issues of concern across the industry where they may exist and what "we" the RAA community can do to

[David Isaac]

From the Ferris Wheel Accident thread.

 

We have all in the past been pretty adept at criticism (myself included), but when there is a problem perceived or otherwise, with a manufacturer, a pilot, an operator, a training organisation or our governing body, how should we approach it?

 

Should we just talk about it among ourselves (dare I say 'bag' the organisation / individual) or should we constructively and proactively approach the organisation / individual involved?

 

Not wishing to single out any organisation but lets take the unfortunate situation that Gary Morgan is in following the Old Bar incident; and I do not support being vindictive in any form to Gary. Hypothetically speaking, what if anything could we have been done if there were known issues pre the incident and more importantly what can we collectively do NOW to bring about an appropriate and satisfactory resolution?

 

There are many more issues than the example I have given, so lets have some constructive suggestions please. This could and should be an interesting and constructive thread; this is our industry, lets support it.

 

Lets try and NOT name and blame on this thread, but lets discuss real examples of issues de-identified and lets see what we come up with in terms of constructive actions.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

David how do you feel about forming a group to make a submission to CASA about improving the RAA?

 

 

[David Isaac]

David how do you feel about forming a group to make a submission to CASA about improving the RAA?

FT personally if the issues were serious enough to form a group I would do so and then approach our Board first. Our Board needs our constructive and objective support. If genuine issues are raised by a consensus, the Board would absolutely listen and act, that is what our constitution has provision for.

There is nothing to stop any group of members approaching the Board at any time with issues of concern. I am certain the Board would welcome that kind of constructive input. In my view to go the other way and back door our own organisation to CASA would be counter productive and destructive for the RAA community, not to mention the potential discredit it would bring on those involved.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

My personal belief is that CASA needs to manage the RAA better. As it is now, what the RAA are reporting to CASA seems to be a bit fictitious. What ever guidelines CASA have given to the RAA about how the organisation runs seems to be inadequate. With the ex-RAA staff now working at CASA it shouldn't be too hard fixing the RAA.

 

paragraph removed - Moderator

 

 

[Bandit12]

Happy to help out if you need a survey developed? Anything with stats attached always carries more credibility. If you want to show a procedural, attitudinal or training deficit, you need to be able to show the numbers.

 

 

[David Isaac]

FT, CASA has recently conducted an audit of RA Aus procedures and processes. As in any audit, issues of non compliance will be highlighted and corrective actions applied, that is the whole purpose of audits. RA Aus can only be better for it. We have a new Board and I know they are striving to get the 'house' in order, sure there will be some pain in the process, but tell me in what organisation there isn't when you are adapting and growing into a governance role.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

So what are you going to put in the submission David?

 

From my perspective, if the RAA shut down Morgan or any other manufacturer, it doesn't do anything for us pilots apart from absolve the RAA of any liability. The same as the training institutions, shutting them down to fix the RAA's legal issues doesn't fix the problems it just makes it harder for the rank and file.

 

 

[Wayne T Mathews]

Hang on FT, let's not put the cart before the horse... And please consider in future comments that the purpose of this thread that David has started, is to be constructive, not destructive...

 

 

[turboplanner]

FT stop, at least for a nanosecond, it would help if you studied the relationship between CASA and the independent Incorporated Association first. Your one liners aren't going to help anyone, and may do a lot more harm. I particularly wouldn't like to see the relentless attacking we saw against Blackrod.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

so what is going into the submission?

 

 

[Bandit12]

so what is going into the submission?

I think the idea was to thrash out some ideas that could go into the submission. I don't think that David Isaac has it all figured out and done yet, otherwise he wouldn't have been put it out there for discussion.

 

So the question is - what do YOU want in the submission FT? Not just a generic criticism, but identify a problem and propose a solution, or at least several ideas that you think may help. Blanket criticism without specifics, and without specific solutions is worthless.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I got nothing to complain about to the RAA, that they haven't already heard. CASA however, I think needs to act.

 

There are plenty of rules in place but no one from the RAA is ensuring that they are enforced, the only people that can force the RAA to lift its game is CASA.

 

The reason Ian why banned political bickering from this site was that its pointless as the RAA already know the issues and they aren't moving on them.

 

 

[David Isaac]

I got nothing to complain about to the RAA, that they haven't already heard. CASA however, I think needs to act.

CASA is already 'acting' as you put it; they have already performed an Audit of RA Aus as I had advised above. I would also think that given the audit was conducted by those in CASA who were previously intimate with RA Aus operations, it is highly likely the audit was thorough.

There are plenty of rules in place but no one from the RAA is ensuring that they are enforced, the only people that can force the RAA to lift its game is CASA.

From what we have seen FT, enforcing the rules is exactly what RA Aus have done, hence the grounding of several aircraft many of which are now flying again. Clearly the recent Ferris Wheel accident inquiry and the audit combined have shown up some administrative errors on the part of both RA Aus and more than one manufacturer and from my information that is causing some pain. So it is difficult to understand why you would so generally suggest that no one from RA Aus is enforcing the rules.

The reason Ian why banned political bickering from this site was that its pointless as the RAA already know the issues and they aren't moving on them.

This comment is completely out of the context of the discussion of this thread. I am NOT encouraging political bickering, I am in fact encouraging discussion of specific examples of issues with the objective of coming up with constructive remedies and I am not limiting the discussion to governing body issues.

[fly_tornado]

So what are you going to put in your submission?

 

moderated

 

 

[Guernsey]

We know that Gary Morgan's (24) registered aircraft are tempoarily grounded but do we know and are allowed to say what other manufactured (24) aircraft are also grounded.

 

I am just trying to get some sort of scale as to how many aircraft and Flying Schools are affected.

 

Alan.

 

 

[Bandit12]

I got nothing to complain about to the RAA, that they haven't already heard.

FT my friend, never make the mistake that just because "they" may have already heard it, there would be no benefit from hearing it again. So throw out your complaints, come with an idea to help and you might find that not many people agree, or that a majority of members aren't happy about the same things too. But if no one shares, obviously there are no problems.

 

 

[David Isaac]

So what are you going to put in your submission?

* FT, I am trying to encourage a culture of " ... see a problem in RAA whether pilot, training, manufacture, maintenance or admin; then be a part of the solution, don't perpetuate the problem by gossip ...".

This comes from my concern that we are quick to criticise within our community and in the process may unwittingly bring about disrepute to our association, remember we are an a association of members, we all have a voice so lets identify issues and be constructive to resolve them.

 

One example I will use is Gary Morgan and the issues raised that have grounded his aircraft ... what can "we" being RA Aus collectively do to resolve this issue regardless of whoever is at fault. There are clear technical issues that have grounded his 24 fleet. Technical issues are not difficult to resolve, I doubt the issues are major, but I'll wager the consequences could be severe and will affect all Australian manufacturers.

 

* part moderated

 

 

[Bandit12]

My agenda is clear - I'm not even an RAA member. My recent background is in survey development and statistics, so I offered to help with that if is useful. One of the problems with trying to fix any problem is getting it taken seriously. While stats take a bashing from a lot of people (including me at times), using them carefully can make a big difference in outcomes. Plus, any well designed quantitative survey data is very publishable in a number of aviation psychology journals or magazines, and if you want CASA or RAA to really sit up and take notice of something that needs improvement, publish it.

 

In a sense, I am fishing. Without ideas to start with, there is no direction. I'd like to do my bit because I very fondly remember my first few flights in an AUF Skyfox and Bantam back in the day, before switching to a Tomahawk and GA.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

*

 

*

 

Checklist for posting:-

 

1) Master on,

 

2) brain in ON position (This step is often forgotten)

 

3) form coherent logical post

 

4) check that the entire post is in the words and not 10% as words, 90% still just in brain which requires reader to stand on head in corner while considering what possible motives or intent you were trying to convey, often second step is done assuming inteligent lifeform created the post...this is not always the correct assumption. If post length in words for a serious post in a serious discussion can be counted on <10 fingers then probably appropriate to redo from step 3)

 

5) Ask questions of self as to how this might be interpreted (This step rarely performed, especially by those that missed 2, 3 and 4, believed that some additional policing may address, no proof or reasoning provided for that thought but clearly true nonetheless)

 

6) Concider what damage your post may do.

 

If people apply the same dilligence to flying as they do to posting then there are a number here that I would refuse to fly with.

 

*

 

*

 

Andy

 

*Parts not essential to topic removed by moderator

 

 

[sain]

I've been staying out of the feris wheel incident posts for the most part (until today), but:

 

As an organisation we need to be, and be seen to be open, transparant and accountable. If questionable practices are identified then they need to be rectified. Only if this is done can we continue to survive.

 

There were a number of construction/manufacturing issues identified with the aircraft involved in the Feris wheel incident. Apparantly this was a factory built aircraft, so this shouldn't have happened in the first place. This aircraft was apparantly being used to conduct flying training, and so should have been subject to regular inspections and, more importantly regular maintenance. This maintenance should have identified the issues with the control column and the rib attachment/construction.

 

Finally, if this was also the aircraft that was used to achieve type certification then we need to know why RAA hadn't identified the issues themselves prior to allowing the aircraft type to be used for training. Thats the worst of the 3 failures, in my opinion, and I think it'll be the one that does us the most damage.

 

This needs to be investigated and the results acted upon, not with a view to allocating blame or shutting down a manufacturer, but with a view to establishing processes to ensure it never happens again.

 

A mistake has been made. Lets not make the mistake of not fixing what caused the damn thing in the first place.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

So David, why not take your personal concerns to your local or state rep.

 

My concern with the RAA is that it is happily veiled in a cloak of secrecy and the only organisation that can force the RAA into the open is CASA.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Thanks Andy and Sain,

 

At last a step in the right direction. Lets see how constructive and creative we can be in pulling together on this as an association of members, hell bent on transparency and accountability. That will certainly raise the credibility profile for RAA.

 

 

[Guernsey]

See post 15....any answers please.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Guernsey: the information about the grounding should be in the public domain as its serious issue with significant implications. Either on the RAA website or via the magazine. If its not then you probably need to contact the RAA directly.

 

 

[facthunter]

I can't see any point in stirring anything up when no-one appears to have any SPECIFIC issues bothering them. When a complete audit is being done surely we would wait (eagerly?) for the report to be forthcoming and digested/analysed.

 

There may be elements of the audit that may be contested. Even CASA has to prove it's case if they want credibility.

 

There hasn't even been a FINAL report on the "Ferris Wheel" incident has there?

 

Again without FULL knowledge of what is happening, I prefer to wait rather than jump in at this point and I don't assume anything till the full story is told. Nev