Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

What would a modern supplementary airline reg set look like?

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

What would a modern supplementary airline reg set look like?

Old 26th May 2015, 11:24
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,349
What would a modern supplementary airline reg set look like?

I remember back to the 70'ies, I think it was reg 207, just an extension to your AOC.
Bill Clinton changed GA Manufacturing in 1994 (?) by signing a piece of legislation into law in the US, spurring Beech, Cessna Piper and Mooney back into life and creating a garden bed in which Eclipse, Cirrus, Adams, Vans and others flourished.

There are some "interesting" and "colourful" operators out there and I am curious about what "feeder" or "supplementary" airline regulation might look like.

Time for a seperate thread.
How would we build a set of regs that foster small regional airlines?

What would the Dick Smith Party, when holding the balance of power, take to the government of the day as a "log of claims"?

Its all probably pointless but we can dream...
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 26th May 2015, 11:41
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 468
Considering the quantity of paper required for the Part 61 regulations I expect the Attorney Generals Department would mandate and ensure a modern supplementary airline reg set would be at least 100 times larger.

Tipsy
CASA: Ready with solutions to problems that don't even exist as yet.
tipsy2 is offline  
Old 26th May 2015, 23:01
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 1,702
Why yet again reinvent the wheel by 'building' a new set of regulations? Regulations that the authorities, aided and abetted by various committees, attempt in Australia end up being a fustercluck of monumental proportions. Everyone has their own agenda. It's like watching 8 year olds playing footy. No notion of teamwork, just grab the ball and kick it in any direction. Our Part 61 is proof positive of that.
The solution? NZ Part 135. Manufacturer's maintenance schedule. MMEL.
CASA obliged to rubber stamp any document that has been issued by the manufacturer and is current eg AFM, POH, load sheet, performance etc.
CASA required to assess AOC applications and variations in a fixed time, for a fixed fee. HARRUMPH - that would be too much to ask.
Mach E Avelli 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.