I’ll preface this with the observation that the whole flying training regulatory structure in Australia, as with so many aviation matters, is complete overreach. But at this point we have to deal with the regulatory quagmire that prevails.
During a training flight at ‘alliance’ ‘base’ X, the aircraft being utilised has nosewheel shimmy during the landing roll. The person running the ‘business’ at ‘alliance’ ‘base’ X tells the instructor and the student that nosewheel shimmy on landing on that aircraft is perfectly normal. What happens next in the APTA FSM? If APTA finds out about the nosewheel shimmy and forms the view that it could be a problem, what actually happens next?
A different aircraft being operated at ‘alliance’ ‘base’ X has no gizmo to record the aircraft’s TIS. What does APTA actually do to make sure that recorded TIS is actual TIS, noting that the instructor’s and student’s ‘flight time’ are not the same as the aircraft’s TIS.
At ‘alliance’ ‘base’ X, the aircraft used for retractible undercarriage training lands and the instructor enters in the MR: “Left Mainwheel undercarriage downlight unserviceable”. Does APTA know about that entry, as soon as it’s entered in the MR and, if yes, what does APTA actually do about it?