----In the US if the area is remote there is no lower limit to the altitude allowed-----
Folks,
Just one of many areas where the Yanks don't see the need to regulate aviation to a standstill --- but leave it up to common sense and personal responsibility --- and recognize that you can't regulate the unwise, and/or terminally immature and/or irresponsible out of existence.
Many regulatory areas of what we call "airwork" simply do not exist in the US, another example being aerial photography ---- no AOC equivalents, with all the inevitable bureaucratic red tape. Just what air safety threat does our forest of aerial photo rules address --- beyond the "if it moves - regulate it" syndrome.
And, the air safety outcome of the "lax" US regulation ---- a far better (lower) accident rate than Australia, comparing apples and apples.
The FAA/AOPA-US/EAA/NBAA/etc. approach to educating to produce the world's best air safety outcomes obviously works ---- compared with the Australian approach of regulating almost everything ( and not just aviation, either) to within an inch of its life.
There is a message here, which we consistently fail
to get!!
Don't just blame CASA --- industry is not short of fans of the thoroughly discredited idea that "more regulation = more safety" --- as long as the "more regulation" is imposed on "them", not me, because I am a really dutifully compliant operator, and therefor "safe" ---- it's "them" that need all the extra regulation to be "safe".
As former FAA Administrator, (Vice-Admiral) Donald Engen said, on a visit to Australia:
"In US, we trust a person because they are a pilot, in Australia you distrust a person because they are a pilot".
Just about says it all about the about the Australian (not just CASA) approach to aviation regulation.
Tootle pip!!