facthunter Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 It usually works out that way often due to AOPA's involvement. or just the passage of time. .. CASA have really been under the spotlight for the last few years. They aren't the KGB. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 What turbo says "Gospel" what others say "hot air". Logically... How can that be?...... "Poo Bah - Lord high everything else" syndrome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 It usually works out that way often due to AOPA's involvement. or just the passage of time. .. CASA have really been under the spotlight for the last few years. They aren't the KGB. Nev Nev, at times it is a bit hard to distinguish CASA and the KGB... both would claim, if challenged, that their actions were in the best interests of 'the State'. However, (and despite the dismissive comments of some), the recommendations of the ASRR recently completed was almost unilaterally endorsed by the Minister responsible. It also had a generally positive reaction from the Aviation community AND the new DAS has publicly stated his commitment to ensuring that the abiding principles expressed will become the new 'culture' for CASA. I watched the progress of Bruce Byron, who made very genuine attempts at consultation with the Aviation industry - meeting at his initiation with key persons and often arriving unannounced at aviation organisations to talk to the people at the coal-face. The CASA internal 'power elite' conspired - and that is the correct word - to subvert the carefully-researched and considered changes Byron was attempting to put in place; as a result, several high-ranking people were summarily dismissed (with the Minister's approval), for what would have amounted to mutiny in a military service organisation. I am talking about being escorted off the premises here. Both Mark Vaile and Warren Truss have been comprehensively ignored by sections of CASA, and were not sufficiently interested /competent to recognise that; Albanese was simply not at all concerned with Aviation, full stop. The CASA action in this case is an obvious and direct contravention to some of the major priorities in terms of 'the culture' of CASA recommended in the ASRR and accepted by the Minister literally days before it was launched ( precisely, I think about 20 days post the Ministerial Statement..) Many aviation organisations and individuals put very considerable amount of time and energy into providing submissions to the ASRR committee and the gamut of problems upon the industry bought by CASA /ATSB / Air Services, were canvassed. The ASRR committee were evidently not fools, and the ASRR itself is a well-considered document that provides a framework for the progress of Aviation. A small and vocal coterie of individuals with personal agendas consider that the CASA action against Jabiru is fair and reasonable. That entirely negates the value of the ASRR principles being implemented by CASA, and I suggest is indicative of the fact that their concerns for the health of the entire aviation community in Australia are worth less than their own prejudice. I believe there is a strong case for representation to the Minister that his own endorsement of the ASRR recommendations has been entirely ignored by CASA - the evidence of that is clear and unambiguous. The RAA Board is - wisely in my opinion - refraining from taking the political channel here, but I suggest there is not inconsiderable scope for individuals to direct the Minister's attention to the situation. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I have dealt with them over many years and known many who have worked there. It is a house of intrigue with people bitching about somone else most of the time. Sometimes there is progress and later it is all gone. They briefly entertained the concept of human factors in accident /incident investigation, but that made it harder to come down on people because it showed why they transgressed and that wasn't the idea. Harder to punish people. Where they are now it is a wonder why anyone indulges in aviation. You would have to almost be addicted to it to stay. There is a lack of skilled experienced people about and it shows. Dick Smith was ambushed. The inertia of the organisation effectively stopped most of the reforms Dick wanted to implement. From day one I recall The internal magazine cover. "Dick Smith.... Your New Head" I agree with what you say about Byron. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Nev - Dick Smith was a major reason for most of the really good people leaving CASA. He reduced the organisation from a collection of the best aero engineering expertise in the country, to the dregs who would never be employed by private industry. He had a damn good principle in 'Affordable Safety' - but he had no frigging idea of how to manage an organisation to achieve that. Sorry if that sounds bitchy - but ask the 'old lags' in the ex-CAR 35 community... Leroy Keith was potentially a excellent CEO for CASA; PAP members held great hopes. Read: http://proaviation.com.au/2013/04/06/to-hell-with-the-rules/. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aldo Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Nev - Dick Smith was a major reason for most of the really good people leaving CASA. He reduced the organisation from a collection of the best aero engineering expertise in the country, to the dregs who would never be employed by private industry. He had a damn good principle in 'Affordable Safety' - but he had no frigging idea of how to manage an organisation to achieve that.Sorry if that sounds bitchy - but ask the 'old lags' in the ex-CAR 35 community... Oscar I have to agree, I believe the downward spiral of CASA began with Dick Smith, lots of people lost jobs because of his ideas and I believe flying is less safe because of his ideas. My opinion only, I'm not a fan and particularly with his take on the 210 crash in the Barrington Tops, his interview on seven absolute rubbish. Aldo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 He was erratic I know . He must be capable of running something. He's not short of a quid. Maybe they fear RAAus because they have no expertise in airframes and all of that CAR 35 stuff. I've got to listening to his views a lot more lately. He doesn't make out he is an ace pilot or ex airforce boffin or Airlines type. and flies just about everything.. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aldo Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Nev But like most self made people it is their way or the highway. It's not that I don't respect his business ability or his ability to fly almost anything I just don't like people who manipulate the truth to suit their own agenda's and he is very good at that. Aldo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I am aware that pilots (particularly Qantas) didn't get on with him at all. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I didn't intend to make a hero out of Dick Smith. More indicate the entrenched nature of the CASA. I have hoped and hoped there would be an improvement. Not to be so far. Do I get my hopes up again?. There IS a limit.Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest john Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 The current news report from the new ceo of CASA is no more than a smoke screen of POLITICIANS SPEECH. Some of the older members on this forum will recall reading the same bullshxt in the AOPA magazines of 35-40 years ago when Peter Patroni , Dick Smith & Boyd Munro who occupied the AOPA Presidents Chair during these times & the same goodwill message was being preached throughout the aviation community during this era . Therefore nothing whatsoever will change within CASA for the betterment of aviation to make flying more of an affordable safety sport. The only thing that is predicted to change within CASA is unfortunatley more RED TAPE, REGULATIONS , SURVEILANCE & interference which will restrict our FREEDOM TO FLY SAFELY, as sure as the tide is due to come in on the next cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 While the lessons in the history of CASA might be interesting, this thread is about CASA 292/14 Warren Truss has done his "independent review" thing as Ministers like to do to show they care, and moved on. He said on September 14 LAST YEAR: "the Civil Aviation Safety Authority is a statutory body and, as Minister, I cannot direct it on safety regulations." So how would going behind CASA's back to the Minister encourage them to a sympathetic view? It's clear that the people who I suggested in #753 might be able to help move this forward are not likely to. June starts Monday, so talking to CASA would be at the 11th hour. It's easier for CASA to let the Instrument run than it is to stop it or ease it, but even at the 11th hour it's worth talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 ATTENTION! The assembly will come to order. Those boys in the back - Stop talking! The following boys will report to the Headmaster's office immediately after assembly for a jolly good flogging: 1. OSCAR for failing failing to ring Mr Ungerman and thus failing to save the world as the Headmaster directed in his proclamation to the a unwashed # 753 2. GANDALPH for not doing something he boasted about having the skills to do several months ago and thus not saving the world. Proclamation # 753 refers. The rest of the assembly will stay back after class and write 1000 times: "Headmaster is great! Headmaster is good! We must not dispute the proclamations of The Dear Leader." That is all! 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 you idiot..... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I was supposed to take that SERIOUSLY??? Have we slipped into a parallel but opposite universe? Not fair, Sir: I was part of a group that invited Ungerman to be briefed on the actual technical issues. His response was 'too busy right now', and there was a whole gang of boys shouting at him at the time to expel Jabiru. It was all in the School Magazine... and now Ungerman has no clothes so he's not going to come out and talk to us. And Mr Aleck has given him a note that says he doesn't have to, anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I thought you blokes would be happy to have a capital A Adult in charge after those terrible years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I was supposed to take that SERIOUSLY??? Have we slipped into a parallel but opposite universe?Not fair, Sir: I was part of a group that invited Ungerman to be briefed on the actual technical issues. His response was 'too busy right now', and there was a whole gang of boys shouting at him at the time to expel Jabiru. It was all in the School Magazine... and now Ungerman has no clothes so he's not going to come out and talk to us. And Mr Aleck has given him a note that says he doesn't have to, anyway. Yes, we are in a parallel but opposite universe. I would also have said "too busy" to a group who wanted to talk about technicals, because these days it's up the the manufacturers and operators to decide the technicals, and the regulators are usually only involved in performance standards. So that tells me Lee Ungermann is operating on current DIRD message. Get to the bottom of the Performance issues in 2014, and you get to the strategy needed to get out of the bog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 would also have said "too busy" to a group who wanted to talk about technicals, because these days it's up the the manufacturers and operators to decide the technicals, and the regulators are usually only involved in performance standards. And the Performance Standard that Jabiru has breached is? 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 So CASA has broken the law gandy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 So CASA has broken the law gandy? Has it FT? Are you saying it has? I haven't and I don't understand why you keep trying the same old stunt of trying to to put words into my mouth. You tried it in#765 and I replied in #772. It didn't work there and it hasn't worked here. Nothing has changed Mate, including your tactics of stirring the poo. Do you have anything of value to add the the thread? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Well, that's the issue, in part at least. There is no nationally decreed nor internationally agreed 'reliability' standard - and CASA relies on either its own determined standards / compliance with international standards ( FAR 23, ASTM, EASA, BCAR etc.) Indeed, CASA has never indicated even so much as a 'goalpost' for engine reliability; it simply plucked out of the air (no pun intended) a figure against which, by comparison, Jabiru engines did not meet. It has not been demonstrated that the 'benchmark' figure used is any more reliable than the figure it used to justify its actions - both remain as unproven. Any assertion that unreliability incidents are under-reported / faithfully reported MUST be substantiated for both the benchmark and the Jabiru figure contention - and that has not been done. For anything less than this, both the Rotax and Jabiru 'figures' are conjecture. Yet CASA ignored statistics for other engines that are demonstrably worse than the benchmark. Therefore, a 'line in the sand' for CASA action due to engine unreliability has not been established; all that has been established, is that in CASA's opinion, Jabiru engines are more likely to have 'incidents' than Rotax engines. CASA has singled out Jabiru engines as a target for action without at any time acting comprehensively to enforce a de-facto 'standard' for reliability. Since there is not one shred of statistical evidence that supports any contention that the 'safety' outcomes of Jabiru engine incidents presents an elevated risk to either those flying in Jabiru-powered aircraft or the 'general public' over the operation of aircraft with other engines, it is clear that the CASA action has targeted Jabiru engines for punitive measures without justification. Indeed, CASA has thus far refused to release the data it claims to support its action. In the absence of that, it is not possible to compare the 'safety outcomes' of other vs. Jabiru engine 'incidents'. This much we do know, however: in 2014 - the year nominated by CASA as the 'trigger' for its action - there were no deaths or injuries to non-flying persons resulting from Jabiru engine 'incidents'. As far as I can recall, there were two deaths in a Jabiru-powered aircraft - off Moruya, and due to an airframe component failure. Across the RAA spectrum, there were no injuries to 'the general public' from any RAA aircraft 'incidents'. There were deaths and severe injuries to the aircraft occupants amongst Rotax-powered aircraft - however the incident reporting rarely isolates whether that was actually engine-incident related. It may well be that the 'death /injury' tally for engine incidents for Rotax-powered aircraft is precisely the same as for Jabiru-powered aircraft: zero. You cannot take 'zero fatalities' vs 'zero fatalities' and construct an argument that the zero on one hand is worse than the zero on the other hand. That is a complete nonsense. You also cannot take a statistical basis of zero impact on the non-flying public from engine incidents, multiply it by an alleged number of engine incidents and come out with a notional figure for the effect of restrictions of other than zero - unless you are entirely deficient in understanding of both mathematics and logic. Historically, the children slaughtered by the impact of Jabiru-engine crashes into their habitat - is zero. Same for the old people in aged-care homes, the young couples just starting out on a happy and productive life, the inspiring professionals, etc etc etc. In fact, based on statistics, the manufacturers of step-ladders are more likely to be the agents of death and injury than Jabiru, Rotax, any ultralight manufacturer. More people died as a result of Police high-speed chases in Australia, than as a result of Jabiru engine incidents. I think, more people died of Hendra virus in 2014 than as a result of Jabiru engine incidents. Ban horses, save lives. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 It seems like Gandy is finally admitting that CASA haven't broken the law. We are moving on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 It seems like Gandy is finally admitting that CASA haven't broken the law.We are moving on! FT you really are a goose! Like your appellation, you are nought but a destructive vortex of wind. I won't make comment about the reference to Lucilia cuprina in your name as the Mods might think I'm being disrespectful. Just in case you didn't understand what I said earlier , let me try again: Gandy, (that's me) doesn't have to "admit that CASA hasn't broken the law" because, (now FT are you paying attention to this bit?) Gandy (that's me) has not offered an opinion on whether CASA has broken the law. If you (that's not me) have, rattling around somewhere in that noggin of yours, the idea that Gandy (that's still me. Are you getting the hang of this yet?) has said that CASA has broken the law then (and this bit is important too, FT) You are WRONG. I (Gandy) would really like you to bump the needle onto the next track. I wonder, have I made that too complicated for you? Would you like me to use words that are not as big? Are you moving on? Don't bother sending a postcard. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Does anyone know who is dealing with this matter in CASA.? What would be their particular qualifications to make these decisions. Do any of them actually work on these engines. I've compared the "failure rate" with plenty of other engines. IF THIS, (whatever this is) is the new standard we might have only Rotax 912's allowed in the skies here. If THEY (rotax) perform less well, in the future It will be rubber bands or pedal power.. Lots of engines that were considered good in the past are being looked at far more frequently because they are old and people fiddle with them AND THEY DON'T GET USED EVERYDAY.. I would venture to say many planes are being flown less often. That fact could have a bearing on things. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 one more time................we, me n her, ( wife ), are constantly heading off somewhere in our JABIRU .....long legs, tiger country always.......99.6% of the time, if we bump into another traveller that's Raa reg........it's another jab. "luck" has nothing to do with my jab 2200 engine, ( and it's hyd lifter engine ).........control your temps, run UCL in your fuel, service it right. i cruise at 2850 ish, burn 15LPH...............this casa @##$$%^^ is (**&&^%$# 9 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now