Norm Sanders Sport Pilot Letter

[aro]

I havnt had a chance to ask Airservices yet. What I was told was, that they supply an update document with the changes, you then pencil them onto the WAC map, hence then judged as up to date.WAC map only!

Probably the AIP SUP e.g H06/15 https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/sup/s15-h06.pdf

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

Please supply a reference to a regulation that says that you cannot carry an expired chart.

Sorry, came from the CASA rep.

 

Someone asked what was the penalty for this? Didn't know offhand.

 

Phil

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

The other option is you can print a paper copy of your route off the iPad and then you would have a paper copy of the current map as back up. Not so easy when planning a route whilst away from home.

Frank,

 

Good point . This was discussed at the talk they gave.

 

Bottom line was that the scale is not the same, so illegal.

 

PHIL

 

 

[aro]

"Investigators" are dealt with in Part IIIA of the Act. Note that "premises" is given a very wide meaning in section 3.The CAR Reg 6 appoints "authorised persons" and Reg 6A sets out what regs they can be appointed to act under. Some of these regs are now dealt with in the CASR of course.

By my reading of IIIA, an investigator can only require you to answer questions when you are on premises where a magistrate has issued a warrant.

 

CAR 6 allows an authorised person to:

 

• Inspect the maintenance release
   
   
  
• Inspect aircraft log books
   
   
  
• Investigate defects in an aircraft
   
   
  
• Inspect your license
   
   
  
• Inspect the aircraft
   
   
  

 

 

I haven't found where they can require you to answer questions, or ask you to produce anything else.

 

 

[aro]

Sorry, came from the CASA rep.

And I think the CASA rep is making stuff up.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

And I think the CASA rep is making stuff up.

I wouldn't go that far. It's not a job that attracts the brightest or best, or even those that fly much for fun. Let's face it, you would probably lose a lot of your flying friends if you were a CASA inspector. They are pretty poorly trained and even the good ones are struggling to understand the rubbish coming out as law. I would say the guy out in the field is just repeating what he has learnt on the job from some other poorly trained official and it then becomes the law in his mind. Always ask for a reference.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Just getting back to the thread's main point, it seems that those who did come in contact with CASA employees at this event had a cordial and useful experience.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Just getting back to the thread's main point, it seems that those who did come in contact with CASA employees at this event had a cordial and useful experience.

And one pilot was told he would be doing something illegal if he left an expired map in his aircraft. But yes, they appear to have been trying to be nice. Let's hope it continues.

 

 

[kaz3g]

By my reading of IIIA, an investigator can only require you to answer questions when you are on premises where a magistrate has issued a warrant.CAR 6 allows an authorised person to:

 

• Inspect the maintenance release
   
   
  
• Inspect aircraft log books
   
   
  
• Investigate defects in an aircraft
   
   
  
• Inspect your license
   
   
  
• Inspect the aircraft
   
   
  

 

 

I haven't found where they can require you to answer questions, or ask you to produce anything else.

True. S32 AJ is limited to actions under warrant and relates to the power to require answers.

 

But s32AK applies to "this Part" which includes other than under warrant. These sections relate to "investigators".

 

CAR 50D covers power to inspect any records required to be made...eg flight plan and fuel calculations. CAR 53 allows investigation of any defects. CAR 227 allows admission to crew compartment. CAR 302 requires production of licence and any other documents. These all relate to "authorised persons" but, as I said, different authorisations can be held by different people.

 

We now also have approved testers under CASR 99.125 who have various powers in relation to AoD testing.

 

CASR 201.001 covers the appointment of authorised persons for the purposes of the CASR (stil in a transition phase)

 

Kaz

 

 

[aro]

But s32AK applies to "this Part" which includes other than under warrant.

Yes, 32AK allows them to detain an aircraft for the purposes of an investigation. Is a ramp check an investigation? Do they need to satisfy any grounds before starting an investigation? What is a "reasonable period"?

 

I am interested to know whether the people conducting ramp checks are usually appointed investigators or simply authorised persons.

 

CAR 50D covers power to inspect any records required to be made...eg flight plan and fuel calculations.

CAR50D is in relation to Aircraft Maintenance Log Books, not flight plan and fuel calculations.

 

Part 4A - Maintenance -> Division 10 - Aircraft Log Books -> 50D Inspection of Records. It only applies where you are required to "keep or retain a record" so presumably doesn't apply to anything you are allowed to discard after a flight.

 

CAR 227 allows admission to crew compartment in flight during air service operations. It doesn't appear to apply to your typical private operation.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Frank,Good point . This was discussed at the talk they gave.

Bottom line was that the scale is not the same, so illegal.

 

PHIL

Phil

 

I interesting take on the matter. Personally I do not support that opinion as :

 

(a) You can legally use an EFB with adjustable scale anyway

 

(b) If you wanted to satisfy that point then the scale of the printout can be adjusted to the same as the printed item anyway.

 

There will always be different opinions but as a "back up" to an approved legal electronic map, I would argue that the scale is being a bit pedantic. I guess unless your EFB has failed then it is not an issue anyway.

 

As far as carriage goes, if a map etc is not part of your "required operational documents" then it becomes freight only.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I prefer to navigate using the A4 printout from Ozrunways and let my co-accused hold the iPad and reassure herself with it that I know where I am. The scale is never an issue as I have 10 mile marks on the printout and tracks to alternates. In fact blow ups of approach and VTC are particularly useful when navigating visually near CTA steps. Second backup is the iPhone. If that is illegal flying then the law is indeed an ass.

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

I prefer to navigate using the A4 printout from Ozrunways and let my co-accused hold the iPad and reassure herself with it that I know where I am. The scale is never an issue as I have 10 mile marks on the printout and tracks to alternates. In fact blow ups of approach and VTC are particularly useful when navigating visually near CTA steps. Second backup is the iPhone. If that is illegal flying then the law is indeed an ass.

I agree with your comments.

 

But when a statement comes from the horses mouth, so to speak, that anything smaller than an iPad mini is illegal, one has to take notice. i.e. iPhone is a no no.

 

PHIL.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I agree with your comments.But when a statement comes from the horses mouth, so to speak, that anything smaller than an iPad mini is illegal, one has to take notice. i.e. iPhone is a no no.

PHIL.

I thought the regs 'recommended' an a4 size ? Which would have excluded the mini? But as it was worded there was a little flexibility? I'm too lazy, maybe I'll look up the regs.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

i think A5 was the size, and mini was deemed okay (wonder if apple had a say)

 

 

[440032]

CAAP 233-1(1) recommends A5 size device screen minimum, (or close to that it almost says)

 

BUT..... CAAPs are not law, so they are really not worth the paper they are written on.

 

And on the front page of each CAAPs says: "blah blah.........nor may the CAAP contain mandatory requirements not contained in legislation."

 

So, general golden rule: If it aint in a regulation (or a CAO) it's probably B.S.

 

 

[kaz3g]

CAR50D is in relation to Aircraft Maintenance Log Books, not flight plan and fuel calculations.

Part 4A - Maintenance -> Division 10 - Aircraft Log Books -> 50D Inspection of Records. It only applies where you are required to "keep or retain a record" so presumably doesn't apply to anything you are allowed to discard after a flight .

I did the response on the fly...check out CAR302(2)

 

(2) The owner or pilot in command of any aircraft shall, on demand, produce or cause to be produced for inspection by an authorised person, any certificates, licences, log books or other documents relating to the aircraft and, if it carries passengers or cargo, the list of names of the passengers or the bills of lading and the manifest, as the case may be.

 

While the division is titled "infringement notices", (1) headings are not part of statutory interpretation and (2) look at 296(J).

 

My view is that "relating to the aircraft" will be read broadly in recognition of the overarching obligation to safety to include a flight by the aircraft.

 

The CARs are hard enough to work through but the CASRs are even harder.

 

Kaz

 

 

[dazza 38]

I did the response on the fly...check out CAR302(2)

(2) The owner or pilot in command of any aircraft shall, on demand, produce or cause to be produced for inspection by an authorised person, any certificates, licences, log books or other documents relating to the aircraft and, if it carries passengers or cargo, the list of names of the passengers or the bills of lading and the manifest, as the case may be.

 

While the division is titled "infringement notices", (1) headings are not part of statutory interpretation and (2) look at 296(J).

 

My view is that "relating to the aircraft" will be read broadly in recognition of the overarching obligation to safety to include a flight by the aircraft.

 

The CARs are hard enough to work through but the CASRs are even harder.

 

Kaz

I actually opened the CASR and CAR publications and flicked through them about 15 years ago. I still have them somewhere in the study.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I actually opened the CASR and CAR publications and flicked through them about 15 years ago. I still have them somewhere in the study.

It seems when it comes to the air law system each and every legislation has an equal and opposite interpretation.

I doubt very much that the average pilot would have more than just a slight idea of the fine points. Either that or I am well well well below average:puzzled:

 

 

[aro]

I did the response on the fly...check out CAR302(2) (2) The owner or pilot in command of any aircraft shall, on demand, produce or cause to be produced for inspection by an authorised person, any certificates, licences, log books or other documents relating to the aircraft and, if it carries passengers or cargo, the list of names of the passengers or the bills of lading and the manifest, as the case may be.

 

While the division is titled "infringement notices", (1) headings are not part of statutory interpretation and (2) look at 296(J).

 

My view is that "relating to the aircraft" will be read broadly in recognition of the overarching obligation to safety to include a flight by the aircraft.

 

The CARs are hard enough to work through but the CASRs are even harder.

 

Kaz

302 is under Miscellaneous not Infringement Notices?? It seems pretty clear that it is referring to documents relating to the aircraft e.g. certificate of registration, airworthiness certificate, log book, maintenance release, POH etc. It is drawing a long bow to suggest that includes flight planning information for a particular flight. Maybe a court could be convinced, but I think they would be wrong and this is not the intent of this section.

 

Is there any section that sets out the form a flight plan or fuel plan has to take, or that it has to be in an enduring form? "70 miles, 120 knots, 40 l/h, 160 litres on board... that ought to cover it" is a fuel plan. You can do it in your head, and people are doing it every day for private flights. It's hard to produce evidence of this after a flight, apart from the fact that you didn't run out of fuel.

 

296J seems to say that even if the matter can be dealt with by an infringement notice they don't have to, they can take you to court instead - but I'm not sure of the relevance?

 

 

[rhysmcc]

CAAP 233-1(1) recommends A5 size device screen minimum, (or close to that it almost says)BUT..... CAAPs are not law, so they are really not worth the paper they are written on.

And on the front page of each CAAPs says: "blah blah.........nor may the CAAP contain mandatory requirements not contained in legislation."

 

So, general golden rule: If it aint in a regulation (or a CAO) it's probably B.S.

I guess their argument is smaller then A5 would not be deemed "accessible to flight crew".

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

it seems that those who did come in contact with CASA employees at this event had a cordial and useful experience.

That's good. But as with any government agent always _ALWAYS_ record the entire conversation no matter how pleasant and sweet the banter is. Local Council inspector tried to defraud me some time back, still have recordings of all conversations to his superiors who covered for him.

 

On a similar note I recall chatting to an insurance agent who called in to visit at work. Just general friendly stuff, hows things, been busy etc. Seemed like a real nice guy; was a bit taken back to find out some time later that this is part of their standard investigative practise to suss out if people are perhaps more likely to commit some insurance fraud! Would never have occurred to me, guess I just don't think along those lines. Gnu's are perhaps too nice and er.... trusting.

 

 

[dazza 38]

It seems when it comes to the air law system each and every legislation has an equal and opposite interpretation.I doubt very much that the average pilot would have more than just a slight idea of the fine points. Either that or I am well well well below average:puzzled:

They are only good for exam purposes, once that is completed, throw then onto a shelf somewhere and use them as dust collectors.