RAA Safety-Training-Compliance Coordinator appointed

[Guest Maj Millard]

Whose being negative now Keith?So in a complete roll reversal between you and I, I say, how about you give the new President and Treasurer (and even the recycled Secretary) a chance to get matters progressing their way before you start asking them to "be honest", which insinuates incorrectly but in your usual way, that they may considering being dishonest.

 

Regards Geoff

Looks like we've had a bit of a role reversal there also Captain......or is it a case of finally seen the light ??.......

 

 

[Captain]

Looks like we've had a bit of a role reversal there also Captain......or is it a case of finally seen the light ??.......

No Madge, just short-term role reversal ......................... before heading back into the dark.

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The important thing is this:

 

 

The old guard has proven that they are out of their depth. Whether it is me, Barry or someone else it doesn't really matter. One thing is for sure though - if we keep doing what we've always done then we will keep getting what we've always gotten. And that's not a good result.

 

Make up your own mind on the candidate you are thinking of voting for but ask yourself this. Is the guy that holds the position now the one you want to hold the position for the next couple of years. History speaks volumes and I urge everyone to listen to it...

This term "old guard" is quite prejudicial and getting boring. We need a new fresh term like " new guard !!" That's what we should use !!.......would you Mr Monke consider the new President Rod Birrell to be old guard or new guard...I reckon he's the right man at the right time, and he has heaps of experience in the sport behind him!.........old guard, new guard, old guard, new guard, old........please explain ?...........Maj...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Hazards at Stark field up here in North Queensland for instance would mean levelling of acres of nasty looking trees around the airport, plus the culling of hundreds of wallabys and roos that love to fed on lush green grass that only the runway offers. Then of course all the kite hawks and wedge tailed eagles would have to be shot out of the sky, don't want to hit one of those. And of course nearby Mt Elliot would need to be dynamited and levelled because it produces nasty turbulance on a windy day!.Where does this idealistic CASA initiated BS stop and start. Hazards are part of the game that we all willingly embrace, they've always been there , always will be. Putting together some SMS manual which "recognises "them won't change a thing. CASA cotton-wooling and waffle at it's finest !......................Maj...

The very last thing the Association needs this week is some Rambo venting about something he clearly doesn't understand on a public forum which a wounded CASA watches.

 

For their benefit, that's not the general attitude at all; many pilots are employees of medium to large companies which have had safety systems in place for years, and understand the principles of risk management.

 

For your information Major, this is not CASA initiated, it's lawsuit initiated, and CASA like any organization is just following due diligence.

 

If you think a safety management system is just a matter of writing a manual to "recognise" issues, you're sadly mistaken; an operation which just did that would be considered negligent.

 

In all companies which have gone through the change, there are always one or two who can't cope with the change and are forced out, but the majority survive and have a safer future.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

If you have been dealing with CASA as long as I have Turbs, you would be able to see it for what it is....nothing but yet another butt covering exercise. They have got it down to a very fine art now....If they really had our genuine safety ? In mind they would be actively assisting us in finding out what is causing our accidents and fatalities, either via their own "sport Aviation office" or from the ATSB..............Maj....

 

 

[Keith Page]

Whose being negative now Keith?So in a complete roll reversal between you and I, I say, how about you give the new President and Treasurer (and even the recycled Secretary) a chance to get matters progressing their way before you start asking them to "be honest", which insinuates incorrectly but in your usual way, that they may be considering being "dishonest".

 

Regards Geoff

Hello Captain

I am not being negative.

 

I must interpret this for you.

 

The new Pres, the new Treas, the Sect they have a case for hitting the ground running.

 

This is a case of getting off ones but and doing something, there has been a lot of bragging/ bush barresters spruking what should be done, now go see if it works.

 

As I see the situation quite a lot like limited over cricket "ya gotta get out there and hit the ball" Sitting there tapping it, oi! nothing happens. One day a centuary next a duck just realety.

 

Now the "honest bit" this regards the CASA meeting next wednesday.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Zibi]

Hazards at Stark field up here in North Queensland for instance would mean levelling of acres of nasty looking trees around the airport, plus the culling of hundreds of wallabys and roos that love to fed on lush green grass that only the runway offers. Then of course all the kite hawks and wedge tailed eagles would have to be shot out of the sky, don't want to hit one of those. And of course nearby Mt Elliot would need to be dynamited and levelled because it produces nasty turbulance on a windy day!.Where does this idealistic CASA initiated BS stop and start. Hazards are part of the game that we all willingly embrace, they've always been there , always will be. Putting together some SMS manual which "recognises "them won't change a thing. CASA cotton-wooling and waffle at it's finest !......................Maj...

Maj, SMS is not about getting rid of all hazards, rather about being aware of them and having a plan of action for each of them.

 

Even though they may all be obvious to you, for many people not living in your general area they may be something completely new.

 

You don't need to cull all those roos and wallabies, all you need to know is put it in your SMS, and then mention what you do about them.

 

For example tell your student to be on a watch out for them, be ready for a go around at any time. Maybe do a strip run before landing if the airfield is not used and you're the only one coming to it, etc.

 

All of this would be pretty standard stuff, that you should be common sense, but at the end of the day, it may be the difference between pilot freezing at the controls wondering what to do about all those roos and crashing in the process, and one that knew about this and had something planned and landing safely after a strip run.

 

SMS is also about people like yourself assuming that some things about the plane, airfield, flying are obvious, but for many people (especially new ones) they may not be.

 

I've seen you post on this board a couple times how important accident investigation is and how we need to know what has happened (and I don't disagree), but at the same time you dismiss all the human factor or SMS programs, when pilot errors are the most common cause of accidents.

 

One thing you have to remember - common sense is not really that common.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Zibi,...I have been saying common sense is not common anymore for many years now. Unfortunately in this day and age we have replaced common sense with human factors and SMSs, which are a very poor replacement in my opinion. A couple of years ago we all complied with the HF thing. Did it stop the accidents ..or even reduce them ?.. a big no. In fact they have increased since that time. And a SMS system in aviation will have about the same results.

 

Now a much better system would be similar to what the Australian Parachute Federation have in place, and have had in place for many years successfully.

 

All drop zones have to have a drop zone safety officer. This is usually a high licensed experienced jumper and often an instructor. He /she has the authority and responsibility to, if an infringement is observed or reported, to speak to that person, endorse that persons logbook, or even ground that person for a period of time, if he/she feels the infringement is serious enough.

 

This is positive action that gives results , not waffle and pipe dreams. The jumpers know someone is watching so perform better and safer accordingly. If they don't, they are taken aside or even out of the system for a period to think about their shortcomings.

 

We have the CFIs in place to carry out this action, and it could all be overseen by an area safety office, covering several locations within his area. An area safety office can also compile real incident data, in real time, which can then be forwarded to the RAA ops manager for storing and assessing. We don't need outside sources to compile our statistics accident data. We already have the people in place to do it easily ourselves.......

 

If a pilot knows that he may be reported or even grounded for a period, he will perform better, and be safer oveall. And those that don't, will stand out pretty quickly with appropriate corrective action then being taken.......

 

There was an area safety officer system in play back in AUF days, with usually the most experienced area CFI being the one giving out the chats or groundings. What happened to that system ???, was it thrown out with the bath water when we suddenly beame 'Recreational'...??........Maj....

 

 

[turboplanner]

Now a much better system would be similar to what the Australian Parachute Federation have in place, and have had in place for many years successfully. All drop zones have to have a drop zone safety officer. This is usually a high licensed experienced jumper and often an instructor. He /she has the authority and responsibility to, if an infringement is observed or reported, to speak to that person, endorse that persons logbook, or even ground that person for a period of time, if he/she feels the infringement is serious enough.This is positive action that gives results , not waffle and pipe dreams.

Now we're getting it.

 

If you care to read some of the previous posts you'll realise a compliance and enforcement structure, which is currently missing from RAA operations will be needed for exactly the reasons you talk about. That's a necessary part of an SMS, along with the person at the top to drive it, and the job description of that person is laid down in the CASA document trail, which recent screamers on this site conveniently have decided not to study.

 

And all of that was required in 2010, it's not something new this week. We've screwed up big time for three years!

 

That's why I said an SMS was not a matter of just writing a manual to "identify" wallabys etc.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The SMS and similar type systems are set up by governments and entities like CASA, not to attack the problems straight on, but to appear as though they have.

 

They can then say "well we required them to instigate a SMS system , so it's not our fault , we did our bit" while not really doing much to eliminate the danger at all.

 

Australian mining industry is ripe with the greatest SMS systems available, yet there are still mining fatalities. They just have somebody to hang now that's all, and make a heap of money out of the whole process .

 

Reminds me of a saying in reference to political correctness......"Political correctness is a docturin, created by a small minority of misguided people, who believe it is entirely possible to pick up a fresh dog turd, by the clean end ".........Maj...

 

 

[Zibi]

Maj, I agree with you that a safety inspector at every airfield would be better, however...

 

Have you seen how much opposition a simple CASA or RAAus ramp check can involves?

 

Seeing as you've been involved in aviation way longer than I have, you have probably been to an airfield where there are more than one flying school - I fly from one like that all the time, and from what I can hear the different CFI's don't really like each other all that much, now imagine if one had power over the others...

 

Also with sky-diving, it's usually organized through some club and you jump out of that club's plane, so if you don't behave, you don't get on the next flight, it's much harder to enforce when a lot of people have their own aircraft. Short of revoking access to the field there is not that much you could do, unless that safety person would have almost police like powers, where he or she could stop and detain your plane or yourself if you do something wrong.

 

Plus as far as I understand it CFI's already have similar powers (certificates, BFRs, etc), the problem is if you don't like one CFI you just go / fly to the next one.

 

I agree that no HF course or SMS will be perfect, especially if people are just treating it as a piece of paper that you need to have. However, short of putting an inspector or spy at every school, or interviewing schools students to check how safe your operation is, those are the methods that are available to us and organizations supervising us, to ensure at least some procedures are followed.

 

I know a lot of people in here criticize the HF exam, to be honest I really liked mine. Maybe it was because of how it the course for it was structured and executed, maybe because instead of considering it's just something I have to get done it makes me sometimes stop and think if I really should be flying o that particular day, even if I really want to, or maybe just because I find it fascinating, how a series of really small things can have a great impact on your life.

 

It's the same with SMS - we're going through setting one up at work as well(not flying related in any way) - is it annoying and time consuming - yes, will it stop accidents, probably not (although we haven't had any yet either), but it has made life easier in some regards, it has made the boss go and spend some money on equipment that's better and safer than what we've had (ladders for example) so I don't take it as a waste of time.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Zibi, the CFis as you should know are overseen directly by the the operations people with regular checks of their schools required.

 

There are many areas of operations that don't have CFIs present.

 

As far as opposition to CASA ramp checks, well if they came up with a UL type checklist instead of using one straight from GA then people may understand it a little more.

 

"Show me your fuel log"...nope, never used one in over thirty years of flying, and never run out of fuel once. I do know how much fuel is in my tanks on departure (measured with the never fail calibrated fuel stick), and I always note my time of departure. I also know how much my engine burns an hour and add some. And I do have a certified chronometer on board as required. To back all that up I have in-flight calibrated fuel sight-gauges in the cabin.

 

"Show me your flight plan"...........nope, talk to the wife, she holds it, and also holds the SARtime. Never failed yet. A system that has worked for 30 years. She knows my route, my capabilities and who to call if I don't arrive as planned. Nobody cares more about me than her. Filed flight plans get lost in the works...been there , done that !..........

 

Weight and balance ? Just flew Townsville to Temora two up, and fairly heavily loaded. Trim lever sits in the middle most of the time, the designer did a good job on my aircraft, you certified the design, and approved it for training, I believe it's right !!.......

 

I carry the latest state of the art navigation equipment,equipped with Ozrunways which you also approved, plus a back up GPS capability, plus maps. Never been lost yet....Maj...

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

A couple of years ago we all complied with the HF thing. Did it stop the accidents ..or even reduce them ?.. a big no. In fact they have increased since that time.

If you look at the fatal accident rate per flying hour, the 3 best years in the decade 2000/2010 were 2008, 2009 and 2010. This is the time that RAAus pilots were having to "comply with the HF thing". In 2 of those 3 years we actually did better than the UK average of 1 fatal accident per 55,0000 flying hours (I think these are the only years we have ever achieved that).

 

I agree that the RAAus implementation of HF wasn't ideal but it could be argued that what is needed is some follow-up education or training in HPL / HF / Pilot errors.

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[turboplanner]

The SMS and similar type systems are set up by governments and entities like CASA, not to attack the problems straight on, but to appear as though they have. They can then say "well we required them to instigate a SMS system , so it's not our fault , we did our bit" while not really doing much to eliminate the danger at all.

That thinking is about 30 years out of date. In the 1970's our Machine Examiners used to almost run down the line of race cars entering "NFF" (No Faults Found) and signing each log book ,which is similar to what you're suggesting above.

 

Then an incident occurred where a Machine Examiner was found to have been negligent because he had not in fact checked a safety component, and from that time the car checks took a lot longer.

 

CASA have just been a joint defendant with RAA in a claim, and I can assure you they will already be under pressure not to neglect their safety obligations. The transport industry tried what you said in the second line, and copped specific Chain of Responsibility legislation in every State, which could now very quickly be added to your operations if there's a sniff of just giving an SMS lip service. The days you are talking about have long gone.

 

Re the compliance and enforcement team required, we discussed it in this thread http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/raaus-sms-how-to-best-go-about-it.64103/,

 

and I gave a sample structure from another industry in #9.

 

 

[biggles]

"Show me your fuel log"...nope, never used one in over thirty years of flying, and never run out of fuel once. I do know how much fuel is in my tanks on departure (measured with the never fail calibrated fuel stick), and I always note my time of departure. I also know how much my engine burns an hour and add some. And I do have a certified chronometer on board as required. To back all that up I have in-flight calibrated fuel sight-gauges in the cabin.

"Show me your flight plan"...........nope, talk to the wife, she holds it, and also holds the SARtime. Never failed yet. A system that has worked for 30 years. She knows my route, my capabilities and who to call if I don't arrive as planned. Nobody cares more about me than her. Filed flight plans get lost in the works...been there , done that !..........

 

Weight and balance ? Just flew Townsville to Temora two up, and fairly heavily loaded. Trim lever sits in the middle most of the time, the designer did a good job on my aircraft, you certified the design, and approved it for training, I believe it's right !!.......

 

I carry the latest state of the art navigation equipment,equipped with Ozrunways which you also approved, plus a back up GPS capability, plus maps. Never been lost yet....Maj...

I like that Maj. I do pretty much the same ..

 

Bob

 

 

[Oscar]

The SMS and similar type systems are set up by governments and entities like CASA, not to attack the problems straight on, but to appear as though they have.They can then say "well we required them to instigate a SMS system , so it's not our fault , we did our bit" while not really doing much to eliminate the danger at all.

This is such a piece of a) cynical, and b) short-sighted commentary, that it hardly beggars commentary. However, lest it be taken as intelligence it needs a response.

 

No system will eliminate willful stupidity. No regulation intended to prevent foreseeable eventualities will succeed in the face of willful non-observance. No amount of peer-pressure good advice will prevent willful disregard. How many experienced aviators were present at Natfly last year when a couple took off at last light - and died shortly thereafter?

 

What an SMS WILL do, is assist in the prevention of accidents resulting from genuine lack of knowledge. By at least reducing the 'unknown' danger factors, aviators have better information on which to base their decisions. Ultimately, the decision to take off, to press on into adverse conditions, to attempt to land, is up to the PIC - but at least, if provided with the best-available information, their choice to take an action is at the least, an informed one.

 

The principle of accessibility to critical information is well-established. For instance, Material Safety Data Sheets are provided for a vast range of products, so that users can be aware of any dangers inherent in using that product. You can argue that this is another version of 'arse-covering' - but those sheets allow end-users to at least be aware of any risks they take in using the product. You cannot buy a ladder without a placard that says; 'do not step above this height - you may lose your balance' - yet around 20 deaths and over 1,000 injuries a year are related to ladders.

 

Users of ladders are not regarded by society as 'risk-takers'. However - how often do you see a report in the media of a death from a ladder accident? Yet every fatality - or even incident - regarding an aircraft gets media attention.

 

The bottom line is: our activity NEEDS an effective SMS, to demonstrate that we are, as a group, not just aware but pro-active in trying to improve our safety standards. We NEED a demonstrable standard by which the actions of the individual can be judged to be either consistent or inconsistent with a reasonable expressed standard of safety. If you wish to call this 'arse-covering', you are entitled to so do - but if you want to beable to enjoy the support of the general community for things like saving local airports from developers, then we NEED the 'arse-covering' of expressed safety standards with which to defend our activities from the prejudice of a community response that we all a pack of death-wish loonies that they don't want near their community.

 

OK, call it 'arse-covering'. However, without it, we stand a very real chance of having our arses run out of too many towns because 'the local community' doesn't believe we are a safe and reasonable activity in their locale. It isn't just CASA's imperative at work here - it's our survival.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Who will be there from CASA Keith?

Turbo old mate,

 

As soon as I get some sort of whisper I will inform you.

 

I have some names however I must confirm they are not fibbing to me, I must be accurate.

 

Regards,

 

Keith Page

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Oscar, who are you, what do you fly ?..............you've only been with us since March 2013, you do seem to be overly sensitive on matters that mention CASA.........................Maj...

 

 

[Guest airsick]

This term "old guard" is quite prejudicial and getting boring. We need a new fresh term like " new guard !!" That's what we should use !!.......would you Mr Monke consider the new President Rod Birrell to be old guard or new guard...I reckon he's the right man at the right time, and he has heaps of experience in the sport behind him!.........old guard, new guard, old guard, new guard, old........please explain ?...........Maj...

You're probably right, "old guard" is a bit over used and a little boring now. I'm open to suggestions...

 

As for Rod? I don't know to be honest. I could be cynical and suggest that he can't be as bad as what we've had in the recent past but that wouldn't serve much purpose. As far as I can tell Rod is making the right noises. I will reserve judgement until he has a chance to prove/disprove himself but I will say this - I am cautiously optimistic. I thought Ed would be good and it turns out he was a man whose view was to do it his way or no way at all. I still think Ed could do a lot of good and wished he simply took it on the chin that others didn't approve of his methodology even if they did support his motives. Let's hope it doesn't go that way with Rod...

 

 

[Tiger]

Oscar is a fish

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

In my experience Rod Birrell is a straight shooter. He follows the Rules and joined Jim Tatlock in opposing the reckless conduct of previous members of the Executive. Rod is certainly a safe pair of hands. Unlike previous Execs, he did not give unqualified support to the previous CEO.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

If you look at the fatal accident rate per flying hour, the 3 best years in the decade 2000/2010 were 2008, 2009 and 2010. This is the time that RAAus pilots were having to "comply with the HF thing". In 2 of those 3 years we actually did better than the UK average of 1 fatal accident per 55,0000 flying hours (I think these are the only years we have ever achieved that).I agree that the RAAus implementation of HF wasn't ideal but it could be argued that what is needed is some follow-up education or training in HPL / HF / Pilot errors.

 

Cheers

 

John

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.

 

If the HF had made a lasting impression, that would still be the case, but it is not. Soon as activity went up, so did the accident tally. There were things to be learned from HF for us all, however no comparison to getting real data on what is really causing our accidents, be it aircraft failures or pilot related problems. We are losing so much valuable info from being keep in the dark on our accidents . If CASA are really concerned, then that's the best way they can help us now..............Maj...

 

 

[sandman]

Way to go Keith, stick it into all them PAMS. Just for you Southerners who don't know what PAMS is (Pissin and Moaners).

 

 

[Oscar]

Oscar, who are you, what do you fly ?..............you've only been with us since March 2013, you do seem to be overly sensitive on matters that mention CASA.........................Maj...

Maj, who I am is immaterial, what I will fly when it's back together is a Jab. Almost all of my entire flying experience has been in gliders, and back in the day I used to hold a DoT Airworthiness Authority for C of A's and minor repairs on 'glass and metal. My 'recent' upsurge of interest in this forum is a direct result of acquiring an interest in a somewhat broken Jab. and while trying to find out the hoops required to be jumped through having to deal with four different Technical Managers: Steve Bell, then Dean Tompkins, then Adam Finn and now Wayne Matthews, in extremely rapid succession. As you will know, two of those Tech. Managers left the RAA in unexplained circumstances and in what was extremely unseemingly haste, and that sparked a note of extreme caution in my appreciation of the stability and competence of the organisation. I need hardly add that WAY too many other things have happened in the last twelve months that have reinforced my apprehensions.

 

As for being 'overly sensitive' on matters that mention CASA: I am not and never have been in any way associated with CASA but my immediate family has made its living for many, many years dealing with CASA on an almost daily basis. There are a number of individuals in CASA that I would not use as lining on a cocky's cage - but that is not the point. You may have seen in some of my posts on threads in this forum area, my extreme desire to see RAA continue and not be subsumed by CASA because it is apparently unable to administer its sector of aviating.

 

The point is this: CASA has the authority. For better or worse, it was long ago decided that some 'body' was needed to protect the safety of 'the people' both when flying in things and from having flying things drop on their heads. Whatever the merits of having a federal authority vs. any other sort of authority, 'the people' (apparently) demanded that 'the government should DO something' about these flying things, and by a diverse route we now have CASA. Hate it or want to hit it with a shovel - we can't just ignore it. It exists, it has legislative responsibilities and concomitant powers - and we have to live with that.

 

That fact is what is known as 'realpolitik', and mouthing off against it is mostly fruitless. Aviators are a very minority group in Australian society; in order to remove CASA from our own sphere of activity would require changing the political will of the majority of the electorate - and good luck with that. I worked in the Commonwealth Public Service for 27 years before going into private industry and I've been on the receiving end of Ministerial demands for 'explanations' of things that some agitated peanut voter has referred to the Minister's office that gets taken seriously by the Minister. I've seen the intense work of dozens of intelligent, hard-working people trying to instill some sense and clarity into legislation/administration of the business of government ignored / overturned due to one piece of bad publicity and a few hysterical responses from ill-informed but 'concerned' people demanding that 'the government should DO something about this'. Never, never underestimate the sway over Ministers of any matter that they might perceive as being 'bad' for their political survival, nor their capacity to grasp an ill-considered and sometimes stupid response that gets them off the hook of the moment. An instruction from the Minister's office to 'fix this' is rarely one that means 'make this better' - it usually means 'make this go away'.

 

Unless the entire sphere of RAA operations can be excised from CASA's jurisdiction, we are forced to operate under its authority. Therefore, while that situation exists, I believe it is pointless to simply fulminate against CASA. The RAA needs to operate in a way that does not attract CASA's undesired attention - and that it has palpably failed to do in recent years. If we could operate 'under the radar' of public attention, we would be left alone to get on with it. That is the situation I would like to see RAA achieve.

 

 

[Teckair]

Oscar is a fish

????