Careful Biccy you'll be blacklisted and highlighted on the growing IOS/FART list of suspects for possible future enforcement action..
And remember that they don't need evidence of association just rumour!
Came across an interesting addendum to the recently released (tongue in cheek) Sup Estimates AQONs 2012:
Man Made Obstacles Located Away From Aerodromes-Risk Review
This review is interesting because it would appear that FF are actually suggesting we adopt Part 77 from the US or NZ regs:
FindingF2
INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION
The USA and New Zealand have developed a legislative framework that groups the regulations pertaining to the management of man made obstacles, wherever they are located, into one rule set (Part 77 –Objects that Affect the Navigable Airspace). Part 77 sets out the requirement for notification heights and the standards with which the regulator is required to assess objects that affect the navigable airspace.
And in R2 option 1:
OPTION 1 – CREATION OF PART 77 OBJECTS THAT AFFECT NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE
This option is designed to group all obstacle related regulation within one CASR Part. It is proposed that this CASR Part is designated CASR Part 77. This brings the regulation of obstacles in Australia in line with the regulatory structure applied in the United States and New Zealand.
Here is
NZ CAA Part 77...hmm bet you if FF adopt Option 1 and they finally get Part 77 all drafted that our version won't be 28 pages (x 10 will be my guess..).
More interesting though is the fact that, if Option 1 is endorsed, FF will be setting a precedent of adopting a NZ reg....nah it would never happen
That would be like saying that maybe..just maybe the IOS could be right!!
