OMA and part C company route and aerodrome manuals
 

Opening a discusion to all aviators concerned for ideas views and personnal opinions as per the above exceptionally safety importand part,how can be a really valuable tool for all where invaluable information can be aquired to keep this up to date current and comrehensuve tool for proffessional preparation advise warning e.t.c and not just another must have i addition to many other purelly for the beaurocracy that is created bacause at the end of the day Aviators are becoming Lawyers

Why don't you try google translate or https://www.deepl.com/translator ? (and uses short sentences else the translator is not going to be much use either)
Also when asking for opinions it works best to state an opinion (even better are controversial opinions):

The part C manual is so long i would never read it!

Everyone who has does not read the part C manual every year is unsafe!

Now your opinion as much as i can gather from your post seems to be that you think it is important.
I guess you are also trying to say that it's not just another regulatory requirement but a necessity in the real world.

Now i'm going to shut up and let actual pilots talk and sorry for the intrusion :)

OMA and part C (company routes). Yes, I agree with it being regarded as a valuable tool and not just legal goobly gook! Leaving the safety argument alone, who can interpret the new flight time limitations in OM A when you need real time confirmation from them and not comfortable at a desk.
Seems to me though the quality of the route manuals have dropped off or showing fewer updates with the categorisation of airfields, A,B or C. Nobody bothers much with cat A airfields, although they can be negotiated with a lot more finesse with some up to date operational information. Lido and Jepp usually do a good job but can get into legal type definitions occasionally. :ok:

:ok:Thanks for your remarks.

As Fluke says, it seems OM A and OM C are becoming less and less useful outside of scheduled commercial operators who have the luxury of expanding a route structure in a controlled manner. OM A is regularly failing in giving very basic direction to crew in one operation I know of. OM C is not worth the bandwidth it's updated over with little to no useful information available. Most Cat C airfields are relegated to just giving a few reasons as to why they are categorised as a Cat C airfield i.e. "mountainous". Unfortunately what could be a fantastic tool is now just a way to tick off a requirement to say the crew could self-brief.

The flip side - are you volunteering to get stuck in and write sections of the OM C? Most non-scheduled operators have an enormous lack of manpower. Don't like it? Get involved and fix it!

"Don't like it? Get involved and fix it!" Good Qoute Journey Man! I wish more pilots did put there money where there mouth was.