Stricty Lible
Hello Creampuff
I do understand what you are saying, but not from the LEGAL manner in which it is presented.
In other words I can see that you are saying
SL has been with us for ages and IS included in the current regs, and
why is AOPA (among others) now presenting an argument why it should not exist.
Am I close ?
I am in no position to answer for AOPA (not a member) but I can understand that after seeing SL in action in court (or at least threatend to be used as I know of no actual cases where it has been used) that some in the industry don't think it is a good idea.
They therefore are lobying a case to have it removed, good on them if that is what they want.
But is it the highest and most important item that needs tackling /resolving in CASA. Well NO it is not. I am sure we would all have our own ideas/agendas as to what that would be.
To me it is to simplify ( make them readable and understandable) in common(non legalease) english so that all those that want to comply can do so without all the wishy washy what ifs that are so common with our current regs.
Sure from your point of view they are easy to understand, and from your background with CASA and your legal training of how many years?, it probably is.
But MATE I don't have that training, and I do wish to make my flying SAFE and COMPLIANT. The current regs make that job just a little more difficult than I and MANY others belive it shoud be.
You are a smart and educated man, and it would appear you are intersted in making things better. You can clearly see (and often let us know) that we pilots generally have a VERY POOR understanding of the legal manner and meaning of the regs.
So help us, present things in a manner which we, the want too's, have a chance of understanding without the uncertainty or misinterpretation.
Now someone that could get CASA and the regs to do that would be someone worth respecting.
Salt Lake City, MY ASS.