Definition of "DAY" in the AUS CAR/CAO?
Whoops – you are correct. I made a mistake.
2200 on 1 March to 2200 on 8 March is 7 SI days.
I will try to come up with a scenario in which it makes a difference.
2200 on 1 March to 2200 on 8 March is 7 SI days.
I will try to come up with a scenario in which it makes a difference.
Let’s see if I can get it right, this time:
Ms Bloggs is rostered to fly (all times local):
2200 March 1 to 0530 March 2
2200 March 3 to 0530 March 4
2200 March 5 to 0530 March 6
2200 March 6 to 0530 March 7
(So, if I’ve worked the maths correctly, that adds up to 30 hours of rostered time so far.)
May Ms Bloggs be rostered to fly at any time on 8 March?
I would have thought that under the ‘midnight-to-midnight’ day measurement, the answer is ‘yes’ because 8 March is day 8.
However, under the ‘SI day’ measurement, the answer is ‘not until 2200’, because day 7 does not finish until 2200 on 8 March.
Ms Bloggs is rostered to fly (all times local):
2200 March 1 to 0530 March 2
2200 March 3 to 0530 March 4
2200 March 5 to 0530 March 6
2200 March 6 to 0530 March 7
(So, if I’ve worked the maths correctly, that adds up to 30 hours of rostered time so far.)
May Ms Bloggs be rostered to fly at any time on 8 March?
I would have thought that under the ‘midnight-to-midnight’ day measurement, the answer is ‘yes’ because 8 March is day 8.
However, under the ‘SI day’ measurement, the answer is ‘not until 2200’, because day 7 does not finish until 2200 on 8 March.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess my previous response was a bit too muted to be noticed, or maybe the phrase "common law" was misconstrued, but case history / common law in Australia defines a day as a 24-hour period commencing at midnight in local time.
This is the legal standard to which you, or any employer, will be held if presenting a case/prosecution/defence before any court or tribunal in Australia.
If the rules or regs mean a 24-hour period, then that's what they say - they do in the drug & alcohol portions, for example.
This is the legal standard to which you, or any employer, will be held if presenting a case/prosecution/defence before any court or tribunal in Australia.
If the rules or regs mean a 24-hour period, then that's what they say - they do in the drug & alcohol portions, for example.
I would have thought that legislation like the National Measurements Act and regulations under it can oust the common law, but in any event, what is the effect of the common law definition of ‘day’ in scenario above?
May Ms Bloggs be rostered to fly on 8 March before 2200 hours?
The only rule we’re applying is:
May Ms Bloggs be rostered to fly on 8 March before 2200 hours?
The only rule we’re applying is:
A pilot shall not fly and an operator shall not roster him or her to fly in excess of 30 hours in 7 consecutive days.
Last edited by Creampuff; 1st Nov 2012 at 03:19.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll bite this hook...
I would say yes she can fly at any time on the 8th, but for no more than 2 hours. Otherwise she will do more than 30 hours since the beginning of the 2nd.
My reasoning is this: as she is not obliged to maintain a logbook with specific times of departure and arrival, she cannot be obliged to maintain a flight time limitation to a rolling 'SI day'. Only dates are recordable, so only dates (midnight to midnight) are enforceable.
Yes, block times are recorded elsewhere, but nowhere that Mrs Bloggs is required to have access to before deciding whether to accept another flight.
I would say yes she can fly at any time on the 8th, but for no more than 2 hours. Otherwise she will do more than 30 hours since the beginning of the 2nd.
My reasoning is this: as she is not obliged to maintain a logbook with specific times of departure and arrival, she cannot be obliged to maintain a flight time limitation to a rolling 'SI day'. Only dates are recordable, so only dates (midnight to midnight) are enforceable.
Yes, block times are recorded elsewhere, but nowhere that Mrs Bloggs is required to have access to before deciding whether to accept another flight.
Yes, CF, because the answer to the OP’s question would benefit from application of Ockham’s/Occam’s Razor. The assumption is that one rule, and one rule alone, applies.
O8: Setting aside the fact that the rule says nothing about ‘logged’ hours or dates, the rule applies to operators as well as pilots. The operator is prohibited from rostering Ms Bloggs to fly [note: not ‘log’] in excess of 30 hours in 7 consecutive days.
Let’s align ‘midnight-to-midnight days’ with ‘SI days’, by moving Ms Blogg’s roster forward 2 hours, to see what happens.
Ms Bloggs is rostered to fly:
0001 March 2 to 0730 March 2
0001 March 4 to 0730 March 4
0001 March 6 to 0730 March 6
0001 March 7 to 0730 March 7
Ms Bloggs has been rostered to fly 30 hours in 6 ‘midnight-to-midnight days’, which happens to coincide with 30 hours in 6 ‘SI Days’.
Whichever way you measure it, it seems to me that the effect of the rule is that Ms Bloggs must not be rostered to fly again until 0001 on March 9. That’s 30 hours and 30 minutes after Ms Bloggs finished the roster at 0730 on March 7.
Now subtract 2 hours (or any period ranging from 2 minutes to 23 hours and 59 minutes) from all the times in the roster. It would be a really weird outcome if merely moving that roster backwards (or forwards) resulted in the mandatory no-roster/no-fly period being any different from the one that applies if the roster starts at 0001 hours.
The really weird outcome is avoided if 'SI days' are used for the calculation.
Key point: we’re only assuming one rule applies here.
O8: Setting aside the fact that the rule says nothing about ‘logged’ hours or dates, the rule applies to operators as well as pilots. The operator is prohibited from rostering Ms Bloggs to fly [note: not ‘log’] in excess of 30 hours in 7 consecutive days.
Let’s align ‘midnight-to-midnight days’ with ‘SI days’, by moving Ms Blogg’s roster forward 2 hours, to see what happens.
Ms Bloggs is rostered to fly:
0001 March 2 to 0730 March 2
0001 March 4 to 0730 March 4
0001 March 6 to 0730 March 6
0001 March 7 to 0730 March 7
Ms Bloggs has been rostered to fly 30 hours in 6 ‘midnight-to-midnight days’, which happens to coincide with 30 hours in 6 ‘SI Days’.
Whichever way you measure it, it seems to me that the effect of the rule is that Ms Bloggs must not be rostered to fly again until 0001 on March 9. That’s 30 hours and 30 minutes after Ms Bloggs finished the roster at 0730 on March 7.
Now subtract 2 hours (or any period ranging from 2 minutes to 23 hours and 59 minutes) from all the times in the roster. It would be a really weird outcome if merely moving that roster backwards (or forwards) resulted in the mandatory no-roster/no-fly period being any different from the one that applies if the roster starts at 0001 hours.
The really weird outcome is avoided if 'SI days' are used for the calculation.
Key point: we’re only assuming one rule applies here.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good points CP.
However, I think it is unconscionable to place a restriction on a pilot when that pilot has no reasonable way of knowing whether the restriction applies. Let me explain.
I realise that your excellent example is only for the 7 day rule. Got it. For the purposes of this paragraph however, imagine that the only rule is the 900hr / 365 day rule. Imagine we've expanded your hypothetical roster so it goes to 900 hrs in exactly 365 days. How would Ms Bloggs know what time of day she did that flight 366 days ago, so she knows when she can start flying again? Ms Bloggs can't consult the operator's records - he was working her too hard, so she quit, and now she is onto her second employer, and the first bloke won't even speak to her let alone let her examine his flight records. And Ms Bloggs can't possibly remember times of day or when rest periods started & stopped. So she's stuck with the only records that CASA require her to have and to use, which is her logbook. All she can do is use logbook dates to determine when she can fly again.
Note in this case, "logged" hours are the only ones available, even though you've rightly pointed out that the CAO doesn't mention that word. Similarly, her current operator can't help, as his records only go back three months to when employment began. Despite his legal responsibility to roster Ms Bloggs correctly, he is just as dependent on her logbook as she is.
The adjusting the times to seemingly get a free day, as you've done to provide an example, is not so weird. In the first case, I think there is no day off owing. In the second case (roster moved back 2hours 1minute) there is a day off owing according to my reasoning. However, you've gotten a day off on the 1st of the month in the second example. So in the long term it averages out exactly the same.
That's why I suggest using dates in the logbook to satisfy the FTL. However, I could be wrong - all the above is just my highly non-lawyer-like reasoning, I admit.
Good discussion.
O8
However, I think it is unconscionable to place a restriction on a pilot when that pilot has no reasonable way of knowing whether the restriction applies. Let me explain.
I realise that your excellent example is only for the 7 day rule. Got it. For the purposes of this paragraph however, imagine that the only rule is the 900hr / 365 day rule. Imagine we've expanded your hypothetical roster so it goes to 900 hrs in exactly 365 days. How would Ms Bloggs know what time of day she did that flight 366 days ago, so she knows when she can start flying again? Ms Bloggs can't consult the operator's records - he was working her too hard, so she quit, and now she is onto her second employer, and the first bloke won't even speak to her let alone let her examine his flight records. And Ms Bloggs can't possibly remember times of day or when rest periods started & stopped. So she's stuck with the only records that CASA require her to have and to use, which is her logbook. All she can do is use logbook dates to determine when she can fly again.
Note in this case, "logged" hours are the only ones available, even though you've rightly pointed out that the CAO doesn't mention that word. Similarly, her current operator can't help, as his records only go back three months to when employment began. Despite his legal responsibility to roster Ms Bloggs correctly, he is just as dependent on her logbook as she is.
The adjusting the times to seemingly get a free day, as you've done to provide an example, is not so weird. In the first case, I think there is no day off owing. In the second case (roster moved back 2hours 1minute) there is a day off owing according to my reasoning. However, you've gotten a day off on the 1st of the month in the second example. So in the long term it averages out exactly the same.
That's why I suggest using dates in the logbook to satisfy the FTL. However, I could be wrong - all the above is just my highly non-lawyer-like reasoning, I admit.
Good discussion.
O8
Last edited by Oktas8; 2nd Nov 2012 at 04:31. Reason: Addressing weirdness
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let’s see if I can get it right, this time:
Ms Bloggs is rostered to fly (all times local):
2200 March 1 to 0530 March 2
2200 March 3 to 0530 March 4
2200 March 5 to 0530 March 6
2200 March 6 to 0530 March 7
(So, if I’ve worked the maths correctly, that adds up to 30 hours of rostered time so far.)
May Ms Bloggs be rostered to fly at any time on 8 March?
I would have thought that under the ‘midnight-to-midnight’ day measurement, the answer is ‘yes’ because 8 March is day 8.
However, under the ‘SI day’ measurement, the answer is ‘not until 2200’, because day 7 does not finish until 2200 on 8 March.
Ms Bloggs is rostered to fly (all times local):
2200 March 1 to 0530 March 2
2200 March 3 to 0530 March 4
2200 March 5 to 0530 March 6
2200 March 6 to 0530 March 7
(So, if I’ve worked the maths correctly, that adds up to 30 hours of rostered time so far.)
May Ms Bloggs be rostered to fly at any time on 8 March?
I would have thought that under the ‘midnight-to-midnight’ day measurement, the answer is ‘yes’ because 8 March is day 8.
However, under the ‘SI day’ measurement, the answer is ‘not until 2200’, because day 7 does not finish until 2200 on 8 March.
Using the SI "preceding 24 hour" rule, we get a more restrictive result - no flying at all on the 8th and not prior to 0530 on the 9th.
Edit: Amplifying on the above, the reason I say no flying at all on the 8th is because the rule says "roster" for flying, that is, the second Ms Bloggs walks onto the flight deck she's been ROSTERED for a 7.5 hour segment, regardless of the fact that most of those hours will be acquitted later.
If you want to be less hung up on the word "rostered", then the SI definition allows Ms Bloggs to commence duty at 2200 on the 8th, since each minute after 082200 we can dismiss the equivalent minute after 012200. This interpretation equals the flying we'd be allowed to do in the 0000-2400 definition.
Last edited by Woodwork; 2nd Nov 2012 at 09:11.
That’s my reasoning, too, WW.
O8: The meaning of the word doesn’t change depending on whether it has ‘365’ instead of ‘7’ in front of it. However, I reckon ‘SI day’ v ‘midnight-to-midnight day’ doesn’t make a schmick of practical difference in the 365 case.
When you wake up on the morning of midnight-to-midnight day 365, no one’s going to have a clue whether the hours you logged on midnight-to-midnight day 1 were for a flight that started before midnight. If all those hours add up to 899.9, good luck to you: it’s a problem I’d like to have!
O8: The meaning of the word doesn’t change depending on whether it has ‘365’ instead of ‘7’ in front of it. However, I reckon ‘SI day’ v ‘midnight-to-midnight day’ doesn’t make a schmick of practical difference in the 365 case.
When you wake up on the morning of midnight-to-midnight day 365, no one’s going to have a clue whether the hours you logged on midnight-to-midnight day 1 were for a flight that started before midnight. If all those hours add up to 899.9, good luck to you: it’s a problem I’d like to have!
Aaaarhhhhh!!
For the good old pommy regulations (don't really know if they have filtered into EASA's new flight time rules), but, for the pommy exams of yore, a day could be:
A) Mean Sidereal Day or:
B) Calendar day, (always GMT, this was before UTC) and
"the rules" made clear which day was "a day".
and daylight and darkness were were precisely defined.
On a day to day basis, we seemed to manage OK in picking the right definition of day for the day --- so to speak.
Tootle pip!!
For the good old pommy regulations (don't really know if they have filtered into EASA's new flight time rules), but, for the pommy exams of yore, a day could be:
A) Mean Sidereal Day or:
B) Calendar day, (always GMT, this was before UTC) and
"the rules" made clear which day was "a day".
and daylight and darkness were were precisely defined.
On a day to day basis, we seemed to manage OK in picking the right definition of day for the day --- so to speak.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 3rd Nov 2012 at 14:13.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff mon vieux.
In the context of Flight and Duty times might the operative word be "local"?
There are now some very well respected and accepted FRMS programmes that account for the rotation of the earth in its orbit around the sun in the application and effects of circadian thingummy rest periods and duty times
We go too fast nowadays for the old rules to have any relevancy.
In the context of Flight and Duty times might the operative word be "local"?
There are now some very well respected and accepted FRMS programmes that account for the rotation of the earth in its orbit around the sun in the application and effects of circadian thingummy rest periods and duty times
We go too fast nowadays for the old rules to have any relevancy.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no one’s going to have a clue whether the hours you logged on midnight-to-midnight day 1 were for a flight that started before midnight
For the hapless Ms Bloggs on her overnight shifts, I recommend recording flight dates in UTC. Perfectly legal and gets around the problem of taking off on day 1 and landing on day 2. KIS.
Check Attitude
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAO 48, Industry Exemptions, Flight Crew Flight and Duty Limits
2. Definitions
2.2 Day: A day is the period between local midnight and the subsequent local midnight.
2. Definitions
2.2 Day: A day is the period between local midnight and the subsequent local midnight.
however in times modern perhaps that "local" time should be further defined as "home base".
A definition in an exemption does not make it so for the regulations.
However, it does show why the discussion is academic in the context of the CAO 48 series: no one's actually obliged to comply with them, irrespective of what they mean. (Another regulatory dog's breakfast).
However, it does show why the discussion is academic in the context of the CAO 48 series: no one's actually obliged to comply with them, irrespective of what they mean. (Another regulatory dog's breakfast).
