How many pages
The following 2 users liked this post by Runaway Gun:
CASRs alone? According to the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments 5 minutes ago: 2,522 pages. But that’s growing.
Then add MOSs. They’re growing.
Of course we don’t count the 1988 regs or CAOs or exemptions because they’ll all be gone in 1998.
Original 1988 regulations? 148 pages. Add CAOs and other odds and sods and student pilots in the mid-1980s were confronted with about 250 pages of rules.
It’s amazing how much a couple of decades and a couple of billion dollars has bought Australian aviation in ‘simplification’ and ‘harmonisation’.
Then add MOSs. They’re growing.
Of course we don’t count the 1988 regs or CAOs or exemptions because they’ll all be gone in 1998.
Original 1988 regulations? 148 pages. Add CAOs and other odds and sods and student pilots in the mid-1980s were confronted with about 250 pages of rules.
It’s amazing how much a couple of decades and a couple of billion dollars has bought Australian aviation in ‘simplification’ and ‘harmonisation’.
You forgot the CASA EX that are well buried in the CASA website not linked anywhere logical.
Took me 20 mins on casa,gov.au to relocate an EX I knew existed that modified something rather important on the CASRs.
Took me 20 mins on casa,gov.au to relocate an EX I knew existed that modified something rather important on the CASRs.
Moderator
I still longingly look back to the ANRs where
(a) the one booklet was about a half inch thick.
(b) it rarely changed
(c) we all could parrot off chapter and verse for a host of regulatory requirements - trying to do that now would be folly in the extreme
(d) the ANOs were comparatively easy to navigate and find stuff.
(a) the one booklet was about a half inch thick.
(b) it rarely changed
(c) we all could parrot off chapter and verse for a host of regulatory requirements - trying to do that now would be folly in the extreme
(d) the ANOs were comparatively easy to navigate and find stuff.
Moderator
John
Despite the $quilions spent on the "Regulatory Reform", I seriously doubt, in practice, the new Regulations and Orders provide any greater safety than the pre 1988 documents. 35 years (so far) in the making!
I am reminded of the RRAT Committee inquiries of 18 years ago when Bruce Byron uttered these immortal words:
I suspect Mr Byron's response was plagiarised from the "Yes Minister" script.
Despite the $quilions spent on the "Regulatory Reform", I seriously doubt, in practice, the new Regulations and Orders provide any greater safety than the pre 1988 documents. 35 years (so far) in the making!
I am reminded of the RRAT Committee inquiries of 18 years ago when Bruce Byron uttered these immortal words:
Senator MARK BISHOP—When do you think those regulations will go to the minister?
Mr Byron—I anticipate we would start sending some of them from about the middle of this year. I do not see this delaying the overall program excessively. We have an action item to develop a plan to forward to the minister about when we plan to have them to the minister, and I assume that plan would be done in the next couple of months. I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
I suspect Mr Byron's response was plagiarised from the "Yes Minister" script.
The following 3 users liked this post by tail wheel:
The following users liked this post:
The trouble with aviation regulations is that as fast as CASA draws up new regs some smart bunny works to get around them and thus the cycle of more new regs goes on.
CASA once said no more exemptions But from my reckoning CASA has to date issued more than 400 exemptions.
And for all the new regs by my count the accident rate has gone up rather than down.
CASA once said no more exemptions But from my reckoning CASA has to date issued more than 400 exemptions.
And for all the new regs by my count the accident rate has gone up rather than down.
Have said before, someone needs to take a picture of a 152, loaded with hard copy of current regs, with the old AIPs on the ground for comparison.
That's of course, if you actually could fit them in a 152 and be <MTOW...
That's of course, if you actually could fit them in a 152 and be <MTOW...
Moderator
runway16 It is a known fact that the more complex (and ambiguous) the regulation the easier it is to "find a way around" that regulation.
Compound that by the fact there are now anti competitive and non commercial regulations with no known safety benefit.
So much for our Australian civil aviation regulations, when the Australian Government assisted PNG financially to adopt a replica of the New Zealand Regulations!
Ever wondered why so many business jets in Australia are US (or foreign) registered? Or why the larger water bombers are US or Canadian registered?
Ever pondered the cost and time to modify a B737, B747, DC10 or C130 to a water bomber in Australia, operate Australian registered on an Australian AOC? It would be a lifetime project in frustration!
The hypocrisy in Australia can be beyond belief. I recall some years ago (post 1988) the owner of a Cessna 206 being honest sought a ferry permit to ferry the aircraft for maintenance without a prop spinner. CASA required flight testing and an EO before they would consider the request for a ferry permit!
Few realise that with the abolition of CAR203 the air services to approximately a hundred Australian remote and rural air communities became illegal, except in the NT where the then CASA DFOM had the common sense to approve those essential services. CASA then proceeded with an aggressive campaign to eliminate those "illegal" operators by any and all means, many of whom were long term small operators, committed to serving their communities.
We have a bureaucracy like no other........
Compound that by the fact there are now anti competitive and non commercial regulations with no known safety benefit.
So much for our Australian civil aviation regulations, when the Australian Government assisted PNG financially to adopt a replica of the New Zealand Regulations!
Ever wondered why so many business jets in Australia are US (or foreign) registered? Or why the larger water bombers are US or Canadian registered?
Ever pondered the cost and time to modify a B737, B747, DC10 or C130 to a water bomber in Australia, operate Australian registered on an Australian AOC? It would be a lifetime project in frustration!
The hypocrisy in Australia can be beyond belief. I recall some years ago (post 1988) the owner of a Cessna 206 being honest sought a ferry permit to ferry the aircraft for maintenance without a prop spinner. CASA required flight testing and an EO before they would consider the request for a ferry permit!
Few realise that with the abolition of CAR203 the air services to approximately a hundred Australian remote and rural air communities became illegal, except in the NT where the then CASA DFOM had the common sense to approve those essential services. CASA then proceeded with an aggressive campaign to eliminate those "illegal" operators by any and all means, many of whom were long term small operators, committed to serving their communities.
We have a bureaucracy like no other........
The following 3 users liked this post by tail wheel:
The US FAA Federal Aviation Regulations and Aeronautical Information Manual (FAR/AIM) is 1216 pages long.
That contains absolutely everything in one book. It's about the same size as a big novel. The USA is one of the most litigiousness countries on earth and they don't seem to need 3+ plus manuals with thousands of pages for their regs. All for $26 USD.
That contains absolutely everything in one book. It's about the same size as a big novel. The USA is one of the most litigiousness countries on earth and they don't seem to need 3+ plus manuals with thousands of pages for their regs. All for $26 USD.
The US FAA Federal Aviation Regulations and Aeronautical Information Manual (FAR/AIM) is 1216 pages long.
That contains absolutely everything in one book. It's about the same size as a big novel. The USA is one of the most litigiousness countries on earth and they don't seem to need 3+ plus manuals with thousands of pages for their regs. All for $26 USD.
That contains absolutely everything in one book. It's about the same size as a big novel. The USA is one of the most litigiousness countries on earth and they don't seem to need 3+ plus manuals with thousands of pages for their regs. All for $26 USD.
You will have to include your source for that because my source says differently.
The United States is already the most litigious society in the world. We spend 2.2 percent of gross domestic product, roughly $310 billion a year, or about $1,000 for each person in the country on tort litigation, much higher than any other country.
The United States is already the most litigious society in the world. We spend 2.2 percent of gross domestic product, roughly $310 billion a year, or about $1,000 for each person in the country on tort litigation, much higher than any other country.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,971
Received 96 Likes
on
55 Posts
I still longingly look back to the ANRs where
(a) the one booklet was about a half inch thick.
(b) it rarely changed
(c) we all could parrot off chapter and verse for a host of regulatory requirements - trying to do that now would be folly in the extreme
(d) the ANOs were comparatively easy to navigate and find stuff.
(a) the one booklet was about a half inch thick.
(b) it rarely changed
(c) we all could parrot off chapter and verse for a host of regulatory requirements - trying to do that now would be folly in the extreme
(d) the ANOs were comparatively easy to navigate and find stuff.
Way back in the late 80's a Lawyer aquaintance of mine once asked if he could borrow my copies for a few days for some now forgotten reason.
When he handed them back, he said to me that you would have to be a Lawyer to understand some of the regs in those publications, and he also stated that he found at least three direct contradictions in the ANR's.
So it wasn't all that great back then either.
As for the current lot; I suspect that even a KC would have difficulty interpreting most of it.
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Port Moresby - The beer is cold at the Aviat and Car Clubs
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
10 Posts
From memory, I think the GA-8 Airvan was forced to go to USA to complete spin/certification testing of the cargo pod.
Too difficult and too expensive under CASA; and probably take a lifetime.
Too difficult and too expensive under CASA; and probably take a lifetime.
Yep. Digital media is a blessing and a curse.
No more amendments to personal documents but now everything no longer needs to fit in a binder so every enthusiast can purge themselves of pages of policy dribble and intentionally blanks.
Add to this, company manuals, (that change as we sleep) that are filled by the enthusiastic ramblings of unlimited underpaids and it’s no wonder the average pilot is looking to Bunnings.
Staying abreast of the documents to the level of detail that we once held proud is now an impossibility. Delivering nothing but self doubt and anxiety to end users.
No more amendments to personal documents but now everything no longer needs to fit in a binder so every enthusiast can purge themselves of pages of policy dribble and intentionally blanks.
Add to this, company manuals, (that change as we sleep) that are filled by the enthusiastic ramblings of unlimited underpaids and it’s no wonder the average pilot is looking to Bunnings.
Staying abreast of the documents to the level of detail that we once held proud is now an impossibility. Delivering nothing but self doubt and anxiety to end users.
Last edited by Pastor of Muppets; 7th Mar 2023 at 03:22.
The following users liked this post: