CASA Part 43
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA Part 43
Any news on when the new Part 43 rules will come into effect? From reading the info on the CASA website, it sounds like a done deal but no mention of when it might be introduced. My employer is in denial and says it will never happen and is not prepared to step up to Part 145 maintenance organisation rules to service his Charter aircraft. For those of you not familiar with the proposed changes see here.
https://www.casa.gov.au/publications...-organisations
https://www.casa.gov.au/publications...-organisations
Are you able to find a copy of even a draft of the proposed Part 43 regulations?
You might want to contact CASA and ask them.
After albeit cursory research, I cannot find any draft Part 43 regulations. If there are not any near-final draft Part 43 regulations now, there will be no Part 43 during your or my lifetime and your employer's position is sensible.
Despite the Orwellian description "completed" and "resolved", the regulatory 'reform' program has actually been "abandoned". The mess generated by the current dog's breakfast will keep CASA running in (very expensive) circles for a long time yet.
After albeit cursory research, I cannot find any draft Part 43 regulations. If there are not any near-final draft Part 43 regulations now, there will be no Part 43 during your or my lifetime and your employer's position is sensible.
Despite the Orwellian description "completed" and "resolved", the regulatory 'reform' program has actually been "abandoned". The mess generated by the current dog's breakfast will keep CASA running in (very expensive) circles for a long time yet.
Since late 2018 when this first became somewhat alive I've seen various bits, but no actual draft of everything with a MOS. I've got records of numerous possible dates, and they have all come and gone.
CASA CD 18122SS
3:58pm on 7.12.2018 CASA CD 1812SS opened for consultation (YES it was a Friday Fax!)
No Part 43 draft was supplied.
7 pages of overview.
36 pages of consultation material
57 pages of Summary or proposed policy.
Total, with no actual draft of the regulations = 100 pages.
FAA Part 43 regulations are 18 pages long.
The 13 regulations take up less than 8 pages.
Appendix (A to F) take up the remaining 10 pages.
CASA CD 18122SS
3:58pm on 7.12.2018 CASA CD 1812SS opened for consultation (YES it was a Friday Fax!)
No Part 43 draft was supplied.
7 pages of overview.
36 pages of consultation material
57 pages of Summary or proposed policy.
Total, with no actual draft of the regulations = 100 pages.
FAA Part 43 regulations are 18 pages long.
The 13 regulations take up less than 8 pages.
Appendix (A to F) take up the remaining 10 pages.
Googled "CASA CD 18122SS" and found this "Policy Decision Summary" for regs that were supposed to be drafted and consulted upon in 2020. This passage in the document shows why these things always descend into a complex farce:
The FAA must be so relieved that CASA analysed the US-FARs and found them to be "a suitable regulatory system, with appropriate safety outcomes and adequate compatibility with the various other elements of the Australian regulatory framework". Champagne glasses must have been clinking in FAA HQ when CASA came to that conclusion.
"Hey Bob, the Aussies say we got it right in Part 43!"
"Didn't we fight them in world war two?"
"Not the Austrians Bob; the Aussies."
"How many aircraft type certificates have the Aussies issued?"
"I reckon at least three or four, Bob."
"Thousand?"
"Nope, just around three or four."
"Well I'm sure as heck happy those guys have condescended to analyse our regulations and have judged them "suitable" and "appropriate" and "adequate". I'll alert the President."
Instead of adopting Part 43 of the US-FARs with minimal changes, CASA decides to "integrate the relevant provisions ... into the Australian regulatory system." What could possibly go wrong?
In August 2018, CASA consulted with industry on which international rule set should be used as the basis for the new Australian regulations. Responses to that consultation showed a strong preference for a ruleset based on the US-FARs with minimal changes. This preference was supported by the Part 43 Technical Working Group (TWG) established by the Aviation Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP).
CASA analysed the US-FARs and found that it would be a suitable regulatory system, with appropriate safety outcomes and adequate compatibility with the various other elements of the Australian regulatory framework. CASA then developed a detailed policy proposal that would integrate the relevant provisions of the US-FARs (primarily FAR Part 43 and some provisions of
FAR Parts 65 and 91) into the Australian regulatory system.
CASA analysed the US-FARs and found that it would be a suitable regulatory system, with appropriate safety outcomes and adequate compatibility with the various other elements of the Australian regulatory framework. CASA then developed a detailed policy proposal that would integrate the relevant provisions of the US-FARs (primarily FAR Part 43 and some provisions of
FAR Parts 65 and 91) into the Australian regulatory system.
"Hey Bob, the Aussies say we got it right in Part 43!"
"Didn't we fight them in world war two?"
"Not the Austrians Bob; the Aussies."
"How many aircraft type certificates have the Aussies issued?"
"I reckon at least three or four, Bob."
"Thousand?"
"Nope, just around three or four."
"Well I'm sure as heck happy those guys have condescended to analyse our regulations and have judged them "suitable" and "appropriate" and "adequate". I'll alert the President."
Instead of adopting Part 43 of the US-FARs with minimal changes, CASA decides to "integrate the relevant provisions ... into the Australian regulatory system." What could possibly go wrong?
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
9 months since the last post on this topic. Any further developments. I've read a lot of CASA consultation material, and I still don't understand how it will affect me as an owner for private operations.
