Old 21st Apr 2011, 18:24
  #36 (permalink)  
4dogs
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Australasia
Posts: 362
Unhappy Oz Law Provides a Specific Offence

Folks,

Under Australian Aviation Law, pilots are compelled to comply with the operator's Operations Manual:

215 Operations manual
(1) An operator shall provide an operations manual for the use and
guidance of the operations personnel of the operator.
Penalty: 25 penalty units.

.........

(9) Each member of the operations personnel of an operator shall
comply with all instructions contained in the operations manual
in so far as they relate to his or her duties or activities.
Penalty: 25 penalty units.

(10) In this regulation, a reference to the operations personnel of an
operator shall be read as including a reference to a person
undergoing flight training with that operator.

(11) An offence against subregulation (1), (2), (3A), (5), (6), (7), (8)
or (9) is an offence of strict liability.
Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.

(12) It is a defence to a prosecution under subregulation (3A) if the
defendant had a reasonable excuse.
Note A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in
subregulation (12) (see subsection 13.3 (3) of the Criminal Code).

Now you will note that the offence attracts a maximum fine of 25 penalty units or about $2700. The FO would be in the frame if he was acquiescent in the breach.

Normally, in the absence of a specific direction from the regulator requiring the 30 minute buffer on twilight, a charge of reckless endangerment would be tossed on first reading unless the Captain sought relief from the company, was refused and took off despite vehement objections from the FO, or something similar.

I don't know any details or any rumours but it does seem unusually heavy handed....guess we'll just have to wait for the details to emerge.

Stay Alive,
4dogs is offline