Lockhart River Qld. Plane crash. 11th March 2020.

[M61A1]

No, it’s not CASA’s role it is State and Territory role, and the Chain of Responsibility legislation applied to a charter where the pilot committed to a landing because he would be sacked if he didn’t and someone was killed would see the Manager, and the owner of the business doing prison time along with the pilot. Mobil was not a good example because they are doing regular scheduled deliveries. The problem in the transport industry was large Companies offering business to sub contractors on an impossible basis, just like the charters we are talking about. The reason the legislation hasn’t entered the aviation industry is almost certainly because pilots don’t know about it and don’t realise they need to go to State and Territory governments.

They all have their Safety Management System, Quality Systems, Training System etc, etc, and all these things make it quite clear that management will do what they have to , but the buck stops at the guy at the bottom who made the decision.

During all the "training" about company policy and such they all get told the company will support them if decisions are made for safety reasons, the reality is a lot more blurry.

[Student Pilot]

They all have their Safety Management System, Quality Systems, Training System etc, etc, and all these things make it quite clear that management will do what they have to , but the buck stops at the guy at the bottom who made the decision.

Hence the employment of so called "Contractors" which really are just employees. If blame and liability can be shifted to the last link, to the one actually doing the service or work then the higher ups don't have to deal with it.

As I said if pilots went to ANY authority with complaints, they would not be pilots anymore, once word is out they would not be employed anywhere. It's reached that level.

[turboplanner]

They all have their Safety Management System, Quality Systems, Training System etc, etc, and all these things make it quite clear that management will do what they have to , but the buck stops at the guy at the bottom who made the decision.

During all the "training" about company policy and such they all get told the company will support them if decisions are made for safety reasons, the reality is a lot more blurry.

I think you're a bit confused here; it clearly referred to State and Territory LEGISLATION which is external to whatever systems companies may have.

There is no room to move for company members from direct employees to the management chain to directors.

Several are incarcerated right now; no one is exempt.

The buck no longer stops with the last person in the chain, and hasn't for about 10 - 15 years.

[turboplanner]

Hence the employment of so called "Contractors" which really are just employees. If blame and liability can be shifted to the last link, to the one actually doing the service or work then the higher ups don't have to deal with it.

As I said if pilots went to ANY authority with complaints, they would not be pilots anymore, once word is out they would not be employed anywhere. It's reached that level.

The industry can end this by getting Chain of Responsibility enacted.

With that in place, the action starts with an incident, not a complaint by a pilot. In most cases he would be prosecuted for making the decision, but so would every member of the chain involved, including the officers and management of any customers who insisted on conditions causing unsafe conduct.

It would be very simple to use the existing CoR in each State as the basis.

[M61A1]

I think you're a bit confused here; it clearly referred to State and Territory LEGISLATION which is external to whatever systems companies may have.

There is no room to move for company members from direct employees to the management chain to directors.

Several are incarcerated right now; no one is exempt.

The buck no longer stops with the last person in the chain, and hasn't for about 10 - 15 years.

I don’t think that you understand that there is a disconnect there....

It’s the legislation which requires them to have their management processes. The employees get to sign that they all familiar with policy and they been clearly instructed so that when the excrement hits the fan they have all their records as required, but that doesn’t mean that’s how they actually do business.

Any audit gets to see all the right stuff and staff have to answer all the questions right whether or not that’s the reality.

[turboplanner]

I don’t think that you understand that there is a disconnect there....

It’s the legislation which requires them to have their management processes. The employees get to sign that they all familiar with policy and they been clearly instructed so that when the excrement hits the fan they have all their records as required, but that doesn’t mean that’s how they actually do business.

Any audit gets to see all the right stuff and staff have to answer all the questions right whether or not that’s the reality.

I realise you get a kick out of tagging on to just about everything I post, but people don’t need to be misled. The legislation I’m talking about is Chain of Responsibility legislation which applies in the Transport Industry only. It applies punitive measures to managers and owners who force drivers to break laws.

[Geoff13]

I thought as much!

What would you know about commercial charter flying unless you've don't it, you've been there with the subtle commercial pressure that's with every pilot !

It has nothing to do with right or wrong otherwise we wouldn't be talking about the realities of GA it's to do about the risks involved in flying, risks that are fluid, the risks of carrying actual people not freight, the risks of not being able to complete the task!

 

Scenario:(nothing like driving a truck!) you plan to fly 8 stock buyers to a once a year stock sale where big dollars change hands. This is your big break after not long joining the company getting the job by the skin of your teeth as the competition was fierce!

You plan the flight and launch legally in good faith. Along the route the WX appears worse than forecast and at your destination it's deteriorated. One of the big players onboard asks 'we are going to be able to land aren't we'? There's the first subtle pressure.

You make an App in low cloud and turbulence, the pax are grumbling mumbling we better land and soon! You miss out & make a missed App. One guy says with a stern voice 'we have a big day ahead we don't want to be late'! More subtle pressure!

You miss out on a 2nd App and are sweating profusely by now. You turn to the pax and say I'll give it one more go then we have to return, it's not pretty the pressure now being put on you is making you feel sick! At the minimum on the 3rd App you still don't see the ground but go a little lower anyway, finally below what you feel comfy with you get kind of visual and circle damned close to the tree tops and nearly forget to put the gear down prior to landing, you pull-up to the gate, it's drizzling outside, 8 grumpy guys get off and disappear in to the waiting mini bus. The rest of the day you feel almost sick!

My "mythical" story could easily fit the very crash we are talking about here!

That's COMMERCIAL pressure, nothing like driving yr truck!!

 

Actually it is exactly like driving a truck. I have been sacked for refusing to run out of hours.

I have also been sacked for refusing to run overweight and then whilst I was collecting my gear out of the trailer tool box I have had someone come and hurry me up so he could hook onto the trailer and go.

As a PIC you are trained to, and paid to make correct safe decisions. That's why there are so many rules, regulations and training.

If every pilot did what they were paid and trained to do then your point would be invalid.

Pressure is something we allow other people to apply to us.

Our job be it truckie, coach captain, Pilot or Skipper is to do our job 1. safely and 2 legally.

If you can't do that then get a job in a different industry where the pressure is not so tough.

 

That's what happens when employees lose any bargaining they had, no choice but do what your told (illegal or not) or no job.

 

There is always a choice.

No job is better than an unsafe job.

It just needs more people to stand up and be counted.

 

The transport industry is changing, COR rules are not enforced anywhere near enough yet but we are getting there slowly.

[Rush]

I think you're a bit confused here; it clearly referred to State and Territory LEGISLATION which is external to whatever systems companies may have.

There is no room to move for company members from direct employees to the management chain to directors.

Several are incarcerated right now; no one is exempt.

The buck no longer stops with the last person in the chain, and hasn't for about 10 - 15 years.

 

 

In principle, you are right. CAR Reg 224 states literally everything you are saying.

 

However what happens in practice? Have a look at literally every ATSB report on incidents like this. What does the final conclusion typically say?

 

"Pilot Error" "Pilot flew into worsening conditions" "Operating Error" "Over weight"

 

CAR Reg 224 is a double edged sword. It can be used as cause for a pilot to cancel a flight. But also is the exact regulation the ATSB, CASA and business points at when a pilot makes a mistake. You cant have it both ways. Either the law protects the pilot to make command decisions or the law is used against them when they make an error. There is no follow up law. There is no protection as an employed pilot if you enact Reg 224 due to operational concerns.

 

CAR Reg 224 is the final rung on the ladder. It literally is, and more times than not in aviation that is where the blame is pushed down to. Either unwittingly or intentionally.

[Guest Machtuk]

In principle, you are right. CAR Reg 224 states literally everything you are saying.

 

However what happens in practice? Have a look at literally every ATSB report on incidents like this. What does the final conclusion typically say?

 

"Pilot Error" "Pilot flew into worsening conditions" "Operating Error" "Over weight"

 

CAR Reg 224 is a double edged sword. It can be used as cause for a pilot to cancel a flight. But also is the exact regulation the ATSB, CASA and business points at when a pilot makes a mistake. You cant have it both ways. Either the law protects the pilot to make command decisions or the law is used against them when they make an error. There is no follow up law. There is no protection as an employed pilot if you enact Reg 224 due to operational concerns.

 

CAR Reg 224 is the final rung on the ladder. It literally is, and more times than not in aviation that is where the blame is pushed down to. Either unwittingly or intentionally.

Well said?

[M61A1]

I realise you get a kick out of tagging on to just about everything I post, but people don’t need to be misled. The legislation I’m talking about is Chain of Responsibility legislation which applies in the Transport Industry only. It applies punitive measures to managers and owners who force drivers to break laws.

My point was that all the documentation, no matter how irrelevant to reality is the evidence that they carried out their responsibility. It's the undocumented demands and norms that require others to stand up and in that industry in particular are unlikely to because you will become a pariah and just like the trucking industry there will always be someone else who put their hand up to have a go.

[turboplanner]

In principle, you are right. CAR Reg 224 states literally everything you are saying.

 

However what happens in practice? Have a look at literally every ATSB report on incidents like this. What does the final conclusion typically say?

 

"Pilot Error" "Pilot flew into worsening conditions" "Operating Error" "Over weight"

 

CAR Reg 224 is a double edged sword. It can be used as cause for a pilot to cancel a flight. But also is the exact regulation the ATSB, CASA and business points at when a pilot makes a mistake. You cant have it both ways. Either the law protects the pilot to make command decisions or the law is used against them when they make an error. There is no follow up law. There is no protection as an employed pilot if you enact Reg 224 due to operational concerns.

 

CAR Reg 224 is the final rung on the ladder. It literally is, and more times than not in aviation that is where the blame is pushed down to. Either unwittingly or intentionally.

 

Chain of Responsibility is NOTHING LIKE CAR 224.

CAR 224 makes the PIC "Responsible for......." and gives the PIC "Final Responsibility...."

CoR goes after the OTHER people in the management chain who put the pressure on the driver.

 

Two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT approaches.

[turboplanner]

Well said?

Please note my explanation above.

It's pitiful that there is a solution for Commercial Pilots waiting there but we get BS posts obfuscating a relatively simple solution, and a solution used by another branch of the SAME GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT.

[Guest Machtuk]

Turbo what sort of charter flying have you done? General or other?

[turboplanner]

Turbo what sort of charter flying have you done? General or other?

I've done no Charter flying whatsoever.

I'm responding to alleged Chart Pilots who have alleged that they have been forced to do things they otherwise wouldn't do due to the threat to their job. Those allegations have been made from time to time on this site, which by its name is for recreational flying, not commercial GA, and there are the regular allegations on other sites from Charter Pilots.

 

Either there's some truth to those stories or they are bullsh!t.

 

I prefer to think there might be some truth to them; I don't need 2000 hours in Charter Flying to come to that conclusion, and I don't need tp prove one way or the other whether what they say is true.

 

If what they are saying is true, then I have some information from another industry which addressed and is reducing the exact same problem of management pressure.

 

Surely it isn't that difficult to understand that legislation in one industry which solves a similar problem is a good basis for solving the same problem in another industry.

[turboplanner]

ATSB Report AO-2020-107 for VHOZO 11/03/2020 doesn't mention any cause for this accident, including any suggestion of pressure on the PIC to complete the flight.

ATSB are suggesting they might have an interim report out in mid April.

There's nothing wrong with discussing potential causes of similar accidents generally.

[M61A1]

I don't need 2000 hours in Charter Flying to come to that conclusion

I think the point is that if you had time in the industry you might actually understand what is being said, because clearly at this time, you don't. Things do not magically change every time someone makes new rules, they might appear to, and sometimes they actually might, but generally there will a perception of change, a change may be documented, but non-existent in reality.

I'll bet that even in your road transport world there is a massive disconnect between what the top thinks happens and what really happens at the bottom. Sometimes those at the top get a hint of reality when something goes really bad, but until then, business as usual.

 

In regard to the post above about the report not mentioning pressure....It probably never will, even if it was the case because

1. Anyone that can tell you about is dead and

2. All the recorded official policy and training will say that there's no pressure and crews will be supported in safe decisions.

[johnm]

Yes Mactuk (and others) ............... the majority of us are rec pilots - armchair commercial pilots if you like - we like flying and we particularly like viewpoints from those that have used their commercial pilots license in anger ............... all good subject matter to us / me

 

Please keep sharing

 

I find it ironic that ag pilots are mentored and trained and presumably fly in their level of experience (with plenty of willing replacements waiting), but, in some instances the inference is a charter pilot flies in to the blue yonder (also with plenty of willing replacements waiting) - seems that maybe each type of flying (ag & charter) does it differently ?

[Guest Machtuk]

I've done no Charter flying whatsoever.

I'm responding to alleged Chart Pilots who have alleged that they have been forced to do things they otherwise wouldn't do due to the threat to their job. Those allegations have been made from time to time on this site, which by its name is for recreational flying, not commercial GA, and there are the regular allegations on other sites from Charter Pilots.

 

Either there's some truth to those stories or they are bullsh!t.

 

I prefer to think there might be some truth to them; I don't need 2000 hours in Charter Flying to come to that conclusion, and I don't need tp prove one way or the other whether what they say is true.

 

If what they are saying is true, then I have some information from another industry which addressed and is reducing the exact same problem of management pressure.

 

Surely it isn't that difficult to understand that legislation in one industry which solves a similar problem is a good basis for solving the same problem in another industry.

 

I thought as much!

Like I've said in another post unless you have been there and done that (actual commercial charter) then you really have no idea about the industry!

I feel sorry for you guys as you simply don't like the truth when it comes from qualified people prefering to big note yourself with fairy tales!

[turboplanner]

I thought as much!

Like I've said in another post unless you have been there and done that (actual commercial charter) then you really have no idea about the industry!

I feel sorry for you guys as you simply don't like the truth when it comes from qualified people prefering to big note yourself with fairy tales!

Good, that saves a lot of time trying to bring the life saving Chain of Responsibility to the aviation industry.

[Guest Machtuk]

Yes Mactuk (and others) ............... the majority of us are rec pilots - armchair commercial pilots if you like - we like flying and we particularly like viewpoints from those that have used their commercial pilots license in anger ............... all good subject matter to us / me

 

Please keep sharing

 

I find it ironic that ag pilots are mentored and trained and presumably fly in their level of experience (with plenty of willing replacements waiting), but, in some instances the inference is a charter pilot flies in to the blue yonder (also with plenty of willing replacements waiting) - seems that maybe each type of flying (ag & charter) does it differently ?

I too fly rec these days more than ever so I'm in your world to remember? I try to give a balanced POV on a broad range of subjects so others can be informed is all but sadly some get their uninformed noses out of joint?

[Guest Machtuk]

I think the point is that if you had time in the industry you might actually understand what is being said, because clearly at this time, you don't. Things do not magically change every time someone makes new rules, they might appear to, and sometimes they actually might, but generally there will a perception of change, a change may be documented, but non-existent in reality.

I'll bet that even in your road transport world there is a massive disconnect between what the top thinks happens and what really happens at the bottom. Sometimes those at the top get a hint of reality when something goes really bad, but until then, business as usual.

 

In regard to the post above about the report not mentioning pressure....It probably never will, even if it was the case because

1. Anyone that can tell you about is dead and

2. All the recorded official policy and training will say that there's no pressure and crews will be supported in safe decisions.

Well said there, some just don't get it!

[onetrack]

I have chartered aircraft numbers of times in previous decades, for business trips with business partners to mining projects. Sometimes singles, sometimes twins.

Never once did we put the PIC under pressure to arrive at our destination, regardless, and never once did I see a PIC sweating through dodgy flying practices. However, I have no doubt they exist, as it does in small numbers, in all industries.

Only once did we enter into unfavourable approaching WX (in a twin), and the PIC made the correct and sensible decision to land 100kms short of our home destination in the city.

I rang the missus and she grabbed the station wagon, and she came and picked us all up, and took us home. The pilot apparently went back by road the next day to collect the aircraft.

I did not see, or hear him, get pressured or abused to complete the flight to the originally specified destination, but perhaps within the confines of the office, it might have been a different story.

[Methusala]

I have heard from a young pilot, working as instructor/dogsbody, who instructed all day then called at 11pm to do some sort of *paper run* to Sydney ASAP. Yep, out of bed right now, no backchat! Just saying.

[pmccarthy]

The only dodgy flights I have had in 40 years of business flying were RPT and not charter. Small RPT twins seemed to have a get-there imperative in bad storms, whereas a charter pilot just turned and said that it was too rough and we would wait.

[Student Pilot]

Please keep sharing

 

I find it ironic that ag pilots are mentored and trained and presumably fly in their level of experience (with plenty of willing replacements waiting), but, in some instances the inference is a charter pilot flies in to the blue yonder (also with plenty of willing replacements waiting) - seems that maybe each type of flying (ag & charter) does it differently ?

It might appear on the surface but no