Jump to content

Pleasent encounter with CASA today


Recommended Posts

So I was breathalised and drug tested today at Tyabb. Greg from CASA was lovely and I'm pleased to say that I was clear of alcohol, amphetamines, opiates, cannabis, and cocaine. Probably a good thing overall at 9:30AM on a Thursday morning...but hell that would have been quite a party!!

 

With all the bad things we say about the regulator I must say I can't fault them on this one. Cheers.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • More 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always found CASA people to be good, just trying to keep us all safe. The CASA people I have no time for are at the top and just working a big money sink to do in a poorer way what FAA does.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
I have always found CASA people to be good, just trying to keep us all safe. The CASA people I have no time for are at the top and just working a big money sink to do in a poorer way what FAA does.

How do you know that?

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You got my attention, I thought you meant Plea sent to CASA, but if Greg was Lovely, that's nice, Now everyone will want Greg to do it. The people "behind the Counter" are not the issue. and never were, in a general sense.. They don't decide the policies or the rules. When you get into that area you will find there's not as clear cut a situation as is desired in uniformity of interpretation. An opinion is not worth much (or a smiling face).. Nev

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a lovely society we have made ourselves. We no longer make laws which the vast majority of people simply follow. Our government no longer trusts its people. We are making a "Low Trust Society". These are usually found in the Third World and the reason that they are Third World is because they are low trust societies. Third World conditions will follow soon enough here.

 

On public servants, I've generally found the front line and their immediate supervisors to be generally helpful. The corruption starts higher up.

 

 

  • Winner 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Playing the devil's advocate, I wonder if "pleasant encounters" will eventually lead to " unpleasant encounters"........

Ah, that'll be the anal probe 037_yikes.gif.f44636559f7f2c4c52637b7ff2322907.gif

 

Oh sorry that's the Aliens isn't it. Wrong group.003_cheezy_grin.gif.c5a94fc2937f61b556d8146a1bc97ef8.gif

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generalised bureaucracy bashing is unhelpful and just puts the "faceless men" deeper into the trenches. Names, places and evidence is the name of the game and this includes positive validation when the system brings about good outcomes.

 

 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I say keep the drunkies and the junkies out of the air. Well done CASA.

 

Spot checks like this just show we can be trusted doing the right thing

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nightmare - these days - All the departments of the government does not trust us. And why should we ever trust the government - catch 22? or the truth.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I work for the government, and our motto and work ethic is "Protect the community" I'm sorry SSCBD but we start from being trusting, then go from there. In the 3 years I've been flying I have never been tested by CASA officials for drug or alcohol use, and I think that's testament to how well our industry has complied with the rules. I think you'll find that regularity of checks corresponds to the incidents involving pilots affected by drugs or alcohol. With road vehicles, I think you'd find a similar increase in road side testing, in response to increasing incidents involving drivers affected by drugs or alcohol.

 

If we can't self manage, then expect the government to get involved, as they should, as there is not only the potential of the drunk to harm themselves but also for them to harm others.

 

Besides, if you have been compliant to the legislation, and that legislation was drafted to protect all members of the public, you have nothing to fear.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

" If you do everything right , you have nothing to fear" is a worn out platitude and doesn't take account of what actually happens sometimes .Originally under this legislation some absolutely ridiculous assertions were made and people booked., like if you are on an aerodrome after consuming any grog you are "presumed" ready to fly, and you can't go and lock your plane or hangar if you have had a beer..

 

Going back to the Issue of the ASIC (as another example) some bright high up CASA individual said (and published) you would not be able to (legally) get off the ground in Australia, without one. There's also some totally ridiculous things done around security designated aerodromes. All this just is one more thing to put one off.. In RAAus you only carry yourself and one other AWARE person...That aware person should know if the pilot is a drug or alcohol abuser.. I wouldn't think of going flying in a U/L unless I knew the pilot by reputation or personally was reliable., knew how to fly and look after his plane and himself. There's not a lot of "community protection'"Involved in this sort of pastime . On the road it's another matter entirely, as you can involve a lot of "other" people easily

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
" If you do everything right , you have nothing to fear"

AH....nineteen thirty something, europe?

 

Meaning"who decides what's right?"............

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
AH....nineteen thirty something, europe?Meaning"who decides what's right?"............

If you're alluding to comparing our government to the Nazi one of Germany, I think you're way off track. I am simply against anyone under the influence getting into the cockpit and piloting an aircraft. I know it's dangerous, so I support the govt that we all elected, to stop such action. I feel for the family of people who have been killed on the road by drunks behind the wheel.

 

" If you do everything right , you have nothing to fear" is a worn out platitude and doesn't take account of what actually happens sometimes .Originally under this legislation some absolutely ridiculous assertions were made and people booked., like if you are on an aerodrome after consuming any grog you are "presumed" ready to fly, and you can't go and lock your plane or hangar if you have had a beer..Going back to the Issue of the ASIC (as another example) some bright high up CASA individual said (and published) you would not be able to (legally) get off the ground in Australia, without one. There's also some totally ridiculous things done around security designated aerodromes. All this just is one more thing to put one off.. In RAAus you only carry yourself and one other AWARE person...That aware person should know if the pilot is a drug or alcohol abuser.. I wouldn't think of going flying in a U/L unless I knew the pilot by reputation or personally was reliable., knew how to fly and look after his plane and himself. There's not a lot of "community protection'"Involved in this sort of pastime . On the road it's another matter entirely, as you can involve a lot of "other" people easily

There is the potential to involve "other" people in an aviation accident, planes have been known to impact with buildings and property and hurt others in the past. We fly over all sorts of things and people, all of which could be damaged by our actions or in-actions.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The corruption starts higher up.

A bit tough there, Mike. I'd say it's more a distancing of the pollies and upper echelon PS from what the coalface issues really are, and a developed attitude of arrogance to go with this. 'Yes Minister' got it pretty right. Sir Humphry wags the Minister in Canberra - as can be seen from the recent CASA response to criticisms. A responsible Minister would smack them down for that little bit of hubris - but we won't hold our breath!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't made a habit of flying over cities, towns or populous areas in an U/L , Nightmare. I can't recall one instance of a person or property being affected by one. Our rules are written to that end.. Could start a grass fire I suppose. but so do cigarette butts. I have never seen anyone fly recreationally when drunk. They did during the war... If someone knows of someone, arrange for "them" to be tested.. or talk to them, at least. Nev.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't made a habit of flying over cities, towns or populous areas in an U/L , Nightmare. I can't recall one instance of a person or property being affected by one. Our rules are written to that end.. Could start a grass fire I suppose. but so do cigarette butts. I have never seen anyone fly recreationally when drunk. They did during the war... If someone knows of someone, arrange for "them" to be tested.. or talk to them, at least. Nev.

Or we could just refer back to the rural market under the trees where a PPG flew under the canopy over the heads of the people and strung himself up in a tree on the way out, or the guy who terrorised water skiiers on Hume Weir, or the guy who killed Sam Gulles family in the Dove, or the guy who hit the DC9 in the US and killed people on the ground ss well as the passengers and so on.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

. Were those people under the influence?. That's essentially what we are talking about isn't it? and as far as populous areas I'm referring to RAAus types in particular.. I'm talking about cost effectiveness.and finding pilots drunk or drug affected. and how you would respond to such events.. I only know of one and it was RPT out of Brisbane.. Airlines Usually have processes to support pilots with such problems.. I'm not saying that it's OK to fly drunk but is it happening? If so where are the stats and what is the treatment. proposed. Is there in fact a problem justifying the trouble and expense.. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
. Were those people under the influence?. That's essentially what we are talking about isn't it? and as far as populous areas I'm referring to RAAus types in particular.. I'm talking about cost effectiveness.and finding pilots drunk or drug affected. and how you would respond to such events.. I only know of one and it was RPT out of Brisbane.. Airlines Usually have processes to support pilots with such problems.. I'm not saying that it's OK to fly drunk but is it happening? If so where are the stats and what is the treatment. proposed. Is there in fact a problem justifying the trouble and expense.. Nev

The answer is we don't know how many are flying drunk, but BluE's post was a very refreshing experience of a Safety Authority conducting a random audit which is a good way to test trends.

If there is a percentage of problems the audits can be increased to see how widespread it is.

 

If the "hits are low, the cost is low; if there is a drinking problem the budget can be increased.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
" Originally under this legislation some absolutely ridiculous assertions were made and people booked., like if you are on an aerodrome after consuming any grog you are "presumed" ready to fly, and you can't go and lock your plane or hangar if you have had a beer..

For the record, on this occasion, myself and the other Pilot that I know was checked were asked if we planned to fly that day. We both confirmed we did. (Had already)

 

If the inspector had wanted to check both engines were still warm and he could have heard our inbound calls on the CTAF. Maybe he already knew, maybe not - but he was pretty savvy.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...