Part 91
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Currently: A landlocked country with high terrain, otherwise Melbourne, Australia + Washington D.C.
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part 91
My apologies for posting a new thread on this (admittedly, I shouldn't feel the need to apologise for not understanding new aviation regs right away, but still, sorry for rubbing it in one more time). I remember seeing one post a while ago on Part 91 but can't seem to find it any more.
CASA sent this email regarding upcoming Part 91. That's leaving me somewhat puzzled: is Part 91 replacing (or consolidating) all of Part 61, CAOs, CAAPs, ...? Are we going to get new, Part 91 licences and ratings?
CASA sent this email regarding upcoming Part 91. That's leaving me somewhat puzzled: is Part 91 replacing (or consolidating) all of Part 61, CAOs, CAAPs, ...? Are we going to get new, Part 91 licences and ratings?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Currently: A landlocked country with high terrain, otherwise Melbourne, Australia + Washington D.C.
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What document are you specifically referring to, may I ask? I'm currently reading https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...nteractive.pdf, which is a mere 168 pages and seems like an VFRG inspired version of the AIP incl. IFR but for humans. As the name implies, it is a guide to this new "Part 91".
From CASA's website:
* i.e. CASR Parts 91, 103, 105, 119, 121, 131, 133, 135, 138.
So we're adding new parts to CASR but we still have the CAO, CAR and CAA. What is unclear is what and how this is supposed to consolidate. Does that imply that those new parts are replacing some of these regs?
From CASA's website:
The flight operations regulations* will consolidate the operating and flight rules, as well as certification and management, for a variety of aircraft and operations.
So we're adding new parts to CASR but we still have the CAO, CAR and CAA. What is unclear is what and how this is supposed to consolidate. Does that imply that those new parts are replacing some of these regs?
The CAO, CAR, related instruments and exemptions will be replaced/consolidated into Part 91. The plain English document consolidated 400 pages of Part 91 and its MOS. Existing flight ops rules are scattered through many documents and are challenging to find if you are not familiar with what is there. The Civil Aviation Act (CAA) is not affected by Part 91. The summary of changes on page 4 lists the most significant new bits. Others such as fuel requirements have been introduced recently. Part 91 has been around for several years but has primarily been the vehicle for rules on navigation authorisations while the rest was being drafted. There is very little that is new. It is just now in one place.
Okihara,
Note the operative date, couple,of year's time, from memory, and make certain you have the correct Part 91, last time I looked, what came up on the CASA web site was an early draft.
The Part 91 tabled is markedly different, and, I am pleased to say, a considerable improvement on the last consultation draft -- the version that most easily come sup on a CASA search..
Tootle pip!!
Note the operative date, couple,of year's time, from memory, and make certain you have the correct Part 91, last time I looked, what came up on the CASA web site was an early draft.
The Part 91 tabled is markedly different, and, I am pleased to say, a considerable improvement on the last consultation draft -- the version that most easily come sup on a CASA search..
Tootle pip!!
Currently legislated Part 91 is here https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L01783
The CAO, CAR, related instruments and exemptions will be replaced/consolidated into Part 91.
Some time in the next decade (maybe).
You have indeed supped deeply of the CASA Kool Aid, Vag.
If you read this https://www.casa.gov.au/files/cd1511os-annexcpdf you will see the relationship between Part 91 and the plethora of existing CAO, CAR etc. As the introduction to the plain English document says, there are very few new requirements and some relaxations.
For example, I can no longer operate my fairly new FAR 23 certified airplane off a grass strip.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: act
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the introduction to the plain English document says, there are very few new requirements and some relaxations.[/QUOTE]
You do realise that this is brought to you by the boffins who brought us Part 61? It’s aim was to consolidate and simplify the FCL Regs, and remove all the exemptions. Over one thousand pages of gobbledygook and at least 30 exemptions to Part 61 later....
Just wait until CASA legal have got their mitts on the plan English MOS, no one will be able to understand them
You do realise that this is brought to you by the boffins who brought us Part 61? It’s aim was to consolidate and simplify the FCL Regs, and remove all the exemptions. Over one thousand pages of gobbledygook and at least 30 exemptions to Part 61 later....
Just wait until CASA legal have got their mitts on the plan English MOS, no one will be able to understand them
The new (or changed) requirements for take-off and landing performance for a small airplane or much more onerous in their detail. (Good to finally get rid of the pseudo certification climb requirements from the operational regs.)
For example, I can no longer operate my fairly new FAR 23 certified airplane off a grass strip.
For example, I can no longer operate my fairly new FAR 23 certified airplane off a grass strip.
You must determine the performance capability of the aeroplane or rotorcraft at the take-off weight, and you must not exceed the weight limitation contained in or derived from either:
the AFM
the manufacturer’s data manual (if any), or
other data approved for the purpose.
the AFM
the manufacturer’s data manual (if any), or
other data approved for the purpose.
You recall the CASA statement about take-off in 40 deg temperatures? It wasn't just temperature - "Mr Walker confirmed CASA's position that aircraft needed to be operated within the parameters published in an aircraft flight manual and there was no provision to extrapolate performance data beyond that provided." I wonder if Mr Walker knows and understands what is in CAO 20.7.4? Anyway, that CAO will disappear and what he said then is pretty much what is in Part 91.
So, if the surface is not level, dry and hard then I cannot take off. The data only has headwinds unlike the P Charts so when Moorabbin Tower asks if I can accept a 2 kt downwind component then the answer has to be "NO". There would be many airplanes in the same situation.
Meanwhile, the UK CAA has their Safety Sense Leaflet #7 on Aeroplane Performance with an iPhone app to make it easy https://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic...EvoPXF9NJknb94
I seen to recall that there is a provision somewhere in Part 91 that will allow for aircraft with no available performance data to operate. Can’t remember where as I haven’t really read the stuff since leaving the 4th floor of the temple in 2016. I do recall that Austers were discussed as an example of an aircraft without available performance data.
Another little gem buried in amongst it is the use of approved equipment. The way the section was drafted could be interpreted that equipment such as headsets, torches, etc would need to be TSO approved. Again, I cannot remember where it is and it also may have been changed since I left.
Another little gem buried in amongst it is the use of approved equipment. The way the section was drafted could be interpreted that equipment such as headsets, torches, etc would need to be TSO approved. Again, I cannot remember where it is and it also may have been changed since I left.
