Originally Posted by Frank Arouet
The word "if" makes it hypothetical and to pander, (look that word up), to your ego, it was Stan, not Dick if you prefer.
I took it to read the "if" was in relation to possibility of selling the photos to "Australian magazines". You were referring to Dick Smith and his around the world helicopter flight in your post, like you referred to other natural persons, organisations, government departments and events elsewhere in the same post.
It is possible to conduct around the world flights as private operations, it is done frequently with business jet style aircraft. Likewise a number of companies have their own aircraft and conduct private flights domestically.
I will not be drawn into commenting about specific flights or natural persons.
Originally Posted by LeadSled
If we are non- compliant, the non-compliance notification makes the non-compliance a compliance, which then is in compliance with the ICAO compliance section of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, that says we should be ICAO compliant. So notifying non-compliance makes us compliant, thereby meaning that the non-compliance with the Act is in fact, not a non-compliant, but a compliance.
Australia is fully complaint to Annex 6 with regard to aerial work operations. Most of the non-compliance areas in Annex 6 are with equipment installed on aircraft like TCAS, CVR, FDR, GPWS etc. For example once area of non-compliance is that Australia does not require a FDR to be installed on an aircraft below 5700 kg.
Your post is somewhat misleading as it would suggest that the aerial work requirements are unique in Australia, that is not the case.
Originally Posted by aroa
I am a Photographer-Aerial, (once) with my own business and my own aircraft.
You were/are a PP(A)L holder with an aircraft and a camera, nothing more.
As a PP(A)L holder you are permitted under CAR 2 to take photographs from an aircraft, and to take passengers, but only as a private operation.
The restriction on any PP(A)L does not permit one to conduct aerial work, charter, or RPT. I do not know what operational category the MR was issued on their aircraft you had, possibly that could have also been restricted to private operations only.
This is very different to what started the discussion on this thread, we were discussing a legitimate GA operator with an AOC working within the rules as they are written, with CASAs interpretation of that law published as policy preventing them from conducting legal operations.
You trying to claim you were in the same boat, however you were not even close. You chose to conduct operations that were illegal for the class of licence you had, you chose to conduct operations that required an AOC. To use a colloquialism, you were a “dodgy GA operator”, and your actions undermined legitimate operators who have gone to the effort to get an AOC, and people who have earned a CP(A)L.
If you had a legitimate business, you would have had all the licences required to conduct the business legally, that includes a CP(A)L and an AOC. As you conducted an illegal business, you have left yourself open to being prosecuted not only by CASA, also by state and federal police for fraud. By your own admission, you have received money by deception, i.e. claiming that you are an aerial photography business and receiving money for the photos that you took.
Originally Posted by aroa
You are either of CASA, or have their genetic disposition... to attempt to bring in issues to make a "safety" case..
No, not in CASA at all. Like most people in industry, we have a “genetic disposition” to “dodgy GA operators” that think they are better than everyone else and do not need to follow the rules.
You will not get sympathy from legitimate AOC holders or CPL/ATPL holders for your actions. As this is a professional pilots forum, that would be most people here.
Originally Posted by aroa
You say..Re AWK.. a different airworthiness standard, differrent licence category and different fuel requirements.
I say .. rubbish.
One cannot conduct aerial work in an aircraft that has an airworthiness category permitting only private operations. Even if an aircraft has the same airworthiness category as an aircraft permitted to conduct aerial work, the maintenance release may not be endorsed for aerial work as a permitted operational category.
A PP(A)L holder is only permitted to conduct private operations, a CP(A)L or higher can conduct private, aerial work, charter, and RPT operations.
As a private operation one is not required to carry any fixed or variable reserve fuel under CAR 234, the recommended fuel is listed in CAAP 234. Operations conducted under an AOC (i.e. aerial work) are required to carry the fuel as published in their operations manual as required under CAR 220.