Originally Posted by
LeadSled
Conner Rod,
The answer to all of the above is that the answers are irrelevant to the discussion in hand --- if, as we are expected to believe, you are a LAME, I have a couple of questions for you:
A lawyer, whether employed by CASA or other wise, is not qualified to write an opinion on aviation law if it relates to maintenance, unless they are a LAME.
Yes/No
No other person is qualified to speak on aviation law if it relates to maintenance unless they are a LAME.
Yes/No.
In short, your argument above is specious and invalid. Ask a lawyer what "jus publicum privatorum pactis mutari non potest" means.
The aviation law is what it
PS 3: There is no contradiction in an AWB containing an acceptable means of compliance, any more than a CAAP or AC, but you still have the flexibility of having an alternative means of compliance negotiated with CASA. But none of the three is L-A-W. This very simple concept seems to be a mystery to you. And yes, I do know the legal status of an S/B or so called MSB, including the latest FAA legal determinations of their status, which has had a significant impact on Cessna's approach to such matters, do you??
Btw ps3
You are totally incorrect. Whislt it may be all good when all is well, when it happens to go pear shaped and there is no other documents other than ac or awb they become the approved document. You really not to stop with your incorrect b/s. You really dont have a clue at all how maintenance and the law are inter twinned in the complexity of the the whole system.
One might surgest you actually go and work in a workshop and actully shut the f up an learn something. But im sure know one would give you entry into there shops.
You are becoming dangerous to the extreme with your absolute lack of knowledge and understanding of these particular subject.