ICAO differences

[witwiw]

Can anyone advise of a site where the ICAO Annex 1 "Differences filed by Contracting States" are available for reading?

[sunnySA]

Australia.

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/publications/current/sup/s10-h22.pdf

[mattyj]

Hmmm...thats a massive document!

heres New Zealand's

http://www.caa.govt.nz/icao/annex_3_amdt_74_difs.pdf

I reckon that answers the "whos right" argument

[The Green Goblin]

That pretty much sums up Australian aviation.

I bet a 'team' of bureaucrats work around the clock to keep that SUP up to date too.

Regulation in Australia is way to top heavy. Perhaps if the Mortein got sprayed in various corners of CASA, the concept of user pays would be redundant as the department would be able to operate within its budget.

Why are we as an industry not asking for more?

[witwiw]

Thanks, so far, of much help.

I am looking more generally about differences notified to ICAO. Is there a web site that lists the differences from all of the member states, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.?

[Helmut Smokar]

The Jeppesen Word Wide Text, contains a list of differences for member states. don't know if you can get non subscribed access?

[LeadSled]

witwiw,

Go to Tech Log, look for the DCA Denmark site (DK) and you will finds all the ICAO Annexe's to the Convention, these are supposed to list the differences filed by every country.

As you will note from the AIP Sup. available from Airservices,(86?? pages of differences) Australia is in a class of it's own, when it comes to re-inventing the wheel, and winding up with one with corners.

This goes to further prove that Australia is a world leader in aviation legislation (all criminal law) by weight, volume or word count, take your pick.

These differences to ICAO are a real problem, for example, an Australia release note for an overhauled part or component is no longer internationally acceptable, which is a hell of a thing if you are trying to do business in the MRO field.

That is why the bigger Australian MRO operators have to get FAA and EASA certification, a problem that doesn't happen in New Zealand. A NZ release note is accepted almost universally, in complete contrast to the Australian situation.

Hence, NZ is doing a roaring trade in this area.

It looks like the new AME licensing system, which was supposed to be compatible with and acceptable to EASA and FAA, is not and will not be!!

Across a number of fields, but especially aviation, Australia is being rendered uncompetitive by bureaucratic regulatory overload, and this is even before the Greens get the balance of power in the Senate.

Don't kid yourselves this is all justified by better air safety outcomes in Australia, Australia rates badly compared to the US, which leads by a country mile ---- go look at all the statistics, not "carefully" selected and selective statistics.

Tootle pip!!

[OverRun]

I just know that this will come back to bite me, but here goes:

Australia is a lot better than it is fashionable to give it credit for. If I was smooth tongued and eloquent, I could give you a well worded story why. But I'm not and I can't. So I'd rather share some of my experiences.

I have had several years doing route evaluations for a European airline. And that has been an eye-opener. I cannot believe the places that RPT jets fly to in Europe as regular transport. Think of the worst old closed runways of Bankstown, and then try and run 737-800s and A320s into them.

Actually that comparison is too easy because Bankstown has no mountains at the end of the runway. Try operations on 1600m runways with 737/320s, and with mountains at the end, and rain, and no grooving. And add in euro-RESAs (which I would like to express as Really European **** Areas).

No chance - run off the end of these airports, and you're crunched. Add in runway gradients that we would use for skiing or fairground rides. We simply don't have those in Oz, and we have all manner of things to keep things on track. Credit to FL and his bureaucratic mates for keeping that balance between safety and operations at the regulatory level. We are actually travelling well.

So when it comes ICAO differences – yeah, we've got some. So what? From my side (which is airports) we are on the safe side of flying and that is what counts.

[LeadSled]

So what? From my side (which is airports) we are on the safe side of flying and that is what counts.Overrun,With all due respect, by what convoluted logic can you equate the vast number of differences filed with ICAO, with positive safety outcomes.

Might I suggest the only reason we are not flying, say, B737s into lots of the small runways like you mention, is that we don't have said runways. Where relatively short runways exist here, have a look at what's using them, up to and including B737NG, if there is a commercial demand.

Apparently, you haven't been looking at the accident and incident statistics all that closely, have you??

Compared with the benchmark, USA, we don't look too good at all.

Do you really think it is OK for Australian maintenance organisations to be locked out of the world markets?? For Australian based operators to become increasingly uncompetitive. Have you noticed how many of the B737 on the Tasman are ZK-, not VH-, even thought, to the self loading freight, they look remarkably like the colours of a major 90 year old Australian airline.

Do you think it is OK that future Jetstar (no Jetstar Asia) international expansion is going to be out of Singapore, where the latest A330s have gone, and where all the QF B787s are slated to go?? ---- and not Australia. As many will know, Singapore is not a "low labor cost" area.

Why is basic "international" flying training booming in NZ compared to Australia ?? Why is China Southern gradually moving its basic flying training to Canada??

Tootle pip!!

[whyisthat]

Well ICAO is different.......but not as different as blokes like Overun. There is actually a world out there Overun, in which most people, and regulators are able to operate with minimal differences. Australia, being one of the "differences"