety in Australia, not CASA.”


“The effect of much of CASA’s processes is to stop industry from achieving adaptation to a changing market rather than to facilitate it, often as a result of CASA staffs’ personal outlook on aviation.

The FOI of the day routine

“Transparency, accountability and clear performance outcomes are almost unknown concepts within CASA, despite pockets of forward thinking individuals who try and hold CASA to the same standards that are delivered by other public service agencies.”

Hmmm Mr. Truss where are you?

“A poor CASA culture that focuses on personal power at the expense of
aviation safety, sensible regulation and industry development.”

Down the rabbit burrow again

“Management does not seem able to formulate a coherent plan for improvement, nor appears capable of enforcing their will over lower managers, delegates and even field staff in the organisation.”

Which is why Chief pilots are still being overruled when they voice serious safety reservations about operational matters foisted on them by unqualified FOI’s pushing their own personal agenda’s.

“For example, the role of FOIs and AWI’s varies enormously between individuals and offices, apparently without any coordination from a central manager. Similarly, the outlook of senior management is not shared by many others in the organization, and the perspective of central office to the regions appears worlds apart.”

Which is why operators of the same aircraft can all be operating differently based on the preferences and opinions of their handling FOI.

“In many cases to consult or not, to work positively with industry or not, or to abide by normal standards of good policy development or not, are not decisions made at high level after consideration of the strategic environment. They are frequently made at a local level, often with an agenda of frustrating central office and increasing the power of local staff.”

“There has been no research presented by CASA or government in the pursuit of cost recovery that would indicate proper account has been given to how much of an increase in costs the industry and industry clients can bear and the possible impact of increased costs.”

The impact is clients forgoing aviation for other means of transportation

“For example, the current migration of GA pilots out of CASA controlled aviation to aviation managed by Recreational Aviation Australia should be seen as pilots voting with their feet.”

And the migration of foreign commercial students to New Zealand

“The long-term impact of this migration on pilot-shortages and cost-recovery may be substantial. In turn, the impact on the national need for a vibrant and safe aviation industry must not be overlooked.”

Says it all really

Mr. Truss you really need to stand up and be counted

Last edited by thorn bird; 9th Nov 2013 at 19:45.

thorn bird is offline Report Post Reply




October 2013:

Old 9th Oct 2013, 06:44   #1561 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 1,172
Pause for reflection?

Posted here as it seems pertinent to the Senate discussions:-Pro Aviation – Paul Phelan. The latest article is an interesting, subtle piece, worth the few moments it takes to read. The question “what went wrong?” is ‘germane’ it also presents a refresher on one of Dick Smith’s best efforts; perhaps this is why the iron ring got tighter.
Say what you like about Dick, he does get accused of many things for which he was not responsible, but the Phelan article (for mine) highlights the well meaning intentions of the man, if nothing else.
Two years in the Hall of Doom is worth cherry picking, even if you are dedicated anti Smith; at least he has actually been there and will stand behind the words. Admirable quality in any man.
If, as I did, you fail to read the introduction and launch straight into the ‘guts’; it’s a surprise when you see who wrote it and when. Anyway – for weel of for woe the piece is on Paul’s website….www.proaviation.com.au
Kharon is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Oct 2013, 07:38   #1562 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 390
KharonThere’s a very unsettling rumour doing the rounds, that despite the best efforts being made by various folk, ol’ trusty Truss has done a deal with devil in the name of saving face.

I do hope it’s unfounded; there will not be too much face left to save if the unthinkable occurs.I can’t believe it, but it sort of makes sense; in a bizarre, twisted way……

This is from Pro Aviation Paul Phelan:

Truss demands action on Senate Committee’s ATSB/CASA recommendations1

Paul Phelan ….. August 22, 2013 Shadow Infrastructure Minister Warren Truss has supported demands from Senator David Fawcett for immediate action on the recommendations of the Senate committee enquiry into CASA and ATSB’s handling of the Pel-Air ditching at Norfolk Island almost four years ago:

“Minister Anthony Albanese must urgently respond to the recommendations flowing from a Senate Committee investigation into a ditched Pel-Air flight off Norfolk Island in November 2009,” Said Mr. Truss.

“The recommendations, handed down by the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee in their Aviation Accident Investigations Report, make disturbing reading.

“The Senate Inquiry was established following the release of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s (ATSB’s) report into the Norfolk Island incident almost three years after the event.

“The circumstances of the flight were both a disaster and a miracle. Despite mistakes being made by the pilot on the air ambulance trip from Apia (Samoa) to the Australian mainland, all four passengers and two crew were saved, the aircraft successfully ditching at night off the coast of Norfolk Island during bad weather.

“However, the purpose of the Senate Inquiry was not the incident itself, but the alleged breakdown in investigation and reporting by the ATSB and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

“Specifically, the report states:

‘The committee accepts that the pilot in command made errors on the night, and this inquiry was not an attempt to vindicate him. Instead, the committee’s overriding objective from the outset was to find out why the pilot became the last line of defence on the night and to maximise the safety outcomes of future ATSB and CASA investigations in the interests of the travelling public’.

“The report makes 26 recommendations to improve the conduct, regulation and procedures governing aviation incident investigations, which the Committee argues were not up to scratch.

“People have every right to expect world’s best practice when it comes to aviation safety, which includes comprehensive investigation and reporting of incidents. The community is entitled to have confidence in our aviation safety regulations and the conduct of our regulators.

“Similarly, it is vital that through comprehensive incident investigations and reporting, industry and regulators are accorded the opportunity to learn from past mistakes and improve systems to overcome existing weaknesses.

“The Report raises serious issues of process that must be addressed. Minister Albanese must restore public confidence in our accident investigatory bodies and deal with the concerns raised in the Inquiry as a matter of urgency.”

For the committee’s recommendations, see here:

halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Oct 2013, 14:41   #1563 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 60
Posts: 21
The Prince becomes a king

Crumbs how things have changed? Mr Truss unseats Albanese for the top job (to coin a phrase) and suddenly the games rules have changed?
Now that Warren has what he wanted, his own toy set to play with, he is supportive of CASA?
He has gone to ground, quietly supporting his aviation watchdog while firmly embedding himself as the new Minister for ass covering. Perhaps he will adopt Wingnuts policy of not reporting asylum seeking boat arrivals by implementing a new policy in which nothing aviation is allowed to be reported?
No whispering about malfeasance in the hallway, no chitter chatter about anything to do with the governments beloved Qantas, no bedroom talk about aviation mischief, no innuendo or discussions in the tea room, not even sign language behind the pot plants is permitted
Yes, that is how he will fix things. And if that fails well it is the gulag for all IOS (or perhaps 5 years in Opotiki).
Sad to see your Senators hard work go down the drain with all the pot plant nutrients.
Paragraph377 is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Oct 2013, 18:53   #1564 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 995
Is Kharon’s post invisible or something??

Kharon paying Dick a compliment and everyone missed it, or maybe no one wants to recognise that Dick maybe eccentric and some of his ideas might be out there but he has always worn his heart on his sleeve…A new approach to enforcement

And this wouldn’t be a Sarcs post without a coupla quotes:

First, aviation safety depends upon there being a high level of trust between CASA and the industry. The Board is concerned that over recent years the level of trust has declined. Some parts of the industry believe that CASA’s current enforcement processes are arbitrary, inconsistent and unfair. Key organisations are advising their members not to speak to CASA about incidents or rule contraventions. There is much work to be done by both CASA and industry to repair the damage that has been done, but the Board believes that a new approach to enforcement is a good place to begin.

This is not a new problem and was clearly expressed by Sir Donald Anderson, the Director-General of the Department of Civil Aviation, in an open letter to the industry dated 16 October 1972.

Sir Donald stated:

I have been concerned for some time by the number of incidents which reveal an element of reluctance on the part of pilots to seek help. It seems to me that it may be helpful if I, as Director-General, give some lead on the rapport which I believe needs to exist between pilots and others in the system if we are to avoid some of the mistakes that are evident. It is important that no barrier should exist to inhibit a readiness by all to give and take in the common interest of safety

If an atmosphere of reluctance or hostility develops to a point where there is discouragement from making full use of the services available, the end result could be disastrous in critical operational situations.

A similar concern was expressed 23 years later in the Plane Safe Report of the Parliamentary Committee chaired by Peter Morris MP.

The Committee stated:

“The committee was dismayed by the denigration, venom and viciousness of the evidence. This attitude of mistrust if not mutual contempt between the participants places a heavy load on CASA in fulfilling its statutory function of promoting higher safety standards through education, training, advice and consultation.”

and two.. nah bugger it those interested enough can do their own bloody clicking

Last edited by Sarcs; 10th Oct 2013 at 06:22. Reason: Green MiLE I’m sure the feeling is mutual!

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 9th Oct 2013, 22:36   #1565 (permalink)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: America’s 51st State
Posts: 106
Kharon paying Dick a compliment and everyone missed it

Sorry, but personally I don’t particularly care, agree with (or understand most of the time) what Kharon has to say.Cheers…
VH-MLE is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Oct 2013, 09:50   #1566 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n’est nulle part
Posts: 1,792
“You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.” – Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

With your head in the sand your bum is exposed old mate.

Apologies to all Ostriches.

Frank Arouet is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Oct 2013, 13:47   #1567 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 995
Addendum to post #1545

Update to EASA FTL reg debate mentioned in post #1545 and directly relevant to Senator Xenophon’s disallowance motion on CAO 48.1:

Europe adopts new Flight Time Limitations (FTL) regulations

The European Parliament adopted the European Commission proposal to harmonise flight and duty time limitations (FTL) for cabin crew and pilots across the European Union.This European Commission proposal is based on an EASA Opinion.

Amongst others, night flight duty will be reduced to 11 hours in the new regulation, instead of 11h45 previously. More flights will be considered night flights and subject to shorter duty periods. Total flight time in 12 consecutive months will be limited to 1000 hours instead of 1300 hours.The weekly rest will be increased by 12 hours twice a month.

The combination of standby at the airport with flight duty will be capped at 16 hours. It is currently 20 hours or 26 hours, or even without limit at all in some EU Member States.

The European Cockpit Association (ECA), along with other flight crew unions, was opposed to the proposal. ECA President Voorbach stated: ”The proposal still contains dangerous safety loopholes. They will allow pilots to land a plane – full of passengers – after being 22 hours awake. It also allows pilots to fly for 12hrs30 through the night. This is up to 25% longer than the 10 hours unanimously recommended by scientists.”

On September 30, 2013, the European Parliament’s transport committee had voted against new flight time limitation measures. In a plenary vote, the European Parliament voted in favour of the new rules.

So the pilot unions were celebrating last week only to be weeping in their pints this week! Sounds kind of familiar!

David Learmount does a good job of straddling both sides of the fence:

Pilot fatigue: the battle is over but the war still rages

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 11th Oct 2013, 18:51   #1568 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On track to somewhere good!
Posts: 32
Question Barrier?

Sorry been OS – and forgot about Barrier, so apologize if I’ve missed something.
What is happening or happened with BA? Are they still in the AAT?
Selcalmeonly is offline Report Post Reply
Old 12th Oct 2013, 00:46   #1569 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,026
The below is from an email today, with an update from the RAAA conference.
Obviously, they were not convinced by the soothing words of Mr. McCormick about what is supposed to be in Part 61, because they are more concerned about what is actually in Part 61 now, before a whole swag of amendments, now in the mill, hit the streets — and Part 61, Version 1.0 isn’t even in operation yet.
Looks like most of the member of the Regional Aviation Association of Australia are at least Honorary Members of the Ills of Society Society [IOS].
Tootle pip!!

Warren Truss addressed the RAA Conference today and he told the regional airlines:

  • Tthat they are close to completing the terms of  reference for the review by an international expert.
  • He stated that he will make the announcement in a month or two. He also stated that the Board will be changed and the indication was it would be this year.
  • He re-affirmed that he has to take the decisions as quickly as possible to implement their policy.

The RAAA Chair, Jeff Boyd, in his opening speech stated too much had been wasted and we are out of step in this region. He went on to say the RAAA Board supports the adoption of the NZ system.

Everyone is against the current direction and totally against Part 61.

Last edited by LeadSled; 12th Oct 2013 at 00:53.

LeadSled is offline Report Post Reply
Old 12th Oct 2013, 06:56   #1570 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 995
Truss at Coolum swings and roundabouts

Good catch Leady!Here is a link to Truss’s speech in full:‘Regional Airlines’ bumpy ride needs a smooth landing’ and Jeff Boyd has already made his opinion widely known, here’s a rehash courtesy of Phearless Phelan: A Bridge Too Far

Although I can’t remember JB (IOS and F.A.R.T Honorary member) mentioning Part 61 in there…hmm perhaps we’ll be able to get the full text of his speech at the Coolum dinosaur park???

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 12th Oct 2013, 15:16   #1571 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 460
Truss and the Future of Aviation

It certainly is in Mr. Truss’s hands and it needs to be a rapid transition with attention to a whole range of issues including:

  1. Regulatory process – Immediate cessation of activities by casa [happenened in 1999], so there is a precedent, with the proposed changes to airspace pulled up in a single day;
  2. Stop the investigatory powers of casa – Pilots, Owners, Operators and Engineers are not criminals;
  3. Get AVMED and remove the poor performers, plus correct with proper supervision of the DAME system;
  4. Weed out the rorters of the system [Cover-up of Hemple];
  5. and Lots More

What Mr. Truss says:

Warren Truss to the Regional Aviation Conference Coolum 2012 | Assistance to the Aviation Industry

Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 14th Oct 2013, 11:29   #1572 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 995
Pause for reflection MKII…why indeed?

In an article by Gerald Frawley from AA magazine put out prior to the election gives further ‘pause for reflection’ and he asks some particularly pertinent questions in the context of this thread:

  • Why is it that aviation was hit by the carbon tax when other transport sectors were not?
  • How has it come to pass that relations between industry and CASA are as bad as they have ever been, and regulatory reform as slow and contentious as it ever was?
  • Why has CASA been downsized and de-skilled in the name of cost-cutting so much that its approval processes are so slow it externalises costs back onto industry in foregone revenue generating activities?
  • Why is general aviation, that training ground of civil aviation, in alarming decline?
  • Why are some of the country’s most important airports seen by their owners as property developments with irksome runways in the middle?
  • Why are many council-owned regional and rural airports struggling to pay for maintenance and upkeep of runways and taxiways?
  • Why haven’t burdensome security regulations been reviewed a dozen years after 9/11?
  • Why isn’t the pilot training industry supported by HECS-subsidised training courses?
  • Why isn’t there a second Sydney airport and an increased movement cap at the current airport?
  • Why is there a looming shortage of LAMEs?
  • Those are just some of the issues facing aviation in Australia today. So why isn’t there a minister for aviation or – at the very least a parliamentary secretary – who can champion aviation’s development and work to address its issues?
  • And indeed why isn’t there a minister, and government policies, that champion aviation’s opportunities and potential as well?
  • Hmm…why indeed?

ELECTION 2013 – Advocating for an advocate

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Old 14th Oct 2013, 13:30   #1573 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 60
Posts: 21
More QON’s ?

Mr Frawley just joined the IOS legion. Welcome
All good questions, I am sure Mr Truss, his boss and all the other minions will take them on notice, to be answered……..never.

Last edited by Paragraph377; 14th Oct 2013 at 13:32.

Paragraph377 is offline Report Post Reply
Old 14th Oct 2013, 19:14   #1574 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 460
casa anyone?? what is their obligation?? in this

Well anyone – let’s stop them

Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 14th Oct 2013 at 19:19.

Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 10:41   #1575 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 460
Warren Truss response to the Industry

The following has just been released by Warren Truss:
Any comments on direction??
Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 11:15   #1576 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 627
A lot of talk about the impressive safety record and the progress in regulatory reform that has been a 20 year process!
No reference at all to implementing any recommendations from the 2 Senate Inquiries.
What the speech reveals is that the rhetoric in opposition is not matched by the potential to change policy in government.
All those holding their breath will be turning a serious shade of blue by now.
Lookleft is offline Report Post Reply
Old 17th Oct 2013, 11:45   #1577 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 1,841
As we’ve both said before, 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, 15:31   #1578 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 995
Estimate AQONs out!

Parliament seems to be back in business now the election writs are in (bar one in dispute Mr ‘Balance of Power’ Clive). Supplementary Estimates are now listed for 18 & 19 November and surprise..surprise AQONs are finally posted (DoIT AQONs Senate Estimates). Hmm.. and there is some answers of interest to the many subjects covered in this thread and the locked thread. Here is a small sampling…QON1:

Question no.: 01Program: n/a Division/Agency: (CORP) Corporate Services Topic: Government response to the Committee’s Accident Aviation Report

Proof Hansard Page/s: 5 (29/05/2013)

Senator Macdonald asked:

Senator IAN MACDONALD: Thank you for that. Senator Thistlethwaite, as the minister representing the minister, can you give any indication of what timing the minister might adopt in relation to this important report and the government’s response to it?

Senator Thistlethwaite: I cannot give you an indication now, Senator, but I can take that on notice and see if we can come back to you before the end of the day.

Senator IAN MACDONALD: That would be great, thank you.


The Government will release a response to the Air Accidents Investigations inquiry as soon as practicable.

Well no surprises there I guess?? The utter disdain, obfuscation and contempt displayed by Albo in regards to aviation appears to have been consistent right up to the last minute of his responsibility; QON2:

Senator IAN MACDONALD: Can you tell us when the answers were submitted by you to the minister’s office?Mr Mrdak: There were 132 questions in total, 40 taken on notice on the hearing day and 92 written questions. The department did not this time meet our requirements to get the advice to the minister as we would have liked. The first 100 draft responses were provided to the minister on 28 March. The further 32 outstanding responses were provided on 8 and 18 April, owing to some delays in getting data from us. But the minister had all of the consolidated answers by 18 April.Senator IAN MACDONALD: Senator Thistlethwaite, do you have any indication of why it took the minister from 18 April until last Friday to deal with those things?Senator Thistlethwaite: No, I do not, Senator. Again, I can seek to take that on notice and provide you with an answer.

Senator IAN MACDONALD: It would be good if you could.

Senator NASH: Can I suggest that perhaps the good senator might like to do that over the next two days for us? I am sure he is able to call the minister’s office and come back to us before the end of tomorrow.

Senator Thistlethwaite: I already indicated that I would.
Answer: The then Minister advised that he had nothing further to add to this response.

And here is an answer for Senator Fawcett’s question on the you beaut (in house) FF Sentinel Surveillance software that rumour has it now has some serious functionality issues :

Senator FAWCETT: Can you tell me the final overall cost of the system as of this budget?
Mr McCormick: For the CASA IT tool Sky Sentinel business and technical implementation, development implementation and the new CASA surveillance manuals from March 2011 to June 2013, the total cost was $2,419,157, but we do not have the breakdown of the Sky Sentinel out of that at this stage. Senator FAWCETT: Can you come back to the committee today, if you can, or tomorrow with that figure? I would be interested to know how much that was. Mr McCormick: Certainly. Answer: The original software/IP was purchased for $35,750 (GST inclusive) knowing additional work would be required in regard to the subsequent development into a functioning system and deployment throughout CASA. The total development costs of the system (including the purchase of the software and IP) was $1,027,848. As advised at the hearing on 29 May 2013, the total overall cost was $2,447,184 which as well as the above, includes associated costs such as preparation of a user manual, training of staff and managers involved in surveillance and business implementation.

For many more examples from the FF masters of spin and smoke’n’ mirrors here’s the link: CAsA AQONs

Last edited by Sarcs; 17th Oct 2013 at 17:58.

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply
Unread 18th Oct 2013, 16:35   #1579 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 54
Posts: 26
Cover up’s, crooks and numpty’s

More lies, more arrogance, more deception, more pony pooh.
Oh the GWM truly is a stronger mafia than Italians in New York. Call them the untouchables I say.
And now there is a new Don, ‘Don Truss’. He will ensure all his Capo’s are protected from those horrible things called justice and accountability.
As for the Senators, what Senators? All shall be kneecapped and buried in a shallow grave so to speak. Dead men cant talk, and the GWM will make sure their protectors around the hallways of Canberra see to it that nothing comes up against the executive turds of aviation.
No sir, sleepy hollow is protected by powerful sith lords with voodoo abilities and small johnson’s.
They fear not Kharon’s beloved ferryman, they fear not the Gobbledock’s ICAO connections, they fear not the ghosts of Hempel and Wright.
The CAsA are protected by the mighty bald eagle, the powerful witch doctor and the silly old test pilot (very former one at that) and his dodgy ticker.
Soon the angry man will depart, retire to his beloved Brisbane river home and his Yak, another crooked batty boy will take up the ‘commander and thief’ role in the DAS unit and commence the cycle of trough indulgence, obsfucation and rorting.
Perhaps Lord Collins will be the new aviation expert appointee? Or a new board member even? Oh fun times ahead, and nice pay packets too.

Last edited by CASAweary; 18th Oct 2013 at 16:37.



From the thread at the time:

Old 18th Nov 2009, 23:37   #1 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 53
Merged: Pel-Air Westwind Ditching off NLK

A Pel-Air Westwind on an aeromed flight from Apia-Norfolk has ditched. Word from the island is fuel exhaustion after 3 approach attempts.

All 6 POB rescued alive by local boat and are in the NLK hospital.

No other information yet.

Ditching at night, yikes.

Car RAMROD is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 04:25   #2 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 60
Wow, that is incredible!!
krankin is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 06:09   #3 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6
Pel-Air ditching

Wow, the weather can sure get bad out there. They are very lucky. Why go to NLK when Noumea is a closer ILS equipped airport??? When I used to run RPT out to NLK we were always wary of the wx, and needed plenty of gas. How will REX manage this stuff up?
Hipster is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 06:20   #4 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 1,495
This will indeed be an accident that I shall have a keen interest in. I too have found myself some years ago now in similair situations, out in the Pacific at night in less that ideal wx conditions wishing I was home in bed.
The stress would have been high for the crew, Aero-Med work has it’s challenges at times like no other.
As long as everyone walks (swims in this case) away then we can all learn from it hopefully.Wmk2
Wally Mk2 is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 06:41   #5 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 51

I’m glad all survived unharmed.From the Rex website:

CareFlight/Pel-Air Medical Evacuation Incident – Samoa to MelbourneThursday, 19 November 2009A CareFlight medical evacuation flight operated by Pel-Air Aviation from Apia (Western Samoa) to Melbourne was scheduled to land at Norfolk Island for a planned fuel stop on Wednesday evening when it encountered deteriorating weather conditions. After several unsuccessful approaches and with diminishing fuel, the pilot-in-command, Captain Dominic James, made the decision to carry out a controlled landing onto the water off the coast of Norfolk Island. The aircraft, a specially-equipped medical retrieval Westwind jet carried out a successful landing on the water and the patient, accompanying spouse and two medical crew as well as the pilots evacuated safely. They were rescued by boat and brought to the local Norfolk Island hospital for observation. The Captain reported that all passengers and crew did not have any apparent injuries. John Sharp, Chairman of Pel-Air Aviation said that he was very proud of the Captain and the First Officer. “They performed an intricate landing on water in darkness resulting in the evacuation of everyone safely and quickly. The training of both the Pel-Air and CareFlight crew came to the fore as everyone kept together and remained calm. Their professionalism stood out on the day and made a substantial difference to the outcome.”

“I also want to thank the rescue team and the local authorities for their prompt action and dedication which resulted in a speedy rescue and evacuation to the hospital.”

CareFlight Chief Executive Officer, Derek Colenbrander, said the successful outcome was testimony to the skill and training of the pilots, the prompt action of local authorities and the efforts of the medical team in continuing to care for their patient.

Arrangements are being made for the patient to be repatriated to Australia.

Kenneth is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 06:46   #6 (permalink)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 205
NLK is not a place you want to be operating into without alternate fuel, regardless of what the forecast says.
You can be visual over the sea but have to climb up into the cloud to make the runway !!
mates rates is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 07:36   #7 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 235

So they went to Norfolk WITHOUT fuel for an alternate?????
74world is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 07:46   #8 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 496
Don’t get too worked up …. its only an ‘Incident’
I had to go to the Rex site to make sure this wasn’t a wind up.
Hats off to the crew for making a safe ‘landing’.
I’m sure there will be many factors in this but the main thing is all are safe and the person who wrote that press release will get a job with the PM s office
ozbiggles is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 07:55   #9 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: zerohedge.com
Posts: 700
Top effort from the crew to salvage a diabolical situation.
However, I have to ask the question is this an why such an operation is permitted in the first place? I have never operated into Norfolk Island, however anecdotally I believe that it is a difficult destination due WX & its remote location.
I find it difficult to believe that to operate into a isolated aerodrome without an alternate is an appropriate for commercial operation, given that other possibilities exist (larger aircraft with greater fuel capacity).
Questions need to be asked of the operator & the regulator.Here are the METAR’s for the 18th November.
breakfastburrito is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 08:00   #10 (permalink)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 33
Posts: 175
Well done to the crew for a successful ditching! Will be interesting to read the ATSB report on this one.
Altimeters is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 08:29   #11 (permalink)
Posts: n/a
So will questions be raised with regards PelAir taking over the RFDS contracts in 2011 (can’t remember the locations)??Can’t believe REX named their pilot, is that kosher?Well done to him and his crew anyway, hard as it gets yeah?
Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 08:54   #12 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 225

Just wondering if the approaches were conducted during the times of the following metars/speci, if so would not the right place to be without alternate fuel:

METAR YSNF 181030Z AUTO 16009KT 3000NDV // OVC002 19/18 Q1013SPECI YSNF 181053Z AUTO 16009KT 5000NDV // BKN002 BKN009 OVC014 18/18 Q1014METAR YSNF 181100Z 14008KT 5000 -SHRA BR BKN005 BKN014 18/18 Q1014SPECI YSNF 181111Z AUTO 15006KT 3200NDV // SCT003 BKN008 OVC014 19/18 Q1014

SPECI YSNF 181128Z AUTO 15008KT 7000NDV // SCT005 BKN012 OVC017 19/18 Q1014

SPECI YSNF 181134Z 15008KT 8000 FEW006 BKN015 19/17 Q1014 RMK BR

olderairhead is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 09:14   #13 (permalink)
When you live….
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: 0.0221 DME Keyboard
Posts: 670
Not sure when the ditching took place, but here’s a weather snapshot of a longer time period. (is there ANYTHING the iPhone can’t do??)

Apart from stopping people wasting bandwidth with information already provided by a link by others?

METARs are interesting but can anyone provide the TAFs (and the times they were issued)? That’s what’ll determine the rights and wrongs of the situation.


UnderneathTheRadar is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 09:20   #14 (permalink)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Conargo Pub
Age: 28
Posts: 91
Strike three

According to Welcome to Weather Underground : Weather Underground
Temp range 18-23, Due point 19.
Max humidity 100%
Temp at or below dew point from 8 pm local.Anyone got a copy of the TAF???Long range cruise charts, alternate requirements,,,,,,,, ?????,,,,,,,Dom well done on getting everyone out alive. That is the thing to take away from this.
Dances With Dingoes is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 09:25   #15 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,129
Wouldn’t it be the case that the majority of aircraft that operate into there WOULDN’T have enough fuel for an alternate given the distances involved?
VH-XXX is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 09:40   #16 (permalink)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 432
Wow! Not a decision I would like to have made Remember going in their a few years ago where the dew point and reported temps were fast closing.By the time I got there, the cloud base was too low to even think of commencing an approach, but plenty of clear areas over the water, so short of diverting to Noumea, only alternative was to descend over the water to do a vis approach.
The approach was below cliff height with a climb to the threshold of the rwy.The FSO recounted of a coastwatch Shrike that almost had to ditch under similar circumstances the day before. I felt for him.Great job to pull off a ditching at night with quick Jet and recover all persons
ZEEBEE is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 10:34   #17 (permalink)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,067

Some more info…

Rescue plane sinks after ditching November 19, 2009 – 12:26PM

Six people including a sick woman have been rescued after a medical evacuation plane was forced to ditch in the sea off Norfolk Island.The CareFlight plane was taking a critically ill patient from Samoa to Melbourne and was attempting to make a refuelling stop at Norfolk Island, the Seven Network reports. Bad weather thwarted three attempts at landing, so the pilot peeled away from the island and put the plane down in the sea about two nautical miles offshore.The crew and the patient were all able to get safely off the plane before it sank three minutes later.

All six people were forced to tread water, only three of them wearing lifejackets, for about 90 minutes before they were rescued by boat.

All were in shock and suffering from hypothermia but no one suffered major injuries.


Transition Layer is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 10:35   #18 (permalink)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: au
Posts: 7
Westwind Ditches at Norfolk Island

Good to see crew and pax ok!
Captain707 is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 10:37   #19 (permalink)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 33
Posts: 175
Already here mate…
Altimeters is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 11:11   #20 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 178
Will be very interesting reading when the report comes out.
Old 19th Nov 2009, 11:21   #21 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 1,495
……..sure will be interesting reading when the report comes out………..in Ch 9’s TV BS!!! Already Ch 9 have started to paint a ‘hollywood’ story from it to milk it for all it’s worth Cloe Bachelor hero pilot is now the leading headline !! FFS!Wmk2
Wally Mk2 is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 11:29   #22 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 120
Could be lots of issues here, especially planning considerations. That said, well done to the Captain for deciding on a gutsy plan and carrying it out successfully. Must have been awful tense after the 3rd missed approach !
Fluke is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 11:37   #23 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 589
Gee, Mmmm. Sometimes you can only plan for 1 approach. From experience Norfolk and LHI can mean you only get one chance then off to the mainland or other alternate. Fuel critical situations can be very testing. Our remote islands are the only time we have ever needed CP and PNR calcs.
PA39 is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 11:42   #24 (permalink)
Silly Old Git
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: saiba spes
Posts: 3,741
I take it there is no precision app. aid at Norfolk?
tinpis is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 11:52   #25 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 178
Tinpis, no there isn’t and its up on top of a cliff too, so very condusive to fog and cloud. AKL is the normal alternate carried for a jet.
Once I came in from Tahiti into there and could not descend and preserve my AKL alternate until VFR was confirmed from the FSU. The weather there can turn bad fast when Temp and dew point is close together.Pleased to hear all walked away.
40Deg STH is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 12:23   #26 (permalink)
Probationary PPRuNer
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
For those interested, just a few hours earlier, a RAAF 737 carrying the Governor-General had to divert back to Sydney, after not being able to land in Norfolk Island due to the bad weather conditions..
A1322 is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 12:27   #27 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wood’s Hole (N4131.0 W07041.5)
Posts: 92
Wonder What Official Report Will Say?

Most poster are correct – NLK can go down to the MNM irrespective of the TTF.However, to make 3 (alleged) approaches (all unsuccessful) to NLK and (assumedly) burning ALTN fuel resulting in:
a. a zero option approach (3rd attempt = must land);
b. a ditching, however successful (result of zero option approach);
c. a allusion of “hero” status.
Facts: unsuccessful approaches (3); controlled aircraft ditching due exhaustion of contingencies/fuel.Forget “stress” and subjective mitigators; to reiterate – min fuel = min options; zero fuel = zero options.
Weapons_Hot is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 12:37   #28 (permalink)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Apartment
Posts: 107
Doesn’t surprise me that the media are using the Cleo Bachelor thing. Media outlets will try to differeniate themselves from each other and find an exclusive angle on a story.
This sometimes just adds to the dumbing down and sensationalising of stories which in Aviation I always hate to see. Now I’ll proberly have to field questions from punters about ditching, if i knew him and if i have applied to Cleo.
Cessna Capt is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 12:38   #29 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sand Pit
Posts: 338
I wonder, if we had adopted the FAA requirements some 15 years ago when regulatory reform began, whether this accident would have been prevented. Requirement to carry an alternate:1 hour before to 1 hour after ETA-Vis <2sm (3.2km)
sig <3000ft The FAA also does not allow charter or RPT aircraft to attempt an instrument approach unless the Wx is reporting above the landing minimums at the time of the intended approach.If we had this rule in operation here, would the decision to divert to Noumea have been made well in advance of the first approach attempt?

mjbow2 is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 12:40   #30 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 178
Weapons Hot, I think we agree on the picture.
40Deg STH is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 12:54   #31 (permalink)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Conargo Pub
Age: 28
Posts: 91
So far REX share price pretty much unaffected from yesterdays close. Is this the same guy that was a SO with Qantas for a short time?

Last edited by Dances With Dingoes; 19th Nov 2009 at 14:09.

Dances With Dingoes is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:04   #32 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Downunder
Posts: 277
It’ll be an interesting report, never been there but flown plenty around the Pacific a few years back, standard fuel for no alternate was 2 hrs island reserve.
skol is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:07   #33 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 365

and they are throwing in:

performed his version of the remarkable Hudson River ditching of Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger III.
Critical Reynolds No is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:24   #34 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: WA
Posts: 25
In reply to MJBow2, from memory it is stated in the CAR’s (just escapes me where rite now), that an instrument approach shall not be commenced unless conditions are above landing minima……. it’s one of those regs that you can never find it when your looking for it!
YBRM is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:32   #35 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 124
I take it there is no precision app. aid at Norfolk?

Ahh but there is a precision approach at SNF!
…too bad no-one has the equipment to do SCAT approaches though…

mig3 is online now Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:34   #36 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 643
Ask them how many life jackets they had on board.
Jet_A_Knight is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:35   #37 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Behind you!
Age: 24
Posts: 5
Weapons_Hot, mate exactly what I was thinking.
The report im sure will explain alot but I also have to ask:
1. There may have been panic, but why did only 3 people have life jackets?
2. The flight must have had a PNR and CP so if he got current weather at that time and saw the weather was OVC002 why did he not divert?
But on a positive note…my hat off to the pilot for ditching safely at night with it overcast meaning no moonlight.Thank goodness no one was seriously hurt.
Boeing_captain is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:41   #38 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Straya
Posts: 38

So, let’s get this straight – they set up for a controlled ditching, but only three of them had time to get their lifejackets on?

What about the dinghy packs also carried?

Don’t get me wrong – glad all worked out well; but as for ‘well trained, and professional’….I remember some years ago picking up a Westwind for an overwater flight and for some reason checking the lifejacket situation…..none found!

Looks like Pelair have again proven they deserve their ‘reputation’.

Bring Back The Biff is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:45   #39 (permalink)
Victim of a bored godModerator
Join Date: Jan 1996
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,184
John Sharp, Chairman of Pel-Air Aviation…..

Is that the same John Sharp, originally Qantas, then CEO Air Pacific and General Manager, TAA, immediately prior to TAA amalgamation with Qantas??

tail wheel is offline Report Post
Old 19th Nov 2009, 13:47   #40 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 284
Hats off to the crew for the successful ditching.
However, just because the operation was “legal” does not make it safe, as has been demonstrated in this case. “Island hold” or whatever they call it is not on IMHO. Like playing Russian roulette. “On route alternates” or a decision at the PNR/Cps are another one, I will not entertain.
I don’t give a damn what the bean counters think but to me “fuel in the tanks is money in the bank.”It is not a crime to have an accident but to run out of fuel, whatever the reason, is criminal. I hope someone can come up with a good reason why this “incident” came to be.
weido_salt is offline Report Post



Old 9th Mar 2010, 23:16   #1 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 37
?thank you 60 minutes. do we agree with this?

Doomed on MSN Video
jhurditch is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Mar 2010, 23:48   #2 (permalink)
I call you back
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alpha quadrant
Posts: 337

That is a truly shocking piece of journalism.There are questions to be answered alright but that idiot reporter is not the man for the job.He seems to have decided that this is a heroes versus villains story (with him getting to decide which are which) and doesn’t allow any latitude for any other possibility.Certainly flying without fuel for an alternate is very odd. It being legal is even odder. That IMHO is what 15 of the 16 minutes should have been about.Nonsense such as ‘would you take off without a full tank of fuel?’ and ‘no one knew where to look because the pilot didn’t issue a mayday’ demonstrate the agenda clearly.

In addition he never examines the weather the Captain relied upon. He never examines how much fuel was taken versus the flight time. We are left to rely on an Air Traffic Controller’s view of fuel load which is poor at best and the word of some retired guy who said he would never take off without a full tank of fuel. Is he really a pilot?

This is why most pilots never trust journalists.

Faire d'income is offline Report Post Reply
Old 9th Mar 2010, 23:56   #3 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: … on an island!
Posts: 230
here the wikipedia version of the episode

2009 Pel-Air Westwind crash – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedianot an happy career for that pilot!
169west is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Mar 2010, 00:04   #4 (permalink)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 715

Quite interesting piece, this one. Glad I did see it.On one hand, I find this to be highly biased and conclusive despite there being an ongoing investigation.On the other hand it does pose some valid questions, such as why they chose depart without fuelling to capacity, and how that could be legal.Could anyone share some light to weather information and briefing in this part of the world? And does anyone know if this can be a case of the Isolated Aerodrome fuel policy (what is it, 2 hours final reserve and certain wx conditions?)One way or the other, credits to the crew for ditching successfully, when ditching was the only remaining option. Now it will be interesting to see how they got to that situation in the first place, hopefully we can all learn something.

Edit: it according to wikipedia, the crew flew ILSs, however according to the AIP there are only nonprecision approaches avaliable.

Last edited by bfisk; 10th Mar 2010 at 00:17.

bfisk is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Mar 2010, 00:13   #5 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 888
Seems to be a rather meaningless video 97 percent concerned with the innate drama of the situation–screaming passengers, black-of-night ditching, miraculous rescue, lots of emotional shots of people saying, “It was horrible…”The other three percent mentions some dispensation–never further explained–whereby Australian air-ambulance flights can apparently file VFR with only VFR fuel. And the chief pilot of Pel-Air (or whatever his position is) calmly explains to the “reporter,” “I’ve already explained to you on the telephone all our reasons and explanations for this…” None of which are provided to the audience. Baffling.
stepwilk is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Mar 2010, 20:37   #6 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CamelShitCity
Posts: 95
Supprised nobody has commented on the fact that the aircraft is on the bottom of the ocean standing on its main gear.Gear down ditching…. this guy has a lot of questions to answer.
3REDS is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Mar 2010, 22:12   #7 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,622
Nonsense such as ‘would you take off without a full tank of fuel?’ and ‘no one knew where to look because the pilot didn’t issue a mayday’ demonstrate the agenda clearly.

Why do you think that stuff is nonsense?

If you are flying to a remote aerodrome known for having unpredictable weather, why would you only load the legal minimum fuel? Why not fill to your MAUW?

If you’re going to do a controlled ditching with power and some time to prepare, why wouldn’t you put out a mayday including your actual position? Why wouldn’t you give the passengers enough time to get life jackets on?

Why was the Captain out before the passengers?

I think these are valid questions for this type of show to be asking and I’ll be interested to read the ATSB report when it comes out.

AerocatS2A is offline Report Post Reply
Old 10th Mar 2010, 22:47   #8 (permalink)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,638
Thoroughly Discussed Here

RatherBeFlying is offline Report Post Reply
Old 11th Mar 2010, 03:03   #9 (permalink)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: North America
Age: 53
Posts: 373
The amazing double edged sword of aviation that I would love to unleash elsewhere….

I watched the MSN video link and read through some of the posts and the related discussion that ran at the time of this event. Here are a few ancillary things to point out to the “spotter’s balcony”.Thousands of aviation regulations are in place. However, an operator/airline can apply for an “exemptions” a license not to comply with the regulation. If an operator can justify not complying with a rule they can petition to be exempted from that rule, if the reasons are good enough the petition is granted. Sruprised?Virtually everything this crew and company did in relation to this flight will be brought out in the open and analyzed in detail; just as it should be.As pilots, and a condition to continued employment, we have to certify medically every six months (Captains). If we do not pass the medical examination we are finished flying. Our backgrounds are reviewed by the medical and civil/federal authorities and any hint of substance abuse/addiction or trouble with the law (driving while intoxicated or other anti-social behavior) will result in the removal of authority to fly. Our blood and urine is analyzed, and breathalyzer exams administered-often randomly while at work.On the job every word uttered is recorded as is every radio transmission, once by the jet and then again by the controlling air traffic facility. My phone conversations with the company flight operations center are all recorded. On the aircraft itself Flight Data Recorders (FDR) document sometimes hundreds of parameters simultaneously; virtually every switch, lever or pedal I move is digitally inscribed in memory with exhaustive detail.

As pilots we will be randomly inspected and our work directly observed, sometimes several times a year by, by government aviation inspectors and company designated examiners (Ramp & Line Checks). Each year, during annual recurrent training (for me this is 5 days), we are expected to demonstrate our flying ability under normal, abnormal and emergency conditions. We must be familiar with changing policies & regulations and possess a thorough mechanical knowledge of the airplanes we fly, the regulations we operate under and the policies commanded by the company along with all the changes therein. You could think of this in terms of sitting for (defending) your PHD, MD, Certified Public Accountant or other professional license exams each year, every year, throughout your working professional life.

I don’t complain one iota regarding the exhaustive oversight I work under. Other than astronauts and a few specialized instances in the military, your commercial airline pilots are likely the most scrutinized, observed and regulated working population on the planet; exactly as it should be.

When this accident investigation is complete the facts will be laid bare; the good, bad and ugly in a way that is unique to aviation. The passengers involved, the public and media will have access to virtually all the unadulterated evidence.

How I wish I could unleash the same level of transparency, accountability and public scrutiny along with the identical threat of jeopardy (we pilots face) on every elected members of my government, the Judiciary, the Law Profession and every Federal/Civil/State/County/Municipality/Public Works or City employee I am required to work with. What a different world this would be.

Last edited by Northbeach; 11th Mar 2010 at 14:44.

Northbeach is offline Report Post Reply
Old 11th Mar 2010, 09:25   #10 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,622
I agree Northbeach. A small nitpick, a Class 1 medical in Australia is only done once a year unless you are over a certain age. Your country must either have more strict requirements or perhaps you are over a certain age?
AerocatS2A is offline Report Post Reply
Old 11th Mar 2010, 09:49   #11 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 888
Class I USA every six months No matter how old or young you are.
stepwilk is offline Report Post Reply
Old 11th Mar 2010, 13:37   #12 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,622
More strict requirements then .
AerocatS2A is offline Report Post Reply