If CASA cannot prosecute a Qantas crew for taking off with no runway lighting in Hobart
Folks,
Perhaps because the analysis of the FDR, and the actual activation time base showed that the lights were on at the start of the takeoff roll, and the demonstrated probability was that they went off shortly after airborne. Remember the criminal standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt".
Under cross examination, "eyewitnesses" are notoriously unreliable sources of evidence, as any criminal prosecutor knows.
Back to the thread, I haven't read the whole thread, has CAR 138 rated a mention? Then you have to understand the certification base for the particular aircraft AFM/POH, to understand what is an enforceable limitation and what is advisory in an AFM/POH (if the aircraft has one).
Tootle pip!!