Recent enforcement actions

• Operation of aircraft with overdue maintenance in contravention of regulation of 41(1) of the CAR
• Operating aircraft without valid class 1 and class 2 medical certificates
• Conducting flights without having undertaken a required flight review as pilot on command in contravention of section 20AB(1) of the CAA and regulations 61.745(1) and 61.800(1) of the CASR (being listed offences under regulation 61.065(1) of the CASR
• While holding key personnel role, failed to satisfy responsibilities as managing director, chief pilot (in contravention of CAR 215(9)), CEO and Head of Operations (in contravention of CASR 138.070(2)), to ensure that persons who operated aircraft under the AOC, AWC and Low Flying permission, did so in accordance with the requirements of the operations manual and the civil aviation legislation.

Failure to demonstrate an acceptable level of safety for the actions in CAR 42A, and at the calendar time period mentioned in Lycoming Service Instruction No. 1009BE had not been provided.

Failure to comply with the requirements, including completing required flight tests, for such approval, including as set out by CASR 61.040.

CASA found that the pilot who held a position of responsibility in an aviation organisation failed to carry out their duties to ensure the safe operations and navigation of aircraft under their control. The pilot engaged in conduct that included flight operations that were reckless in their nature, the failure to record aircraft maintenance faults, making false statements in maintenance documentation and the failure to record the time in service of aircraft that the pilot was operating.

CASA found that the pilot who held a position of responsibility in an aviation organisation failed to carry out their duties to ensure the safe operations and navigation of aircraft under their control.

The pilot engaged in conduct that included flight operations that were reckless in their nature, the failure to record aircraft maintenance faults, making false statements in maintenance documentation and the failure to record the time in service of aircraft that the pilot was operating.

It was identified that:

• the operator failed to adequately record pilot flight and duty times;
• the operator’s personnel engaged in fraudulent conduct that involved the falsification of maintenance records of aircraft;
• the operator allowed aircraft to be operated while the time in service was not being recorded;
• the operator allowed the reckless operation of aircraft during tourist and filming operations;
• the operator allowed unqualified personnel to pilot or operate aircraft;
• the operator failed to adequately induct personnel involved in flight operations;
• the operator failed to comply with a CASA Instrument of approval for Human External Cargo operations; and
• the operator carried dangerous goods when not authorised to do so.

CASA had reason to believe that the pilot had engaged and may engage in conduct that constituted, contributed to or result in a serious and imminent risk to air safety. Find out more about CASA’s power to immediately suspend an authorisation for serious and imminent risk to safety.

Applicant failed to achieve the required 200 hours of flight time conducting Part 61 initial flight training in an aircraft of the specified category.

CASA found that the pilot engaged in conduct that included the unlawful carriage of dangerous goods, unlawful conduct of maintenance, the failure to record aircraft maintenance faults, the fraudulent submission of maintenance documentation and the failure to record the time in service of aircraft that the pilot was operating.

CASA found that the pilot engaged in conduct that included flight operations that the pilot was not authorised to carry out, unlawful conduct of maintenance, the failure to record aircraft maintenance faults, the fraudulent submission of maintenance documentation and the failure to record the time in service of aircraft that the pilot was operating.

Between 19-21 July 2022, a CASA surveillance event was conducted. A total of 20 safety findings were made by the audit team.

Safety findings are required to be correctively actioned by the organisation in a timely fashion. In this case, 17 of the 20 safety findings were not acquitted. The company committed to an Action Plan to address the unacquitted findings, but did not adequately fulfill its commitment to do so.

Due to failures in the organisation's maintenance record keeping obligations, quality control and, among other things, the use of unqualified personnel, The company was found by CASA to have contravened CAR 30(3A), CAR 42ZE(1) and CAR 42ZP(1). On this basis, CASA found that the authorisation holder failed in its duty as the holder of a Certificate of Approval; and no longer satisfied the requirements for the issue of a Certificate of Approval. On 9 May 2024, CASA decided to cancel the company’s Certificate of Approval.