Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

EASA + CASA + FAA + CAA + DGCA

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

EASA + CASA + FAA + CAA + DGCA

Old 17th May 2019, 06:04
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: blue earch
Posts: 29
Cool EASA + CASA + FAA + CAA + DGCA

Rather than having different regulations for each region, can't they all merge and have a common system for licensing and requirements?
flysmiless is offline  
Old 17th May 2019, 06:18
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,240
In theory, yes.

Practically, which nation's interpretation of ICAO Annex 6, all the other annexes and all the SARP's does everybody else adopt?
Probably though, the good folks in Chicago in 1944 got it as close to standard as the nationalist allows..

Rated De is offline  
Old 17th May 2019, 07:52
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,671
If ICAO could grow a set (UN masters>rolls eyes) then you may have a chance. Even make a bloody start. ICAO standard medical, valid in all ICAO jurisdictions.
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 17th May 2019, 08:09
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 46
Posts: 356
Ahhh now wouldn’t that make life simple!

I have 3 diff ATPL’s not EASA, looked at doing however the thought of 14 exams kinda put me off.

Common sense shall never apply!
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 22nd May 2019, 22:39
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: where the plangtin iz
Posts: 54
ICAO

"Rather than having different regulations for each region, can't they all merge and have a common system for licensing and requirements?"

I thought there was, it's called ICAO
beached az is offline  
Old 22nd May 2019, 23:14
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cairns
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by beached az View Post
"Rather than having different regulations for each region, can't they all merge and have a common system for licensing and requirements?"

I thought there was, it's called ICAO
ICAO only makes recommendations (SARPS). Itís up to individual states to implement them. Few states (if any) simply adopt the SARPS ďas isĒ. Hence the ICAO differences section in Jepps. Australia is one of the most non-compliant ICAO states. Just check out the size of Australiaís differences section. One big difference between ICAO and Australia is the ICAO recommendation for a mandatory retirement age of 65.

I doubt that that there will ever be a uniform set of rules to cover aviation law just as there will never be common international laws to cover motor vehicle driving. Some countries will choose to drive on the right and others will drive on the left. Thatís just how it is.


Last edited by DHC8 Driver; 22nd May 2019 at 23:28.
DHC8 Driver is offline  
Old 22nd May 2019, 23:24
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Doomadgee
Posts: 354
While we are at it- how about globalising the units used in aviation, eg only litres, kg, Celsius,, metres etc. sux fly in to the use and talking vis n feet, pressure in inches of mercury etc or China with its metric ness.

Oh oh and another thing, make English the only language spoken on the radio.

Capn Rex Havoc is offline  
Old 22nd May 2019, 23:30
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 170
Global harmonisation! A wet dream as CASA can't even harmonise the regions on issues...
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 23rd May 2019, 11:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,155
Too many careers potentially affected. Fergetabatit.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 23rd May 2019, 11:42
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 405
Originally Posted by Capn Rex Havoc View Post
While we are at it- how about globalising the units used in aviation, eg only litres, kg, Celsius,, metres etc. sux fly in to the use and talking vis n feet, pressure in inches of mercury etc


ICAOís policy is for standard units for Aviation. It probably wouldíve happened had one certain country bothered to implement the metric system.

Oh oh and another thing, make English the only language spoken on the radio.
Itís not use of other languages thatís the problem, itís those who choose to speak English without using standard phraseology:

dr dre is offline  
Old 23rd May 2019, 13:48
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 564
That controller is a dick.

Ee Tee De are....you serious?
wheels_down is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 01:43
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 168
In response to the usual uninformed rants about the extent of Australian differences from ICAO SARPS, see here https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...ction_1.7.html for the FAA.. No one should wish zero differences. We could not afford it
Vag277 is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 04:40
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,795
Originally Posted by Vag277 View Post
In response to the usual uninformed rants about the extent of Australian differences from ICAO SARPS, see here https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...ction_1.7.html for the FAA.. No one should wish zero differences. We could not afford it
Folks,
Last time I noticed, Australia filed something over 4000 differences to ICAO --- based on evidence to the RRAT Senate Standing Committee.(Nearly 5000??)

Think of the unemployment consequences if we complied.

Quite frankly, many of the differences, of which I am aware, are farcical, and complying would make no difference, certainly not risk levels.

In short, in my opinion, many of the Australian "differences" are differences for the sake of being different. But they do often have quite severe operational or other financial penalties.

Indeed, one former CASA very senior lawyer was of the view that ICAO compliance equated to "surrendering our sovereignty" ----- risk management ( aka. air safety) didn't rate as an issue.

Tootle pip!

PS: Last time I looked, US only filed a very small number of difference to ICAO Annex X, Vol 2 Standard Phraseology --- mostly to do with descent clearances..

Last edited by LeadSled; 24th May 2019 at 04:46. Reason: spelling
LeadSled is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 05:10
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Doomadgee
Posts: 354
Itís not use of other languages thatís the problem, itís those who choose to speak English without using standard phraseology:
You obviously have not flown in France or China or Spain or Russia, or Italy - to name a few.
Capn Rex Havoc is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:43
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 77
Posts: 2,690
Smile

[color=left=#000000]'or Italy'...[/color]

Tell moi, - how does one wave one's arms in front of de mike and expressa one'sa selfa ??

Just afoolin-a......
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
Old 30th May 2019, 08:18
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Brisbane
Age: 55
Posts: 18
Less LAME

Benefit some but just give Qantas a free ticket to get rid of more of us for more overseas cheap labour
Shipwreck00 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.