Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of fools.
Go for that piss before you wet your pants.

I wouldn’t sweat it, unless you are Superman or otherwise able to derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air on your own.


The aircraft is flying, not the pilot. Even if (1)( b) is interpreted to mean “while the pilot in command is flying the aircraft in that airspace”, the pilot in command is not flying the aircraft while s/he is in the toilet.


(1) The pilot in command of an aircraft for a flight contravenes this subregulation if:

(a) during the flight, the aircraft is flown in controlled airspace; and
(b) the pilot in command does not continuously monitor the primary communications medium used by air traffic control while flying in that airspace.

Maybe a CPDLC interface in the ****ter would do the trick!

Or a headset with a very long lead.

Which is all well and good until something goes wrong whilst you're out and then some overzealous CASA official looking to deflect blame find these rules.

How about we get a decent ruleset instead?

So is the consensus interpretation that if you are flying in CTA, if you want to leave the cockpit even for a quick pee, you must have a co-pilot that has either:

1. A Captain checked to line on same fleet
2. A Co-pilot with an ATPL who has been line checked?

But if you are flying OCTA, you can just hand over to the other pilot?

As the captain of a long haul aeroplane with 4 pilots, I remain the pilot in command even when in the bunk asleep.

That said, the way that is framed shows the lack of understanding the people who author these things really have, which is sad, gone are the days when the regulators were experienced industry professionals, not the regulators are the OLC and someone who came out of law school into the public service.

Not so long ago I had to have a Flight Attendant babysitting me on the flightdeck when the other pilot went for a slash. They're obviously competent at flightdeck oversight so just get 'em back up now! :ok:

Under the Australian rules, isn’t the operator obliged to nominate one, and one only, person to be the PIC of an aircraft for a flight? If yes, how can someone else be PIC during that flight while the nominated person is using in the amenities (or sleeping)?

121.535 provides for relief of the PIC, but it doesn’t explain how an FO or SO without an ATPL can be left in charge.

Even if the PIC cant leave their seat whilst OCTA or whatever this is about. If the PIC has not gone to the lav by TOD, or hold on until landing there is bigger problems

Where is the “relief” - good pun by the way - from 91.635?

The PIC remains the PIC, even while being “relieved”.

121.535 (2) or (3) allows the PIC to delegate the conduct of the flight to an appropriately qualified pilot who meets the specified requirements, no?

But the same person remains the PIC, nonetheless.

Hopefully we’ll be able to get ICUS weaved into this…

I like it! In command under supervision while the supervisor is in the ****ter!

:ok:

I can't weave ICUS into this conversation but is Class E considered controlled airspace for an IFR flight?

Why do you care?
......do you really need written permission to take a piss now.

There are a lot more warts in the new ops regs, trust me as I spent 2 years with CASA writing the 91 and 135 regs!

I went into bat for common sense rules on many occasions and I was bowled out on many occasions, however I did have a little success. I got frustrated and moved on.

In CASA’s defence, it’s certainly not the people in CASA dictating how the new rules have been drafted, it’s the federal government lawyers. This is something that most people in industry don’t understand.