Originally Posted by
Lead Balloon
It therefore follows that you’re advocating for mandatory alternates, irrespective of weather and other information pre-flight. If so, I would ask: Do you do much flying in ‘outback’ Australia?
My perspective is centrally relevant. It’s the perspective on the basis of which I do stuff. In the scenario I gave, it isn’t objectively an emergency, it’s not an emergency in my mind and I’m not transmitting a mayday. You and anyone else can hold your breath until your face turns blue, but I’ll declare an emergency when and if I decide my passengers and I are in grave and imminent danger and the transmission of a mayday will make a difference.
I’ll make you a promise: On the day that a wheels-up aircraft is jammed at the intersection of the runways at YTIB and there are three aircraft inbound close to consuming fuel to FFR, I’ll buy you a lottery ticket and cartwheel nude down George Street (or whichever capital city Main Street you choose.)
I said I was joking (sort of) in as much as I am pointing out a difference between Australia and international practice. I understand mandatory alternates would have a detrimental effect on he viability of Australian GA, but I do think carrying fuel to an alternate is a good idea when possible. I did plenty of flying in situations just as challenging as the outback- Kunamulla is NOTHING compared to Lagos or Accra, and still had an alternate, but I understand that isn't always possible in Australian GA.
No, your perspective is not relevant when it comes to regulations. You don't get to be of the opinion that a 10% overload is alright, that 200 below minima is OK because of your experience, or that something defined by regulation as an emergency isn't because you don't think it is. Emergency is a regulatory defined term, and so, if you meet those criteria, you ARE objectively in an emergency.
If you don't want to comply with that regulation, go ahead. You are now in breach and subject to prosecution- your choice, your consequences. You still haven't told me what harm it will do to you or your passengers to comply.
Now, of course, after proposing your own highly unlikely scenario, you make light of the fact that I counter with one.
Difference being, I was proposing one in which you comply with the law without it in any way making your situation worse.