While we're waiting for the debate....
PNM
post #1686:
1 - if the motion lapses without debate then the Instrument is disallowed and ceases to have the force of law;
2 - if the motion is debated and voted in, then the Instrument is disallowed and ceases to have the force of law; or
3 - if the motion is debated and voted out, then the Instrument continues to have the force of law.
....Kharon brings up an interesting point,
post #1687...
notice that the FAA, who can legitimately claim safety sovereignty, have shown the way (again) with their revised fatigue rules which have apparently managed to reach a most satisfactory conclusion. They probably have not satisfied everyone's wishes, but the interested parties have, in a democratic fashion, achieved a greatly improved regulation based on modern thinking. So Bravo the FAA. Meanwhile here at home – "round and around the garden" – seems an apt description and 25 years in not really a long wait in the life of a glacier; is it ?
As of two days ago the US are now operating to an amended FAR 117:
"PART 117 - Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements"
And as "K" mentions besides one or two points of difference, the new rules have been generally well accepted, here's an example from ALPA:
ALPA Supports Same Flight And Duty Rules For All Airline Pilots
“ALPA applauds the FAA and DOT for their continued efforts to ensure that the U.S. airline industry remains the safest in the world. The new science-based flight- and duty-time rules are a significant victory for safety and the traveling public here in the United States because they represent a long-overdue overhaul of decades-old flight and duty regulations.
“Unfortunately, the regulations have one critical shortfall because they exclude cargo airline pilots. ALPA was fully engaged in the FAA’s Aviation Rulemaking Committee regarding pilot fatigue, and has long maintained that the new flight- and duty-time limits and minimum rest requirements must cover all airline pilots. It is clear from the science that all airline pilots experience fatigue in the same ways, regardless of whether they are transporting passengers or cargo. Cargo airline pilots fly the same aircraft types over the same routes, into and out of the same airports, as passenger airline pilots. This is why ALPA supports H.R. 182/S. 1692—the Safe Skies Act, which would require that cargo pilots be included in these regulations in order to increase safety for the public. We urge every U.S. senator and representative to support this important aviation safety legislation for all who rely on air transportation.”
Here in Oz Fort Fumble in their usual bombastic way rammed through into law
Civil Aviation Order 48.1 Amendment Instrument 2013 (No. 1) despite criticisms from similar industry groups to the US ALPA...
AIPA: Safety risked by flawed aviation rules that would result in fatigued pilots landing planes after 20 hours at the controls
“AIPA believes that a scientific review of the proposed limits is necessary, ensuring efficiency is balanced with flight safety through principles developed by thorough scientific analysis, not lobbying. The motion to disallow CAO 48.1 will allow all industry stakeholders to go back to the table with CASA and produce legislation that is more aligned to international best practice, which will provide an outcome that is significantly better for public safety.”
VIPA: New Regulations
"CASA has previously stated that the current CAO 48 is devoid of sound scientific principles to define the prescribed Flight and Duty limits cites this inadequacy to advocate for its new rule set. The new CAO 48 is supposed to be based on currently recognised and credible fatigue science. Sadly the new CAO 48.1 does not come close to satisfying the scientific principles. For example the scientific studies that ICAO relied upon to develop the SARP for FDP limits recognise that flight duty should not exceed 8 to 9 hours at the controls. The new rules routinely allow for this, which is no different to what we currently do.."
This FF total disconnect with industry concern was further highlighted by a speech made by the DAS at Clive's dinosaur park
:
Reforming civil aviation regulations - enhancing safety standards through new flight crew fatigue management rules
The recent claims made by some sections of the industry appear to compare the standby requirements specified in the new CAO 48.1 with foreign regulators’ airport standby arrangements. However, these are two very different concepts, and comparing them is tendentious and misleading.
Hmm...so while we wait and ponder the next political moves, on yet another reg debacle, it would appear the rest of the world has addressed the problem and are getting on with it...
...
TICK TOCK indeed!