Government Responses to Safety Review

[vk3awa]

http://www.warrentruss.com/portfolio.php?id=2556

[dsam]

This would seem to be a duplicate thread to:

 

The Aviation Safety Regulation Review Report - Government Response

 

 

[Chocolate]

Issues identified by committee..yes. Govt response ..full of caveats. and the ministers speechwriter from casa saying we are already heading that way. Casa got a shove to get on with reg introduction by end of 2015. So..has that had any effect in the past..nope. I'm off to write to my local member of parliament.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Issues identified by committee..yes. Govt response ..full of caveats. and the ministers speechwriter from casa saying we are already heading that way. Casa got a shove to get on with reg introduction by end of 2015. So..has that had any effect in the past..nope. I'm off to write to my local member of parliament.

Have a read of the detailed response link posted on the main thread. I did, and there's going to be quite a bit of change.

 

 

[dsam]

Have a read of the detailed response link posted on the main thread. I did, and there's going to be quite a bit of change.

Yes turboplanner, it seems there is a big shake-up in store for CASA, provided both the minister and the new Director of Aviation Safety have the courage and drive to see these changes pushed through. Lets hope the momentum and mood for change doesn't lapse over the summer break whilst Federal Parliament goes to sleep till next year.

 

Admin, shouldn't we combine these duplicate threads? Just thought it makes sense to do so... Thanks.

 

 

[robinsm]

Remember this is CASA, we dont follow the law...we are the law!!!'''

 

 

[Ultralights]

wern't CASA told to get on with airspace reform and get it done by 2000? then 2005? then 2010?

 

 

[poteroo]

wern't CASA told to get on with airspace reform and get it done by 2000? then 2005? then 2010?

Sure were! But we need to understand that CASA is part of the Federal bureaucracy, and as such, it must continue to expand. ('work' expands to fill the available time!) So, every project will require more staff. Every rewrite will be a peculiarly 'Australian' piece of regulation - because the air here is different from elsewhere. CASA's fundamental culture demands that successful rules and regulations employed in the USA - be ignored completely. After all, what would the Yanks know about aviation? If you want an example of stuffing up a proven US piece of legislation - go no further than CASR Part 61. It's a nightmare for flying schools.

 

Unless the new Board grows some cojones, and lays down the rules from day 1 - the whiteants will continue to rule in Fort Fumble. Heads must roll. The organisation needs to be directed to actually 'foster' aviation - not destroy it. I don't know that this current, (or the alternative), government, has the will to do what the industry desperately needs. Does it really matter to them? Hell no -as long as that heavy metal with red tails keeps flying - she'll be right.

 

happy days,

 

 

[dazza 38]

Wouldn't it had easier if CASA just imported the FAA system in its entirety?

 

 

[turboplanner]

CASA has to work within ICAO regulations.

 

Where FAA is compliant with ICAO that shouldn't be a problem (and the last time I did some searching FAA was complying with ICAO on the subject I was researching.)

 

 

[djpacro]

"Australia's aviation safety regulatory system is based upon the international standards, recommended practices and procedures adopted by ICAO.

 

....

 

Article 38 of the Convention requires, where a State finds it impracticable to comply in all respects with a standard, or to bring its own regulations or practices into full accord with a standard, that notification be given to ICAO."