RAA Safety-Training-Compliance Coordinator appointed

[David Isaac]

Richard,

 

An Oscar is a very popular tropical aquarium fish of the the Cichlid family.

 

'Astronotus ocellatus' is the species of fish known under a variety of common names, including Oscar, Tiger Oscar, Velvet Cichlid, or Marble Cichlid.

 

They are a magnificent specimen but they can bite quite ferociously ... LOL

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Oscar was also a Japanese fighter aircraft (land-based Zero) that couldn't take a hit and came apart easily if hit by allied fire..........LOL.........Maj.................

 

 

[David Isaac]

While we are on the subject of safety management systems, I thought you would all enjoy this Aussie poem about risk assessment and mitigation .... ROFLMAO

 

Aussie Poem

 

 

 

The sun was hot already - it was only 8 o'clock

 

The cocky took off in his Ute, to go and check his stock.

 

He drove around the paddocks checking wethers, ewes and lambs,

 

The float valves in the water troughs, the windmills on the dams

 

 

 

He stopped and turned a windmill on to fill a water tank

 

And saw a ewe down in the dam, a few yards from the bank.

 

"Typical bloody sheep," he thought, "they've got no common sense,

 

"They won't go through a gateway but they'll jump a bloody fence."

 

 

 

The ewe was stuck down in the mud, he knew without a doubt

 

She'd stay there 'til she carked it if he didn't get her out.

 

But when he reached the water's edge, the startled ewe broke free

 

And in her haste to get away, began a swimming spree.

 

He reckoned once her fleece was wet, the weight would drag her down

 

If he didn't rescue her, the stupid sod would drown.

 

Her style was unimpressive, her survival chances slim

 

He saw no other option, he would have to take a swim.

 

 

 

He peeled his shirt and singlet off, his trousers, boots and socks

 

And as he couldn't stand wet clothes, he also shed his jocks.

 

He jumped into the water and away that cocky swam

 

He caught up with her somewhere near the middle of the dam.

 

 

 

The ewe was quite evasive, she kept giving him the slip

 

He tried to grab her sodden fleece but couldn't get a grip.

 

At last he got her to the bank and stopped to catch his breath

 

She showed him little gratitude for saving her from death.

 

 

 

She took off like a Bondi tram around the other side

 

He swore next time he caught that ewe he'd hang her bloody hide.

 

Then round and round the dam they ran, although he felt quite puffed

 

He still thought he could run her down, she must be nearly

 

stuffed.

 

 

 

The local stock rep came along, to pay a call that day.

 

He knew this bloke was on his own, his wife had gone away,

 

He didn't really think he'd get fresh scones for morning tea

 

But neither was he ready for what he was soon to see.

 

 

 

He rubbed his eyes in disbelief at what came into view

 

For running down the catchment came this frantic-looking ewe.

 

And on her heels in hot pursuit and wearing not a stitch

 

The farmer yelling wildly, "Come back here, you lousy bitch!"

 

 

 

The stock rep didn't hang around, he took off in his car

 

The cocky's reputation has been damaged near and far

 

So bear in mind the Work Safe rule when next you check your flocks

 

Spot the hazard, assess the risk, and always wear your jocks!

 

 

 

[Pete Greed]

Pretty much sums it up Oscar. What we now need to see are the consultative, strategic planning and implementation processes that will make it happen - Members happy, RAAus board happy and to complete the trifecta, CASA happy.

 

Get the above right and the necessary actions/operations will follow. That is, I am sure, what the majority of members want from the RAAus board; and certainly not more of the past machinations of who did what to who on the climb to our current dodgey position of shonkey governance/management and non compliance with the government (CASA). All the ducks are lined up. Experienced Chair and Treasurer, all we need to do is redefine the role of Secretary.

 

Pete

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

John, the years you mention we're the years we all suffered under the global financial crisis. There was a general downturn in flying activities in this country, and internationally for that matter. Naturally because of that there were also less accidents and fatalities.

Flying activity increased (year on year) from 2000 onwards but did indeed decrease in 2010. However, if you reread my post, you will notice that I was referring to the number of flying hours for each fatal accident - this is independent of the level of activity in a given year so there must be some other cause ?

 

I don't disagree at all that better dissemination of the scenarios & causes of recent accidents would beneficial & I hope that if/when you are an RAAus board member you come back & post here that you have achieved this - I will be the first to congratulate you. Nevertheless I'm increasing convinced that there will be very few, if any, new lessons in any of the conclusions. Hence, pending your changes, most of the lessons can already be learnt from the investigations in other countries which do publish them.

 

I recommend the BMAA reports from the UK (although there are far fewer fatalities because they have a much better safety record). They can be found here http://www.bmaa.org/pwpcontrol.php?pwpID=3730

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[turboplanner]

The fluctuation in numbers could also be that although there was an initial perception of where the HF push came from - silly accidents, it's development and rollout was a disaster, with at least two independently written books which didn't coincide with the RAA syllabus or questions, and a pathetic couldn't care less exam.

 

The whole exercise needs to be started from scratch again, this time without the money making book sellers, and drawing on the examples which created the statistics, which showed the need for it in the first place.

 

If you research and analyse the statistics professionally, and tailor the training material to those statistics, and not academic theory related to a skindiving pilot, and have one set of training material, and ensure there's an exam before first solo, and FI audits at frequent intervals during training, you'll instill some of what some people call airmanship into future pilots.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Crezzi, I have been reading crash reports for over thirty years now, and still read one or two every week on this forum (news). They are a good education and a constant reminder that tragedy is only a short mistake away. I've also noted a continuing trend, with the same stupid and obvious mistakes being made with exactly the same results.

 

But they are all in the back of my head somewhere, and it's always nice when flying to recognise the danger areas and say to oneself "just watch things here" ..So far it's worked for me. Yes if I do end up on the board, pushing for accident reports will be top of my list, either by getting reports from ATSB or developing our own system. Next time some agreement comes up to be signed with CASA, we need to say "hang on, we need accident reports or no go" ..We have a right to some information .........Maj...

 

 

[Oscar]

From what I have seen, the only channel of reporting accidents in RAA has been the page in Sport Pilot. If one accepts that this is a publication intended to promote RAA activity to the general public (and I acknowledge the value of that), then the scant details could be regarded as consistent with the intent of the publication. However, it does not, in any real way, provide useful information to RAA members.

 

Accident investigation requires forensic skills. Let me give an example: the (fatal) crash of a Thorpe T4 some years ago, that flew in a gentle descent on full power into the ground. The pilot was a currently-rated and medically-checked airline pilot. The investigator, called in to help by the local Police in preparing their report for the Coroner, found a small crack in the floor immediately behind the exhaust exit, and was aware of the fact that a Thorpe T4 has negative pressure in the cabin, thus sucking in CO. He asked for a supplementary autopsy report to check for CO in the corpse's blood - that was found. The pilot was either dead, or at least comatose, well before the aircraft hit the ground.

 

The FULL information regarding the causes of accidents is very much needed - and it should not be redacted because it might be thought to be prejudicial to the cause of RAA aviating. If you are the pilot flying a Gazelle - do you NEED to know that the loads on the lift struts reverse beyond a certain airspeed/ loading? Bloody hell, you do, if you want to keep on living. Do you need to know that a hard landing in your Technam could have compromised the undercarriage bolts? - how much are you prepared to pay out in insurance excess when the u/c subsequently fails? Do you, as a Sting owner, need to know that in certain circumstances, the completely inadequate shoulder harness fittings will fail and smash your head against the panel ? Your widow and fatherless children might have liked you to know that and taken appropriate action in an emergency.

 

OK, perhaps RAA needs to keep its dirtier information away from the gaze of the general public for the sake of its public profile- but that information needs to be collected and be available to members. Only by having access to information, can we make informed decisions.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Next time some agreement comes up to be signed with CASA, we need to say "hang on, we need accident reports or no go" ..We have a right to some information .

Since Major seems keen to represent us, and is showing more prick and teeth than Wyatt Earp, I think we're going to have to gently, helpfully, bring him up to speed.

 

CASA (your friend who keeps you flying regardless of constant kicks up the ding[c. 2013 Facthunter]) is not likely to be wanting to talk about or sign up to anything to do with accident reports, mainly because the jurisdiction for that is deliberately kept separate, so that in the event of a catastrophe, CASA's position in the event can be investigated by an outside body, which incidentally has not been backward in kicking the Ar$e of our friend CASA in recent years.

 

Aviation management in Australia is controlled by the Minister for Infrastructure & Transport through Department of Infrastructure & Transport (DIT)

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au is the base link covering land/sea/air transport

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/international/icao is the link showing Australia’s connection to International aviation.

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/Airport Planning/Index.asp is the link showing the DIT relationship to airports and airport activities.

 

This has been badly misrepresented in some recent RF posts.

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/safety/index.aspx is the link showing DIT relationship to safety and accident investigation.

 

Here you can see that several separate bodies are involved in aircraft safety for a recreational aircraft.

 

• Department of Infrastructure and Transport
   
   
  
• Airservices Australia
   
   
  
• Australian Maritime Safety Authority
   
   
  
• Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB)
   
   
  
• Bureau of Meteorology
   
   
  
• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those who don’t travel cross country, don’t file flight plans, don’t need weather reports, don't get involved in the mandatory Performance & Operations requirements, and don’t need to be rescued may not be familiar with the touch points for Airservices Australia, Bureau of Meteorology and the Australian Maritime Safety Authority.

 

These are all separate bodies, and if you fly in Australian airspace with other aircraft, it might pay to bring yourself up to date with your safety obligations. Same applies to Radio – if you’re flying in Australian airspace so are QLink operators.

 

http://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/overview.aspx This provides an overview of ATSB, and says:

 

“The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) is an independent Commonwealth Government Statutory Agency. The ATSB is governed by a Commission and is entirely separate from transport regulators, policy makers and service providers.”

 

So it is not a division of CASA, it is an independent body, and is appropriate that a body investigating accidents should have an arm’s length relationship with ALL participants including regulators.

 

The failure to investigate, from an aviation aspect, accidents involving aircraft registered by Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. is not an issue for CASA to sort out.

 

CASA are not involved in investigating accidents, and the administration and training materials of RAA need to be brought up to date to reflect this.

 

Aviation accidents in Australia are investigated by a separate body, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). RAA needs to bring its documentation up to date to reflect this, and the current policy of ATSB to investigate some Recreational Aircraft accidents and incidents.

 

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/safety/ssp/files/Australias_State_Safety Program_2012_FA6.pdf t leads to a document which gives a good indication of how it all fits together and was updated/written in April last year.

 

Paragraph 1.3 shows who is responsible for Accident and Incident investigation

 

Paragraph 2 is headed State Safety Risk Management, and this talks about the SMS approach.

 

As we now know RAA has not has an operating SMS since 2010 and is currently non - compliant , and sooner rather than later CASA is going to have to move to legal sanctions regarding this breach.

 

 

[flyvulcan]

Perhaps RAAus should point out to CASA/ATSB etc. that a crucial component of any SMS, and more importantly our SMS is the reporting/analysis of incidents. Consequently, if we do not receive all investigations/conclusions into the incidents associated with our primary activities, then we cannot maintain an effective SMS.

 

The fact that regulatory protocol is preventing us from implementing an effective regulatory imposed SMS should support our case to gain access to this information.

 

 

[turboplanner]

That one won't wash with me FV, the two are not mutually exclusive and we already get enough data to send us in the right direction.

 

Ultimately good statistics = accurate targetting, but in terms of avoiding a mandatory Safety requirement I think some people will need to face criminal charges in some fatalities.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Since Major seems keen to represent us, and is showing more prick and teeth than Wyatt Earp, I think we're going to have to gently, helpfully, bring him up to speed.CASA (your friend who keeps you flying regardless of constant kicks up the ding[c. 2013 Facthunter]) is not likely to be wanting to talk about or sign up to anything to do with accident reports, mainly because the jurisdiction for that is deliberately kept separate, so that in the event of a catastrophe, CASA's position in the event can be investigated by an outside body, which incidentally has not been backward in kicking the Ar$e of our friend CASA in recent years.

 

Aviation management in Australia is controlled by the Minister for Infrastructure & Transport through Department of Infrastructure & Transport (DIT)

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au is the base link covering land/sea/air transport

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/international/icao is the link showing Australia’s connection to International aviation.

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/Airport Planning/Index.asp is the link showing the DIT relationship to airports and airport activities.

 

This has been badly misrepresented in some recent RF posts.

 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/safety/index.aspx is the link showing DIT relationship to safety and accident investigation.

 

Here you can see that several separate bodies are involved in aircraft safety for a recreational aircraft.

 

• Department of Infrastructure and Transport
   
   
  
• Airservices Australia
   
   
  
• Australian Maritime Safety Authority
   
   
  
• Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB)
   
   
  
• Bureau of Meteorology
   
   
  
• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those who don’t travel cross country, don’t file flight plans, don’t need weather reports, don't get involved in the mandatory Performance & Operations requirements, and don’t need to be rescued may not be familiar with the touch points for Airservices Australia, Bureau of Meteorology and the Australian Maritime Safety Authority.

 

These are all separate bodies, and if you fly in Australian airspace with other aircraft, it might pay to bring yourself up to date with your safety obligations. Same applies to Radio – if you’re flying in Australian airspace so are QLink operators.

 

http://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/overview.aspx This provides an overview of ATSB, and says:

 

“The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) is an independent Commonwealth Government Statutory Agency. The ATSB is governed by a Commission and is entirely separate from transport regulators, policy makers and service providers.”

 

So it is not a division of CASA, it is an independent body, and is appropriate that a body investigating accidents should have an arm’s length relationship with ALL participants including regulators.

 

The failure to investigate, from an aviation aspect, accidents involving aircraft registered by Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. is not an issue for CASA to sort out.

 

CASA are not involved in investigating accidents, and the administration and training materials of RAA need to be brought up to date to reflect this.

 

Aviation accidents in Australia are investigated by a separate body, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). RAA needs to bring its documentation up to date to reflect this, and the current policy of ATSB to investigate some Recreational Aircraft accidents and incidents.

 

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/safety/ssp/files/Australias_State_Safety Program_2012_FA6.pdf t leads to a document which gives a good indication of how it all fits together and was updated/written in April last year.

 

Paragraph 1.3 shows who is responsible for Accident and Incident investigation

 

Paragraph 2 is headed State Safety Risk Management, and this talks about the SMS approach.

 

As we now know RAA has not has an operating SMS since 2010 and is currently non - compliant , and sooner rather than later CASA is going to have to move to legal sanctions regarding this breach.

Unfortunately Turbs, I can't really say you've told me a thing in that blurb that I wasn't already aware of. We all know exactly what the system is and isn't, what we need to do I work out how to use it for our purposes, without getting clogged in the BS, which is what a lot of it is. You must remember I have trained and work for 12 years under what I consider to be a much more superior system...the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) The US book (FARS) is just that, ONE book..covering all the regs to do with flying, maintaining, building and standards. Our BOOKS stand over a meter high if stacked on top of each other. The majority of it being BS, legalese and major waffle.

 

I recently studied and sat for the CASA AA (Aviation airworthiness) exam and passed first time with 86 percent. Got me buggered how though, even 10 or so Kiwis in the class kept saying "we knew it was bad over here, but we didn't think it was this bad !" And a kiwi does know BS when they see it !.

 

In the US they do more flying in one day then we do in this whole country in one year...all governed by ONE book. The greater majority of aircraft operated in this country were designed, built and certified under the FAA regs, and now are required to be maintained under them also.

 

In my opinion our new incoming CASA people need to be sent to work with the FAA for at least one year, before being let loose here. That way they may have half a chance of knowing how to start running a countries aviation structure .....Don't even think of trying to re-educate me Turbs, I've been suffering under these coxxhxxds for way too long now ...And don't conveniently forget the AUF / RAAus didn't get to where it is with CASAs help and blessing. Wasn't until we became a major force that they even acknowledged us. Until then they just wanted us all to go away and kill ourselves....Sorry, but up here in the North we don't beat around the bush like you Southerners, we prefer to tell it like it is....And besides Turbs I won't be representing you, as your not even a paid up supporter of the RAAus !!!..Maj...

 

 

[turboplanner]

OK I'll try to make it simpler. For the sake if this exercise CASA is the "butcher" and ATSB is the greengrocer.

 

We are not getting information on carrot prices.

 

You said you would bring this up with the butcher.

 

I pointed out it was the greengrocer who was supposed to provide carrot prices.

 

What we need is less people attacking the butcher because they can't get carrot prices.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The butcher needs to start producing some beef !! Otherwise we won't be around to eat carrots .......Maj...

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

A couple of examples for you too contemplate......In the States I owned and flew a twin engined Lazair aircraft, manufactured in Canada (Ozzie has one). All perfectly legal by the FAA..and the USUA (united States Ultralight Federation). Just really another step up in capability for a pilot, is how they saw it.... Here they are banned. Real pity as they are a blast to fly, and very safe.

 

If you fitted a ballistic, or other type of life saving parachute device to an UL aircraft in the US, they gave you another 25 Lbs allowable to your allup take off weight. Most parachute devices weighed about half of that. A nice little gift to encourage the fitting of those devices. Doesn't sound like a lot but when your pushing the 254 lb limit, it's huge !....Here they don't care, or would probabily not even know what one looked like.

 

 

[Powerin]

I note, Maj, that you are a great believer in common sense. I like to think I have some too. But as you have also noted, it is a rare commodity these days.

 

And therein lies the rub. One of the reasons we have to put up with this level of regulation is not necessarily because the regulators have no common sense, but because there is so little of it in general society. These days we can't trust that the pilot lined up behind us at the holding point (or someone lined up at the traffic lights for that matter) has any.

 

So if some sort of safety regime protects me from those lacking in this area, or pulls me up when I do something stupid myself, then I'm all for it.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Powerwin, Couldn't agree more mate, but lets get rid of all the waffle and Legalese BS that out British based regulations (all three versions being used currently) are covered in. Get it all down to one book like the yanks...it works, it's simple, and everyone knows where the goalposts are.........................Maj.....

 

 

[flyvulcan]

Information post

 

For those members who are not familiar with the principles of a SMS, the ICAO SMS Implementation Training Course (which I have attended, prior to introducing a SMS into my organisation) has a reasonable presentation about SMSs. It can be viewed at http://legacy.icao.int/anb/safetymanagement/training/presentations/ICAO%20SMS%20M%2008%20–%20SMS%20planning%20(R013)%2009%20(E).ppt.

 

It may look like a load of waffle, but if implemented correctly, such a system would provide enormous benefit to our organisation. I have seen firsthand the substantial benefits of a successful system within an aviation organisation.

 

 

[turboplanner]

It's good that you posted that FV because it's the ICAO SMS that's mandatory for Recreational Aviation Australia.

 

About as controversial as getting a wimp to take an injection.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

It's good that you posted that FV because it's the ICAO SMS that's mandatory for Recreational Aviation Australia.About as controversial as getting a wimp to take an injection.

Only problem is CASA doesn't always work within the ICAO guidelines as anyone in the industry will well know. Only when it suits them. Their lack of acceptance of the FAA A&P (ICAO type 2) being a classic example. There are also many airspace guidelines that they refuse to accept. NZ is more ICAO compliant than we are..................Maj...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Powerwin, Couldn't agree more mate, but lets get rid of all the waffle and Legalese BS that out British based regulations (all three versions being used currently) are covered in. Get it all down to one book like the yanks...it works, it's simple, and everyone knows where the goalposts areand

 

Only problem is CASA doesn't always work within the ICAO guidelines as anyone in the industry will well know. Only when it suits them. Their lack of acceptance of the FAA A&P (ICAO type 2) being a classic example. There are also many airspace guidelines that they refuse to accept. NZ is more ICAO compliant than we are

The FAA was simple when you were flying there Major; I experienced it.

 

After being used to face to face weather briefings, full reporting where my flights were tracked live etc in Australia, I was in the US and decided to fly down the Grand Canyon. The local CFI just gave me the key to a Cherokee, pointed it out on the apron and said "Have a good flight!" After I explained that he was coming with me to do the radio if nothing else, we flew straight over the top of Nellis Air Force Base, with about 100 fighters lined up side by side and about 30 miles from Area 51 where the CIA and USAF were flying Oxcart/Blackbird missions.

 

However, the FAA is not the same animal as it was when you were there. I had a look at Ultralight operations this morning and the regulations look about as hard to find and as complicated as the CASA/RAA system - certainly not in one book as you suggested. Those days are clearly over so there's no point in whining on.

 

I also looked for ICAO association and it's obvious that FAA are incorporating more and more standards every year. For example one note said "ICAO flight plan procedures change significantly in November 2012

 

In passing interest I wondered if the big bad SMS had come anywhere near FAA, and I found they were already fully compliant.

 

Here's the FAA front page relating to SMS

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/sms/

 

Here are frequently asked questions, which will be helpful to a lot of people who have been misinformed about RAA obligations

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/sms/faq/

 

And here, in tjhis link, shining like a beacon is the reference to ICAO Document 9859, the EXACT SAME ONE that RAA was required to have complied with in 2010!

 

In other words FAA have already done what we have failed to do.

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs900/sms/media/newsletter/sms_qr_guide.pdf

 

So let's just cut the BS and disinformation and get on with it!

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Misinformation..?........there is no point in comparing the FAA with the RAAus Turbs, totally different entities. One has been around for over 100 years, and one for only 30 years !!....come on now pull the other leg!......and refer post 845 which you have also conveniently ignored.................Maj...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Powerwin, Couldn't agree more mate, but lets get rid of all the waffle and Legalese BS that out British based regulations (all three versions being used currently) are covered in. Get it all down to one book like the yanks...it works, it's simple, and everyone knows where the goalposts are.........................Maj.....

(a) You were the one who tried to con us that the yanks had just one book.

 

(b) I quoted and addressed your post 845; FAA is now extensively incorporating ICAO standards

 

The purpose of providing the links I posted is to allow people to go directly to the source for information, rather than having someone pull their leg.

 

With source documents there the truth becomes very obvious.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

You really need to get yourself a current copy of the FAA FARS / AIMs Turbs (federal aviation regulations)......If you go to the Jeppesen website, the 2013 FAR/AIM manual ISBN-13 9780884875840 is listed for US$12.95. It includes all FARS 1,3,43,61,71,73,91,97,103,105,119,135,136,137,141,142,49CFR830,1552, and 1562. The AIMS (Airmanship Information Manual) contains all relevant regulations also. Pretty much all you, or I would need in one book !!......This is the recognised and most used reference used in the States for regulations.......... Maj....

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

And by the way, we have nothing that even comes close here in one book !....nor can look foward to having in the distant future.....................Maj...