The consultation process is a requirement, but the main issue is that some of it's been done years ago and is still being used as 'the industry agreed' but now often out of context. Working groups such as Part 138 haven't even signed off on the Part but it's been put out anyway. Worse, parts have been developed in relative isolation and don't gel, and the whole mess has in my view turned into a ridiculously verbose, convoluted and in places very inappropriate reg set.

The idea of plain, simple and effective rules (as required by the Act) seems to be too hard a concept for some people to grasp, to not only the industry's detriment, but CASA's itself.

LB, I don't think we need any more evidence than CASA said they were going to 'harmonise' the regs with new CASRs to align with the FAA and EASA in about 1988 or 1989 - NZCAA said the same. Here we are 33 years later and CASA still has not introduced the full set of CASRs - NZ had it done by 1990.

So true, have a read of the NZ CAA regs. Then read 'equivalent' regs from CASA. CAA regs seem easier to understand. Talk about complicating things with CASA regs ....I know I know, the lawyers.

Hey it’s the Australian way to overcomplicate things and make life harder than it should be, why expect anything different on this occasion?