09-26-2016, 10:22 PM
Knock knock. Who's there? Iggins. Iggins who? Iggins and Bingers from The Australian!
Beautiful work Thorny. Nice bit of ground work and some quality sniffing below the 'glowing' surface. Well done sir.
'T' said;
"Please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the Airport Act precluded a trust or trust from owner an Airport".
That's how I read the legalese contained within the Act. Perhaps my understanding of what I have understood from over the past decades has been incorrect? Can anybody help me and shed some light on this particular airport mystique?
'T' said;
"But since when has the law got in the way when Murky Mandarins are there to give a nudge huge wink wink".
Indeed. Stay tuned. The Murky mandarins have changed many laws over the years. It doesn't actually take much - a few strokes of the pen here and there, rush (sneak) it through parliament during a late sitting, pop it on the Guv'mint website at 2359 on a Friday night or during a long weekend and hey presto! Law changed and everyone else is still asleep!
'T' said;
"Rumours are that a lot of pressure is being placed on CAsA to ignore safety issues, as they did with the closure of the only North South runway in the Sydney basin".
No? Surely not? The Governments precious income above safety? Surely you are mistaken?
'T' said;
"The State Guv'mint apparently wants to build an industrial building on the helicopter training ground which will require the removal of a windsock. Of course aircraft don't need a windsock, if they need to know what the wind is they can ask the tower, of course the night freighters outside tower hours will just have to guess. Someone very high up the food chain in CAsA has ordained that nobody at the coal face is to talk about it".
Well I always thought windsocks were a bit overrated anyway! But surely they can't move the windsock Thorny? It would then be non-compliant with MOS. And CAsA don't like issuing exemptions, particularly if the requested exemption serves no intrinsic 'safety' value. And why the 'hush hush'? If all is above board and transparent then what has anybody got to worry about? Are the Mandarins worried that the two headed fish and pus weeping crustaceans in the Georges River are going to tell somebody what's going on?
'T' said;
"Also heard on the grape vine that some four story apartment blocks, exclusively for Muslims and an Islamic prayer hall are to be built in the Georges hall shopping centre. Bit close to the airport perimeter thinks me, then who cares about runway splays or cherokees through someones front window?"
Aeroplanes and the worlds most peaceful religion have always fit together rather well don't you think? So who would've thought - a Muslim enclave just a grenade throw away from a NSW airport. Well there you go ey, learn something every day.
The world of airports gets murkier by the month. Better be careful Murky, somebody might make pumpkin soup out of you yet!!
TICK TOCK immaculate Darren. Time to set up a 'correct the record' page on your website isn't it?
Beautiful work Thorny. Nice bit of ground work and some quality sniffing below the 'glowing' surface. Well done sir.
'T' said;
"Please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the Airport Act precluded a trust or trust from owner an Airport".
That's how I read the legalese contained within the Act. Perhaps my understanding of what I have understood from over the past decades has been incorrect? Can anybody help me and shed some light on this particular airport mystique?
'T' said;
"But since when has the law got in the way when Murky Mandarins are there to give a nudge huge wink wink".
Indeed. Stay tuned. The Murky mandarins have changed many laws over the years. It doesn't actually take much - a few strokes of the pen here and there, rush (sneak) it through parliament during a late sitting, pop it on the Guv'mint website at 2359 on a Friday night or during a long weekend and hey presto! Law changed and everyone else is still asleep!
'T' said;
"Rumours are that a lot of pressure is being placed on CAsA to ignore safety issues, as they did with the closure of the only North South runway in the Sydney basin".
No? Surely not? The Governments precious income above safety? Surely you are mistaken?
'T' said;
"The State Guv'mint apparently wants to build an industrial building on the helicopter training ground which will require the removal of a windsock. Of course aircraft don't need a windsock, if they need to know what the wind is they can ask the tower, of course the night freighters outside tower hours will just have to guess. Someone very high up the food chain in CAsA has ordained that nobody at the coal face is to talk about it".
Well I always thought windsocks were a bit overrated anyway! But surely they can't move the windsock Thorny? It would then be non-compliant with MOS. And CAsA don't like issuing exemptions, particularly if the requested exemption serves no intrinsic 'safety' value. And why the 'hush hush'? If all is above board and transparent then what has anybody got to worry about? Are the Mandarins worried that the two headed fish and pus weeping crustaceans in the Georges River are going to tell somebody what's going on?
'T' said;
"Also heard on the grape vine that some four story apartment blocks, exclusively for Muslims and an Islamic prayer hall are to be built in the Georges hall shopping centre. Bit close to the airport perimeter thinks me, then who cares about runway splays or cherokees through someones front window?"
Aeroplanes and the worlds most peaceful religion have always fit together rather well don't you think? So who would've thought - a Muslim enclave just a grenade throw away from a NSW airport. Well there you go ey, learn something every day.
The world of airports gets murkier by the month. Better be careful Murky, somebody might make pumpkin soup out of you yet!!
TICK TOCK immaculate Darren. Time to set up a 'correct the record' page on your website isn't it?