Community service flights new rules
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh i see, light aircraft are for entertainment, using them for anything more constructive is a dangerous thing because then motivation will always overcome common sense. Machtuk is bringing us back to medieval logic. Human beings cannot be trusted to make good decisions but must always defer to divine authority- the great god “safety “ as revealed by his high. priest CASA.
You regard an ABC report as factual? Then you build your opinion around it and expected be taken seriously? What planet are you on?
You have fallen for CASAs sleight of hand where they now claim the power to categorise types of private flights according to the passengers and circumstances of the flight. That is effectively an end to private flight in its entirety!
To put that another way, it ain’t private if CASA can dictate who you can carry and where you can go. Have you got that through your head?
You have fallen for CASAs sleight of hand where they now claim the power to categorise types of private flights according to the passengers and circumstances of the flight. That is effectively an end to private flight in its entirety!
To put that another way, it ain’t private if CASA can dictate who you can carry and where you can go. Have you got that through your head?
Last edited by Sunfish; 7th Feb 2019 at 05:50.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strict regimes also have accidents, no less tragic, the difference is simply that more rules are broken in the process.
Webjet & the other flight intermediaries must be the next CASA targets, surely they have booked passengers on ill fated Lionair/ Air Asia flights without informing the innocent passengers of the risk.
As Old Akro says, cancelling an AF is the easiest flight cancellation a pilot can make (its just a phone call). When I cancel a private family flight I subsequently need to re-book hotels & hire cars, my kids miss school & I miss work the next day- far more complicated.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Continue on guys, I expect a few personal attacks. It's an Australian pilots thingy, most hate it when an another opinion is viewed!
Last edited by machtuk; 7th Feb 2019 at 06:48.
I’m with machtuk.
Mandating calendar-based engine overhauls will cure ‘get-home-itis’ and continuing VFR into IMC. That, and shortening the period in which the minimum number of landings and take offs in type have to be completed, should just about get to zero accidents and incidents. The next step should surely be minimum CPL and AOC coverage, to guarantee zero fatalities.
Mandating calendar-based engine overhauls will cure ‘get-home-itis’ and continuing VFR into IMC. That, and shortening the period in which the minimum number of landings and take offs in type have to be completed, should just about get to zero accidents and incidents. The next step should surely be minimum CPL and AOC coverage, to guarantee zero fatalities.
CASA had a problem with these two Angel Flight fatal accidents. It may well be that both were caused by pilots pushing into IMC contrary to their licensing. So, CASA rules may have been broken, can’t have that, politicians may blame CASA for not policing rules. Solution? More rules. Reason? To destroy Angel Flight. Problem solved.
Well.looks like Angel Flights will just have to go by another name.
Little Timmy, lives in Warren and is in need of chemo in Sydney, ( we wont mention the medical need.).
Timmy will be chuffed to have a TFE, a Trail Flight Experience on the way from Warren to Bankstown. where en-route the pilot will tell him all about the whys and wherefores of aircraft, flying and may even let him feel the controls.
What a nice educational day out for Timmy that PVT flight was. And took his mind off the hospital visit.
Little Timmy, lives in Warren and is in need of chemo in Sydney, ( we wont mention the medical need.).
Timmy will be chuffed to have a TFE, a Trail Flight Experience on the way from Warren to Bankstown. where en-route the pilot will tell him all about the whys and wherefores of aircraft, flying and may even let him feel the controls.
What a nice educational day out for Timmy that PVT flight was. And took his mind off the hospital visit.
Word around the traps concerning the Angel flight that crashed taking off from Mt Gambier is that the passengers had form in pushing there weight around if you know what I mean. ie encouraging the pilot to go now etc due appointment to keep. Not the first time apparently.
May only be a rumour ofcourse but that is what PPrune is for. If true opens up another Pandoras box and points to the need for education to both pilots and passengers not silly requirements like engine hours,no NVFR etc.
May only be a rumour ofcourse but that is what PPrune is for. If true opens up another Pandoras box and points to the need for education to both pilots and passengers not silly requirements like engine hours,no NVFR etc.
And mandating control cable replacement will stop VFR pilots continuing into IMC.
Finally: It all makes sense to me.
Not a 'medical issue an individuals mental issue
Its the Pilot's decision, made in the air or on the ground prior to departure, and since its in/from the pilots head, CAsA has NO control over it.
And they really HATE that which they cannot CONTROL
Therein lies the problem, accidents will always happen because individuals will make decisions that lead to consequences, fatal or otherwise and THAT cannot ever be regulated away.
BUt our esteemed regulator sure is trying hard to get there ! "safety" is all whatever the cost, reality or perception
Its the Pilot's decision, made in the air or on the ground prior to departure, and since its in/from the pilots head, CAsA has NO control over it.
And they really HATE that which they cannot CONTROL
Therein lies the problem, accidents will always happen because individuals will make decisions that lead to consequences, fatal or otherwise and THAT cannot ever be regulated away.
BUt our esteemed regulator sure is trying hard to get there ! "safety" is all whatever the cost, reality or perception
CASA had a problem with these two Angel Flight fatal accidents. It may well be that both were caused by pilots pushing into IMC contrary to their licensing. So, CASA rules may have been broken, can’t have that, politicians may blame CASA for not policing rules. Solution? More rules. Reason? To destroy Angel Flight. Problem solved.
There are 2 glaring weaknesses in the ATSB Horsham report. 1. The report does not disclose who the pilot rang when he landed at Bendigo. He made 3 phone calls, one of which was to met briefing. A phone all that would have been recorded. But the ATSB failed to disclose what weather advice the pilot recieved before deciding to reload his passengers into the aeroplane and continue. The second is that one of the passengers - known to be highly agitated - was found not wearing a seat belt and out of her seat. This raises the spectre of an agitated passenger interfering with the control. But this was not considered at all by the ATSB.
The second Mt Gambier incident does not yet have a final report - about 18 months after the accident. Prima facie it looks like the pilot flew into a fog layer and became disoriented. But, the pilot landed in similar (presumably worse) fog 2 hours prior. So - legal or not - he had familiarity with what he was getting into and how high it was likely to extend, which appears to be only a couple of hundred feet thick. There is a strong chance he was able to see blue sky vertically above him and ground directly below him. The aircraft probably only needed to maintain a climb for about 30 seconds to climb through the fog layer, but it did not. We don’t yet know if the aircraft had an autopilot. But a simple wing leveler and an aeroplane producing full power and any semblance of airspeed control would have seen the aircraft climb through the fog. I’m not condoning the pilot taking off into fog and I have personally cancelled and Angel Flight about 3 hours before ETD because of fog. But blaming this accident on VFR to IMC without a report from the ATSB (no matter how poor it will be) is facile.
I am curious, Old Akro:
How will the proposed changes to Community Service Flights fix what you believe to be the cause (s) of the Horsham and Mt Gambier accidents?
If the changes will not fix the problem, then why amend the regs?
How will the proposed changes to Community Service Flights fix what you believe to be the cause (s) of the Horsham and Mt Gambier accidents?
If the changes will not fix the problem, then why amend the regs?
I have it: CASA should charge a fee to approve each community service flight!
With 10 penalty points if the pilot of a CSF does not submit a full flight plan from his mum at least 24 hrs prior to takeoff. Problem solvered! No more accidents, poor weather or engine failures ( the real cause of all problems according to CASA ).
Folks,
See today's Australian aviation page, in my opinion it would appear that the new CASA ChairperX has been captured by CASA --- base on statements attributed to him (I am still allowed to be gender specific, am I??) about the need for new restrictions on Angel Flight, because the operations are not really "private" because the fuel is paid for.
So there you have it, free (donated) fuel changes the category and risk profile of the flight --- and a calendar overhaul of the engine will fix that??.
Apparently, Mr. Mathews does not understand how private operations are defined in Australian air law --- but he is not alone there!!
Tootle pip!!
See today's Australian aviation page, in my opinion it would appear that the new CASA ChairperX has been captured by CASA --- base on statements attributed to him (I am still allowed to be gender specific, am I??) about the need for new restrictions on Angel Flight, because the operations are not really "private" because the fuel is paid for.
So there you have it, free (donated) fuel changes the category and risk profile of the flight --- and a calendar overhaul of the engine will fix that??.
Apparently, Mr. Mathews does not understand how private operations are defined in Australian air law --- but he is not alone there!!
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 8th Feb 2019 at 04:11.
Folks,
To add to the last post, it seems that CASA are going to proceed via a Legislative Instrument, instead of a direction.
Of course, this means it can be disallowed ---- but if I can count, there are not fifteen sitting days of the Parliament remaining, so the LI will lapse when the election is called/Parliament prorogued.
Is this a neat way of CASA sliding out from under what is a very ill-thought out action, and leaving it to the next parliament??
Any thoughts, folks??
Lead Balloon??
To add to the last post, it seems that CASA are going to proceed via a Legislative Instrument, instead of a direction.
Of course, this means it can be disallowed ---- but if I can count, there are not fifteen sitting days of the Parliament remaining, so the LI will lapse when the election is called/Parliament prorogued.
Is this a neat way of CASA sliding out from under what is a very ill-thought out action, and leaving it to the next parliament??
Any thoughts, folks??
Lead Balloon??
More cunning than sewer rats is CAsA. Is the LI designed to lapse as a neat way to get of the hook, that has been well and truly shaken by the comments pertaining their dopey idea in the first place.
A private flight is a private flight...or apparently not, depending on the "wisdom" of some bureaurat.
OMG !! Free fuel..the sky is falling !
The Oz Aviation page 08/02 today was interesting.
With Angel flight CAsA want to flex their penile power muscle. With fatigue rules , not wanted by QANTAS, they go flaccid. Go figure
For the target ....size does count..!!
What a sodding joke.
A private flight is a private flight...or apparently not, depending on the "wisdom" of some bureaurat.
OMG !! Free fuel..the sky is falling !
The Oz Aviation page 08/02 today was interesting.
With Angel flight CAsA want to flex their penile power muscle. With fatigue rules , not wanted by QANTAS, they go flaccid. Go figure
For the target ....size does count..!!
What a sodding joke.
Not sure where you get the idea that it will “lapse”, Leaddie.
If it’s a legislative instrument it has to be laid before (‘tabled’ in) each House within 6 days of the instrument being made. Each House then has 15 sitting days in which to move a motion to disallow. According to Odger’s: “Where a session of the Parliament ends because the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires, or the Parliament is prorogued, and a notice of motion to disallow has not been withdrawn or otherwise disposed of, the instrument in question is deemed to have been laid before the relevant House on the first sitting day of the new session. The opportunity to move disallowance is then renewed.”
Note that the instrument is in force for the entire period, which can be months. And note that if a motion to disallow is not moved in either House, the instrument continues in force even if there’s a change in government.
Making subordinate law - e.g. a legislative instrument - in the lead up to an election can therefore be a very ‘clever’ (translation: ‘sneaky arsehole’) bureaucratic tactic to make a controversial law while the pollies are focussed on re-election and the 15 sitting days can span months. By the time the post-election dust settles, the law has done months of damage and the new government is usually focussed on the ‘big picture’ (consolidating itself by, if necessary, making deals with cross-benchers) rather than trivia like subordinate legislation that’s been in force for months and done damage that won’t make any political difference, given that the next election is a couple of years away.
This is, after all, the lucky country.
If it’s a legislative instrument it has to be laid before (‘tabled’ in) each House within 6 days of the instrument being made. Each House then has 15 sitting days in which to move a motion to disallow. According to Odger’s: “Where a session of the Parliament ends because the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires, or the Parliament is prorogued, and a notice of motion to disallow has not been withdrawn or otherwise disposed of, the instrument in question is deemed to have been laid before the relevant House on the first sitting day of the new session. The opportunity to move disallowance is then renewed.”
Note that the instrument is in force for the entire period, which can be months. And note that if a motion to disallow is not moved in either House, the instrument continues in force even if there’s a change in government.
Making subordinate law - e.g. a legislative instrument - in the lead up to an election can therefore be a very ‘clever’ (translation: ‘sneaky arsehole’) bureaucratic tactic to make a controversial law while the pollies are focussed on re-election and the 15 sitting days can span months. By the time the post-election dust settles, the law has done months of damage and the new government is usually focussed on the ‘big picture’ (consolidating itself by, if necessary, making deals with cross-benchers) rather than trivia like subordinate legislation that’s been in force for months and done damage that won’t make any political difference, given that the next election is a couple of years away.
This is, after all, the lucky country.