It has been obvious for many years that Aviation regulation in Australia is simply perverse.
It is designed to further the interests of the staff of the regulator and their cronies - and no one else.
The regulatory reform program and the very regulations themselves are evidence of this.
The matter at the heart of this thread - the use of AC43-13B and similar could have been simply handled by a Plain English sentence inserted in the regulations themselves:
"In the absence of an aircraft specific SRM and the absence of a repair scheme for the specific repair approved by a national regulator, approved maintenance data, for example FAA AC43-13B, may be used to effect minor repairs."
A further rider is needed that if there is conflict in the approved data (ie not in the SRM or repair scheme) it is to be referred to CASA.
The definitions section does the rest.
I happen to know the former leader of the project to rewrite Victorias laws in plain English which was completed around 1997. He was formerly from PM and Cabinet, then Vic. Premiers department, then a commissioner for small claims and is now a magistrate.
If I run into him in the next few months, I will ask him to look at the regs and give his opinion - it will no doubt be both colorful and accurate. He could also suggest a fix as he was a master of bureaucratic infighting at one stage.
Absent that, it will take Three smoking holes in quick succession with great loss of life and a royal commission before any change is possible.
Last edited by Sunfish; 4th August 2012 at 23:23.