CARs in Plain English
CARs in Plain English
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi Offshoreigor -
Are they that clear and concise? Don't think so! Speaking as one who writes Ops Manuals for a living, I think they could have done the job much better (in fact I know they did a better job, the lawyers screwed it up).
It's not so much the language anyway, but the layout, so I translated the whole lot into English, moved it all around, cut out the duplication and the bleeding obvious and reduced the whole lot down to 300 pages from 1600 (well, lawyers used to get paid by the word).
I could turn it into HTML, I suppose, and put it on the web page. Just looking for suggestions!
cheers
phil
Are they that clear and concise? Don't think so! Speaking as one who writes Ops Manuals for a living, I think they could have done the job much better (in fact I know they did a better job, the lawyers screwed it up).
It's not so much the language anyway, but the layout, so I translated the whole lot into English, moved it all around, cut out the duplication and the bleeding obvious and reduced the whole lot down to 300 pages from 1600 (well, lawyers used to get paid by the word).
I could turn it into HTML, I suppose, and put it on the web page. Just looking for suggestions!
cheers
phil
Guest
Posts: n/a
Excuuuuse Me!
If you write Ops Manuals for a living and do other wonderous deeds, such as turning CAR's into childrens novels,(ie easier to read, at least by your standard) please give us an example as we cannot comment on your accomplishments without first having a peek.
If you really wrote Ops Manuals for a living, you wouldn't have said it in the first place.
Cheers, OffshoreIgor
PS Please feel free to e-mail me to discuss this further, as I have never had any difficulty in either understanding or interprating CARS, ANO's, AIR REGS etc....
If you write Ops Manuals for a living and do other wonderous deeds, such as turning CAR's into childrens novels,(ie easier to read, at least by your standard) please give us an example as we cannot comment on your accomplishments without first having a peek.
If you really wrote Ops Manuals for a living, you wouldn't have said it in the first place.
Cheers, OffshoreIgor
PS Please feel free to e-mail me to discuss this further, as I have never had any difficulty in either understanding or interprating CARS, ANO's, AIR REGS etc....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey, all I did was ask if anyone was interested - a simple indication of the affirmative or otherwise would have been sufficient, instead of saying (twice now) how wonderful you are at reading regulations - 99% of us aren't and just want to be pilots and not lawyers.
I didn't ask for comments on what I had done, I was asking whether it would be worth expending any effort on making it accessible to other people.
>>If you really wrote Ops Manuals for a living, you wouldn't have said it in the first place.
To what are you referring?
Phil
I didn't ask for comments on what I had done, I was asking whether it would be worth expending any effort on making it accessible to other people.
>>If you really wrote Ops Manuals for a living, you wouldn't have said it in the first place.
To what are you referring?
Phil
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just the sort of answer I need - the idea, as I said, is not so much to translate it, but to make it easier to get around and give you some idea of where to look in the originals. I'm down to the last 70 pages, then I've got to index it, so will announce when its ready shortly. I will be able to post a sample if required.
cheers
phil
cheers
phil
Guest
Posts: n/a
PACO:
No offence, but what I was trying to say was that if you have truly put the effort into a document of this type, then let people have a look at it. Sort of a 'beta' version for opinion.
There's not much point publishing it if it doesn't improve on the original.
As for my reference to 'Ops Manuals'. From what I see out there these days, they mostly seem to all have the phrase "Refer to CARS # blah blah blah, etc." So if your background in Ops Manual authoring follows this style, then you will understand what I meant.
Cheers, OffshoreIgor
PS. Don't make your chain so easy to yank!
Never let your aircraft take you, where your brain hasn't been in the last five minutes.
No offence, but what I was trying to say was that if you have truly put the effort into a document of this type, then let people have a look at it. Sort of a 'beta' version for opinion.
There's not much point publishing it if it doesn't improve on the original.
As for my reference to 'Ops Manuals'. From what I see out there these days, they mostly seem to all have the phrase "Refer to CARS # blah blah blah, etc." So if your background in Ops Manual authoring follows this style, then you will understand what I meant.
Cheers, OffshoreIgor
PS. Don't make your chain so easy to yank!
Never let your aircraft take you, where your brain hasn't been in the last five minutes.
Guest
Posts: n/a
There will be a beta version available soon, though if anyone wants a look they are welcome to email me.
You were on the back end of a lot of unqualified people unrelated to this forum trying to tell me how to do my job, so the chain is a little sensitive at the moment. Anyway, they've all been shot down in flames.
As for Ops Manuals, well, I'm from the old school and do a proper job, that is looking after the guy who has to read them, so I don't do them on a cheap and chippy typewriter wearing boxing gloves!
cheers
phil
You were on the back end of a lot of unqualified people unrelated to this forum trying to tell me how to do my job, so the chain is a little sensitive at the moment. Anyway, they've all been shot down in flames.
As for Ops Manuals, well, I'm from the old school and do a proper job, that is looking after the guy who has to read them, so I don't do them on a cheap and chippy typewriter wearing boxing gloves!
cheers
phil
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sounds like a neat thing Paco, and probably long overdue. What I would love to see is a Canadian replication of a book they have in the U.S. where their FAR's not only are made clearer, but also show some examples of actual rulings to show the intent and interpretation of actual regulations in the courts. Examples of cases, just like reading accident reports, gives real life examples that reinforce "y'all be careful out there"
Guest
Posts: n/a
I agree that the current CARs are in fairly plain English. I also wouldn't want to consult a paraphrased version, because I want to see word for word what the CARs *say* to ensure I'm legal. I don't trust anyone else but me to interpret the CARS for me. The duplication could be reduced, but if it were you'd have to flip from section to section even more.
What I'd really like to see is a fully searchable, true hypertext version, so that I could click on a word to see its definition, instead of searching through the interpretations to try to figure out things like whether a non-pilot crew member required for aerial work constitutes a passenger for the purpose of needing a functional landing light at night.
What I'd really like to see is a fully searchable, true hypertext version, so that I could click on a word to see its definition, instead of searching through the interpretations to try to figure out things like whether a non-pilot crew member required for aerial work constitutes a passenger for the purpose of needing a functional landing light at night.
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is not intended to be a legal replacement, but more of a commentary - you would still need CARs for the full legal effect. If you like, it's a quick reference for the working pilot, because the whole printed work and/or CD are simply not useable in the cockpit. I haven't included the definitions yet - would it be more useful it they were? Sounds like it might be, but I'm trying to keep the book size low. If I did it as a PDF file, it would certainly be more searchable than the current edition, but hard copy is often useful too.
I will shortly have a beta version avaiable for a download - will let you know when it is available.
I will shortly have a beta version avaiable for a download - will let you know when it is available.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well laid out and easy to read.
How do you spell mosaicked??
How about a margin with the # of the relevant CARS section by the related text?
I would think that there would be market for this publication - would you autograph mine
------------------
-.-- --.- -..-
How do you spell mosaicked??
How about a margin with the # of the relevant CARS section by the related text?
I would think that there would be market for this publication - would you autograph mine
------------------
-.-- --.- -..-
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ah, so there is a market for it - that's what I wanted to know - I've just got to do the indexing, and a bit more preafrooding, as the last chapter is still a little rough - I'll think about the references, but at the moment it's a bit of a spare time project. I can certainly send you a signed copy once it's printed, in return for your test driving - it can be done as PDF and hard copy, though the realistic cost for that would be 40 bucks. PDF would be cheap though.
Thanks for your comments!
Phil
Thanks for your comments!
Phil
Guest
Posts: n/a
PACO:
Although well layed out, I think you are looking at a niche market. It seems to deal primarily with the private fixed wing market not the CARS complete!
You don't seem to think much of covering CASS, which given the nature of this Forum would require a lot more attention.
I like what you have done from a pure learning stand point, but certainly not an improvement on the commercial need.
Cheers, OffshoreIgor
PS. I have been both a professional Military and ATPL rated Helicopter Pilot for the past 20+ years. I am not yanking your chain this time.
[This message has been edited by offshoreigor (edited 10 December 2000).]
Although well layed out, I think you are looking at a niche market. It seems to deal primarily with the private fixed wing market not the CARS complete!
You don't seem to think much of covering CASS, which given the nature of this Forum would require a lot more attention.
I like what you have done from a pure learning stand point, but certainly not an improvement on the commercial need.
Cheers, OffshoreIgor
PS. I have been both a professional Military and ATPL rated Helicopter Pilot for the past 20+ years. I am not yanking your chain this time.
[This message has been edited by offshoreigor (edited 10 December 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ah well, if you read the intro to Part VII, it says ....
"Although CARs splits aviation activities into four types, that is, Foreign, Aerial Work, Air Taxi, Commuter and Airline (Private Operators are covered in Part VI), the general principles and paperwork involved in running them are the same, just more complex as you go up the scale. To save space, this chapter lumps everything together, with the differences explained as we go along. Just extract whatever is relevant to your organisation."
I assure you, everything is in there, including CASS, but except for maintenance, which is not usually of interest to the working pilot. It is certainly not for the private fixed wing market!
Phil
"Although CARs splits aviation activities into four types, that is, Foreign, Aerial Work, Air Taxi, Commuter and Airline (Private Operators are covered in Part VI), the general principles and paperwork involved in running them are the same, just more complex as you go up the scale. To save space, this chapter lumps everything together, with the differences explained as we go along. Just extract whatever is relevant to your organisation."
I assure you, everything is in there, including CASS, but except for maintenance, which is not usually of interest to the working pilot. It is certainly not for the private fixed wing market!
Phil
Guest
Posts: n/a
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the A.I.P. use to have most of the regs in it ??? And weren't they written in plain english ??? I used to consult the A.I.P. regularly when I had a question, but now it has very few regs in it. It is still a decent reference, but it used to be quite a bit better. Too bad T.C. dropped the ball !!!
Randy_G
Randy_G