hydraulic failure wrote:
It's all about 1. Brand and 2. Safety. . . . Fly with us and enjoy the comfort of knowing that we operate under an aoc.
Sipping the Koolaid a wee bit. Merely scare-mongering. No basis in fact or reality.
I think the greatest hurt in this industry is how young pilots are treated. . . . Perhaps if we all supported the new recruits better then this wouldn't be needed.
I agree with this statement . . . but, it does not apply to young pilots, only. I met a well experienced, older pilot in QLD, down on his luck, sleeping in his car. Seems nobody will give him a chance. He is a helluva nice guy. We need to set our learned prejudices and personality differences aside.
If you base a personality assessment or a hiring decision, based on what one writes on a public forum . . . then you're a jackass, in my opinion.
Though a little off topic, but related to the aforementioned, when I was an Instrument Check Airman, the Chief Pilot directed me to fail a pilot. I gave him a bit of extra training and passed him. Not only was he a heck of a nice guy, he was a combat vet and a skilled pilot. On another occasion, when I was a Chief Pilot, I was directed to terminate a pilot. I deemed there was no need to terminate his employment, based solely on a personality conflict, because we were under strength and the pilot was well qualified, highly skilled, and I thought he was a nice guy. Like me, he spoke his mind, directly. The only thing that keeps any operation safe is the conscience and professionalism of pilots, mechanics, and other personnel involved with Aviation.
"Commercial realities" must take a back seat to these. From my experience, an A.O.C. or a recognisable brand or logo on the side of an aircraft guarantees nothing. The only purpose any brand or logo serves is for immediate iconic recognition and marketing. If I am full of it, next time you go shopping, will you reach for a brand-named item or some clean skin, generic or Select store brand, though it may actually be better quality? If I am full of it, then what is SEO all about, when designing a website, if you do not want it to be at the top of Google?
Though a CASA registered sightseeing operator lacks an AOC, it does not necessarily mean that he will be any less compliant with Air Laws and Aircraft Limitations, et al, than an AOC holder. In fact, it could be the other way around. Just because some operator is a well established and venerated AOC holder, his safety compromises may evade detection, due to size of the operation, time constraints of CASA inspectors, and knowing how to steer CASA away from problem areas, or putting a sheen of compliance (eye wash), during a CASA audit.
Over the years CASA has cited many AOC holders for areas safety and maintenance discrepancies and non-compliance. These are a matter of public record.
Lastly, CASA will not close its eyes or ignore non-AOC holders. They must comply, will be monitored for compliance and will have scheduled audits.
C.A.S.A.'s mission statement:
To enhance and promote aviation safety through effective regulation and by encouraging the wider aviation community to embrace and deliver higher standards of safety.
C.A.S.A.'s mission role:
CASA's primary function is to conduct the safety regulation of civil air operations in Australia and the operation of Australian aircraft overseas.
Do you really believe CASA will compromise on safety or do anything to undermine public confidence in aviation safety?
C.A.S.A.'s Tripartite structure:
CASA and the ATSB have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that sets out safety objectives and underlying values to guide the ongoing relationship between the two organisations. The MoU will maximise aviation safety outcomes and enhance public confidence in aviation safety.