Old Performance Charts, still valid ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 150'amsl
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old Performance Charts, still valid ?
Has anyone had any luck finding out if the old departmant style take-off and landing performance charts can still be used in GA.
From what I can find it is a very grey area still and the regs don't really make it very clear CAO 20.7.4, 6.1 to 6.3 and 10.1 to 10.3
If you can't use them then what do you use for say long grass etc.
And if you can use them where to you put them, you can't put them in the POH, so does CASA issue a new approval and put them in your OP's manual ?
Currently looking regarding b55 b58 c310
From what I can find it is a very grey area still and the regs don't really make it very clear CAO 20.7.4, 6.1 to 6.3 and 10.1 to 10.3
If you can't use them then what do you use for say long grass etc.
And if you can use them where to you put them, you can't put them in the POH, so does CASA issue a new approval and put them in your OP's manual ?
Currently looking regarding b55 b58 c310
Use them any way .They work and may one day save your life.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: AUS
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Suggest you include the Aus P Charts in the Supplements Section of the aircraft POH, as you would Door Off approvals etc.
To be compliant with the guidelines you also remove all Supplements for equipment the aircraft does not have and make up a new List Of Contents page for this section.
Then list these items as being added or removed, as the case may be, on the Ammendment Record page. e.g "Incorporated existing Australian CAA Performance Charts, 8th March 1987", "Removed Supplement 5.2, "Airconditioning".
Have set up many POHs like this, including P Charts in either Performance or Supplements Section and the POHs have had the blessing of this area's CASA Airworthiness & Flight Ops as well as a number of Aviation Auditors.
To be compliant with the guidelines you also remove all Supplements for equipment the aircraft does not have and make up a new List Of Contents page for this section.
Then list these items as being added or removed, as the case may be, on the Ammendment Record page. e.g "Incorporated existing Australian CAA Performance Charts, 8th March 1987", "Removed Supplement 5.2, "Airconditioning".
Have set up many POHs like this, including P Charts in either Performance or Supplements Section and the POHs have had the blessing of this area's CASA Airworthiness & Flight Ops as well as a number of Aviation Auditors.
Last edited by Spotlight; 24th Apr 2003 at 20:40.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 150'amsl
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spotlight
What you have said is what I thought could be done, however our CASA op's gent say's this is a no can do and can not approve such a supplement to the POH.
So where do we go from here ?
I was then told to continue to use them and was referred to the CAO's as listed above etc, but this is still very grey. Basically said to keep them in a seperate file on the flight deck with the approved CASA loading system and refer to these as required.
Sounds like a handball to me, I am not going to use them unless they are certified.
Maybe my guy has it all wrong ( I hope so ), when these supplements you mentioned for P charts where approved by CASA did you manage to get any documentation stating the continued use or not.
CASA can't just go and change the POH as they see fit can they?
What you have said is what I thought could be done, however our CASA op's gent say's this is a no can do and can not approve such a supplement to the POH.
So where do we go from here ?
I was then told to continue to use them and was referred to the CAO's as listed above etc, but this is still very grey. Basically said to keep them in a seperate file on the flight deck with the approved CASA loading system and refer to these as required.
Sounds like a handball to me, I am not going to use them unless they are certified.
Maybe my guy has it all wrong ( I hope so ), when these supplements you mentioned for P charts where approved by CASA did you manage to get any documentation stating the continued use or not.
CASA can't just go and change the POH as they see fit can they?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Camden, NSW, Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kickstart, I suggest you do as Spotlight suggested. I have a letter from Rob Elders for CASA in Canberra that advises me to do just that. Perhaps your CASA ‘Ops guy’ might like to talk to Rob Elders and get harmonised.
Moderator
.. alternatively, give John Klingberg in Canberra (CASA - 131 757) a call - he is (or was - I haven't spoken with him in recent times) the Flight Manual whip in CASA and can point you in the acceptable direction to achieve your aim. Thoroughly pleasant chap, always helpful, and knows all the ins and outs of the AFM game ...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 150'amsl
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Chaps
I'll give these guys a call on Monday and by the sound of it all should be fine.
I still can not understand how after so many months that the district offices don't know what the real story is.
Oh well Cut, Weld, Grind.
I'll give these guys a call on Monday and by the sound of it all should be fine.
I still can not understand how after so many months that the district offices don't know what the real story is.
Oh well Cut, Weld, Grind.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful of Rob Elder he is nothing but a spin doctor.......
This whole flight manual bossiness is a big mess........
Always ask the CASA spin doctors like Rob Elder a number of questions:
1. Why did Australia introduce the Australian Flight manual all those years ago? and
2. Why after 30 years has CASA decide to drop the Australian flight manual?
I don't think any of us will get the real answers to these questions
As for myself I will keep using the factored P Charts.
This whole flight manual bossiness is a big mess........
Always ask the CASA spin doctors like Rob Elder a number of questions:
1. Why did Australia introduce the Australian Flight manual all those years ago? and
2. Why after 30 years has CASA decide to drop the Australian flight manual?
I don't think any of us will get the real answers to these questions
As for myself I will keep using the factored P Charts.
Moderator
It is many years since I have dealt with Rob Elder and even then that was in his previous life. Unless he has changed his spots in the meantime he was, and I presume still is, a reasonably decent chap with whom to interact.
I think that the point which needs to be kept in mind is that he is an administrator and government policy specialist (and, indeed, a man of considerable knowledge and expertise in those areas), but not an aviation engineering or operational technical specialist .... if you want a technical answer, then ask the appropriate technical specialist ... if you ask Rob he is going to do just that in any case I suspect ....
The introduction of local flight manuals was in response to a perceived need for additional data over and above what was in the CofA and placarded data. What was quite workable for a Tiger was not very suitable for the crop of larger and more sophisticated GA machines which came on the market during and since the 60s. There was nothing at all sinister or conspiratorial about the introduction of light aircraft flight manuals.
In recent times the regulatory philosophy has changed to one of automatic acceptance of foreign NAA approvals whether we like it or not and, given that the foreign flight manuals are now of a higher value than in the bad old days, it was inevitable that the local animal, with its cost overheads, had to go. Again, nothing at all surprising about that.
There is nothing to stop a pilot or operator using the foreign unfactored POH or AFM data as a basis for generating conservative data similar to the old P-chart data ... the factors used are well known and the standard procedure used to generate the charts was published in a DCA airworthiness document which was generally available to the engineering fraternity ... if you want the equations used, I am sure that I, or others, could be persuaded to dig out that data from the dustier parts of our filing cabinets for you ... mind you ... a Guinness or three would improve our enthusiasm for battling the spiders in the bottom drawer ....
I think that the point which needs to be kept in mind is that he is an administrator and government policy specialist (and, indeed, a man of considerable knowledge and expertise in those areas), but not an aviation engineering or operational technical specialist .... if you want a technical answer, then ask the appropriate technical specialist ... if you ask Rob he is going to do just that in any case I suspect ....
The introduction of local flight manuals was in response to a perceived need for additional data over and above what was in the CofA and placarded data. What was quite workable for a Tiger was not very suitable for the crop of larger and more sophisticated GA machines which came on the market during and since the 60s. There was nothing at all sinister or conspiratorial about the introduction of light aircraft flight manuals.
In recent times the regulatory philosophy has changed to one of automatic acceptance of foreign NAA approvals whether we like it or not and, given that the foreign flight manuals are now of a higher value than in the bad old days, it was inevitable that the local animal, with its cost overheads, had to go. Again, nothing at all surprising about that.
There is nothing to stop a pilot or operator using the foreign unfactored POH or AFM data as a basis for generating conservative data similar to the old P-chart data ... the factors used are well known and the standard procedure used to generate the charts was published in a DCA airworthiness document which was generally available to the engineering fraternity ... if you want the equations used, I am sure that I, or others, could be persuaded to dig out that data from the dustier parts of our filing cabinets for you ... mind you ... a Guinness or three would improve our enthusiasm for battling the spiders in the bottom drawer ....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 150'amsl
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have called CASA again,
And all they can say is, " I doubt you will get something from CASA syaing you can use the P Charts" and another person " You need to get the items for the supplement certified by an engineer ", I thought that was who made them up???
Then another one " you need to call your local CASA office we don't handle that ", or call the flight manual hotline and talk to the message bank ?
This is really Dumb, I understand why the Flight Manual changes where made but the job has been botched, can we use these charts or not?
Looks like I will just have to go change my Op's manual to say that we will only use the POH data which is not factored for short dry grass etc, just Paved runways. Does this mean we can still operate off this type of runway or not, or do we have to move to the USA so we can land on these paved surfaces.
I am sure this will be sorted out simply but this is dragging out a bit. Is there some changes in the new regs that will address this matter ?
Normally CASA have been fine to deal with, but there has never been a clear cut decision made on this, surely if that was done then we would know where we stand.
Oh well I am off to do some hypo take off and landings calc's with these POH figures - this will be interesting.
And all they can say is, " I doubt you will get something from CASA syaing you can use the P Charts" and another person " You need to get the items for the supplement certified by an engineer ", I thought that was who made them up???
Then another one " you need to call your local CASA office we don't handle that ", or call the flight manual hotline and talk to the message bank ?
This is really Dumb, I understand why the Flight Manual changes where made but the job has been botched, can we use these charts or not?
Looks like I will just have to go change my Op's manual to say that we will only use the POH data which is not factored for short dry grass etc, just Paved runways. Does this mean we can still operate off this type of runway or not, or do we have to move to the USA so we can land on these paved surfaces.
I am sure this will be sorted out simply but this is dragging out a bit. Is there some changes in the new regs that will address this matter ?
Normally CASA have been fine to deal with, but there has never been a clear cut decision made on this, surely if that was done then we would know where we stand.
Oh well I am off to do some hypo take off and landings calc's with these POH figures - this will be interesting.
