Tomo Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Also CAO 95.55 limits the number of aircraft places to two, not the number of souls on board. I don't think the RA-Aus ops manual says anything about carrying only one passenger. This is true, I've been looking through it this afternoon, and can only find reference to 'two seats' etc... So who knows the actual answer from a legal point of view?!
ave8rr Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 This is true, I've been looking through it this afternoon, and can only find reference to 'two seats' etc...So who knows the actual answer from a legal point of view?! Very interesting IF this is in fact the case Tomo. We will await a ruling from RAA headquarters. Might take a while though! If this guy is in fact legal I bet we will see a rule change probably quicker than updating the register. Cheers Mike
David Isaac Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Actually the reference is to : "1 Application 1.1 This Order applies to a single-place or 2-place aeroplane that: ........" So the interpretation will be on the meaning of "place" ... does place mean seat or bum? This is potentially going to be an interesting discussion. Somewhere in the Regulations "place" will be a defined term.
winsor68 Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Jeez Kaz... I am not a Lawyer... So is that YES or NO or Maybe and untried in court?
David Isaac Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 If I read that correctly Kaz it would appear to imply that an adult can carry an infant child on their lap under CASA regulations and two infant children could occupy the passenger seat under certain circumstances in an RA Aus registered aircraft unless some other Ops regulation says anything to the contrary with John has indicated does not. If so that is a real surprise to me. But do we yet know what 'Place' means or do we need to?
hendonguy Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 this will be an over sight while writing rules , bet if its proved this guy was breaking the rules having 3 in the aircraft the rule will be changed very quickly
kaz3g Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Civil Aviation Order 20.16.3 (as amended) Contents Air service operations — carriage of persons 2 Definitions In this section, unless a contrary intention appears: .... A child is a passenger who has reached his or her third but not his or her thirteenth birthday. An infant is a passenger who has not reached his or her third birthday. A passenger is a person who is not a crew member. ... 3 Seats 3.1 Each crew member and each passenger shall occupy a seat of an approved type: ... except: (i) infants, children and stretcher cases carried in accordance with subsections 13 and 14 respectively... 4 Seat belts and safety harnesses 4.1 Except as provided in subsections 14 and 15 safety harnesses, or seat belts where safety harnesses are not fitted, shall be worn by all persons at the times listed in paragraph 3.1. ... 12 Passenger capacity 12.2 The number of passengers carried in an aircraft for which an emergency evacuation demonstration is not required may exceed the number of approved passenger seats fitted in the aircraft only if the excess number of passengers: (a) has been approved by CASA; or (b) does not exceed the number specified in column 2 of the following table opposite the number of passenger seats specified in column 1; Column 1 Column 2 No. of passenger seats No. of excess passengers 2-6 1 13 Carriage of infants and children 13.1 Where their combined weight does not exceed 77 kg, 2 children may occupy 1 seat if: (a) seated side by side; and (b) restrained by a lapstrap only; and © the seat-belt is adjusted to secure both children at all times when a seat belt is required to be worn. 13.2 (1) An infant may be carried in the arms or on the lap of an adult passenger (but must be restrained using a "loop"), So my personal opinion is that if an aircraft is registered as a 2 seat aircraft with 2 adults aboard (pilot and passenger) it may not carry an extra passenger even if that extra passenger is an infant. It can carry the pilot and an infant restrained in a approved capsule fastened onto the passenger seat or it may carry two children secured by a seat belt on that seat. Please note I practice in the area of criminal law and not aviation law. The foregoing is my personal opinion and should not be taken as legal advice. If you need legal advice please speak to a lawyer with expertise in the area of interest. kaz
kaz3g Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 If I read that correctly Kaz it would appear to imply that an adult can carry an infant child on their lap under CASA regulations and two infant children could occupy the passenger seat under certain circumstances in an RA Aus registered aircraft unless some other Ops regulation says anything to the contrary with John has indicated does not.If so that is a real surprise to me. But do we yet know what 'Place' means or do we need to? Sorry David and All I have had a long day and missed the one little bit about "passenger" means... so it appears from what I can tell that two adults and a child is a no no. kaz
kaz3g Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 You can read the whole CAO here http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2009C00628/Download
kaz3g Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 I can't find a definition for "place" and if there isn't one it would have to be given its ordinary common meaning (try Macquarie Dictionary) but I suggest "2 place" means a pilot seat and a passenger seat. kaz
John Brandon Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Just to inform you all that, in my opinion, it is downright stupid to carry any small child in any sport and recreational aircraft or other very light aircraft. See http://flysafe.raa.asn.au/emergencies/deceleration.html#restraint John Brandon
kaz3g Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Jeez Kaz... I am not a Lawyer... So is that YES or NO or Maybe and untried in court? Sorry Windsor... everything in law is an argument but I think 2 place means a pilot seat and a passenger seat and the more I think about it the more I'm inclined to think no extras at all because that table starts at 2 passenger seats. A 2 seat aircraft has only one passenger seat hence is not covered by the allowance. So my advice above needs to be amended to say no extras at all, not even pilot plus two children. Pilot and an infant in a capsule secured to the passenger seat would be ok. Sorry for the confusion. kaz
kaz3g Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Just to inform you all that, in my opinion, it is downright stupid to carry any small child in any sport and recreational aircraft or other very light aircraft.See http://flysafe.raa.asn.au/emergencies/deceleration.html#restraint John Brandon I certainly agree, John. I know a few C150's have a kiddies seat in the back but I'd not feel comfortable carrying one there. Even my Auster with 2 back seats leaves me very reluctant about taking adult or child there because it is so difficult to exit in a hurray. kaz
winsor68 Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 So... Could you take a second person in a single seat aeroplane? Given that a "seat" can seat 2 people under some circumstances?
David Isaac Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 So... Could you take a second person in a single seat aeroplane? Given that a "seat" can seat 2 people under some circumstances? No Donny, because a single seat aircraft does not have a passenger seat, it only has a seat for the pilot. See the CAO definitions in Kaz's post on passenger definition.
winsor68 Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 No Donny, because a single seat aircraft does not have a passenger seat, it only has a seat for the pilot. See the CAO definitions in Kaz's post on passenger definition. Yeah... Was thinking about this while taking my daughter to school... 2-6 seats ...+1 pax... I was imagining Biggles rescuing Algy from the huns on the wing of his Camel!
kaz3g Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Yeah... Was thinking about this while taking my daughter to school... 2-6 seats ...+1 pax...I was imagining Biggles rescuing Algy from the huns on the wing of his Camel! I don't remember him rescuing Algy that way but he did rescue a "spy" on his wing from under the noses of the "Huns" after he was told by Colonel Raymond the aircraft previously sent to rescue the guy had crashed near Mossieface Wood. It had to be on the left wing, of course, because the gyroscopic effect of the Clerget rotary engine supposedly made the aircraft turn right deadly fast. It also made it a bit of a pig to fly when you also take into account the extreme forward C of G and short fuselage. kaz
Wayne T Mathews Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 I don't remember him rescuing Algy that way but he did rescue a "spy" on his wing from under the noses of the "Huns" after he was told by Colonel Raymond the aircraft previously sent to rescue the guy had crashed near Mossieface Wood.It had to be on the left wing, of course, because the gyroscopic effect of the Clerget rotary engine supposedly made the aircraft turn right deadly fast. It also made it a bit of a pig to fly when you also take into account the extreme forward C of G and short fuselage. kaz Holy sh!t Kaz... Keep that up and we're all gunna start calling you Shelly (for those not in the know, Shelly is the double humped biped version of the name Sheldon)...
Guest Baa Baa Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 So whats the thoughts here? Was he breaking any laws with 3POB Barry
kaz3g Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 So whats the thoughts here? Was he breaking any laws with 3POBBarry Who... Biggles? Wartime emergency and before the CAA kaz
Guest Baa Baa Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Was the Camel 1 or 2 humps? could make a differance
winsor68 Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 I don't remember him rescuing Algy that way but he did rescue a "spy" on his wing from under the noses of the "Huns" after he was told by Colonel Raymond the aircraft previously sent to rescue the guy had crashed near Mossieface Wood.It had to be on the left wing, of course, because the gyroscopic effect of the Clerget rotary engine supposedly made the aircraft turn right deadly fast. It also made it a bit of a pig to fly when you also take into account the extreme forward C of G and short fuselage. kaz Crikey Kaz!!! You know funnily enough when I wrote the post I was thinking..."Now who was it that Biggles carried on his wing in that book?... hmmm... I will just use Algy... No one will notice surely!!!" Blew that theory out of the water!!! I used to have a lot of Biggles books... they were a kids edition in fairly large print. I regret now giving them all away to a younger kid when I got to about 14... I would love to read them again... and I believe there were a lot more stories then the dozen or so I recall... Will have to visit the local second hand bookstore...
alf jessup Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Hey W68, I see you commented on the heartstopper vid on youtube a few weeks back, I saw it today and also commented on it, I actually know most of them down there and was not at all impressed with what I saw. Alf
alf jessup Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Go to youtube and once in there type in heartstopper.wmv in the search engine and make sure you big screen it. Need I say more as you will see David Alf
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now