Reply With QuoteI had a little to do with that guy a few years ago, he did seem a little... different
ForumSage
Pel Air / Norfolk Island ditching:-
This was the investigation that proved doubly embarrassing when they invited the Canadian Transport Blokes to run a (friendly?) review over it.
Alas, the Canadians were much more perceptive than our lot.
https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/12/05...om-go-to-whoa/
and
Canadian study identifies flawed processes and policies | Pro Aviation
At least the Mt Isa Constabulary did their job properly.
I had a little to do with that guy a few years ago, he did seem a little... different
Master
SubscriberAustralia should straight out adopt the NZ rules. At least we will not be all criminals, and the rewrite only took five years.
2012 Fuji White 3.0 D4, Rear view camera, Hi-line sound, E-diff, Xenon lights, ARB winch bar, Lightforce 240 50w HID. Brads sliders.
Problem is our law language is in the strict liability (?) sense: a pilot commits an offence unless... An operator commits an offence unless... They don't have to prove why you broke a rule, just that you did. It's up to the defence to argue the breach was not on purpose. Casa very rarely pull that string but they certainly can. Their legal department is VERY selective of what they will pursue
That's howall law in Australia is written I'm led to believe, if you changed that they would have to rewrite ever law in Australia.
Posting Permissions
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks