Response 38490528

Back to Response listing

Personal information

2. Last name

Last name (Required)
Tuppack

5. If yes, please specify the name of your organisation.

If yes, please specify the name of your organisation
Bureau of Meteorology

Carriage of documents

1. This proposal introduces new journey log requirements for international flights. (section 3.01 and 3.02 of the Part 91 MOS)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. This proposal explicitly permits the carriage of documents electronically. (regulation 91.113 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Firearms

1. This proposal removes the need for CASA approval for someone to carry firearms on aircraft - for flights not regulated for this purpose under the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004. (regulation 91.130 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Crew members

1. This proposal creates a broader requirement for fitness for duty and removes the prescriptive eight-hour rule for alcohol consumption. (regulation 91.215 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. This proposal broadens the requirement for cabin crew, to include non-air transport flights carrying 20 or more passengers. (regulation 91.1460 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

3. This proposal broadens the requirement for passengers to comply with cabin crew safety instructions. (regulation 91.790 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Portable Electronic Devices (PEDs)

1. This proposal removes the prescriptive list of permitted portable electronic devices (PEDs) on flights. (regulation 91.145 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. This proposal restricts crew members from operating PEDs where that would be distracting to the performance of their duties. (regulation 91.150 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Equipment

1. This proposal relaxes oxygen requirements for non-air transport operations. (Division 30.9 of the Part 91 MOS)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. This proposal expands a requirement to preserve flight recordings (and recorders) after an immediately reportable matter while reducing the amount of time these need to be retained. (regulation 91.724 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

3. This proposal consolidates all the rules for the Minimum Equipment List (MEL) in one place and expands who can approve the MEL. (regulation 91.1680 to 91.1705 of CASR and sections 33.01 to 33.09 of the Part 91 MOS)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Take-off and landing

1. This proposal introduces an approach ban for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flights under certain circumstances. (section 17.07 of the Part 91 MOS)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. This proposal changes the existing low visibility take off and approach exemptions to an approval. (regulation 91.425 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Flight requirements

1. This proposal extends the ability for pilots not operating under an AOC or other certificate to use night vision imaging systems (NVIS) under certain conditions. (section 5.02 of the Part 91 MOS )

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. This proposal introduces the ability for night Visual Flight Rules (VFR) flights to use IFR lowest safe altitudes. (regulation 91.395 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

3. This proposal introduces a requirement to comply with Air Defence Identification Zones (ADIZ) procedures. (regulation 91.362 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

4. This proposal creates a requirement to comply with aircraft interception procedures. (section 20.05 of the Part 91 MOS)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

5. This proposal reduces the altitude above which a VFR aircraft must (where practicable) use VFR cruising levels from 5000 ft to 3000 ft AMSL (above mean sea level). (section 13.04 of the Part 91 MOS)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Animals

1. This proposal significantly simplifies the rules for the carriage of animals in the aircraft cabin. (regulation 91.200 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

Emergency simulation restrictions

1. This proposal restricts the simulation of certain emergencies, predominantly, in Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) or at night. (regulation 91.570 to 91.610 of CASR)

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

General response

1. Are the proposed changes to the general operating flight rules appropriate and can they be complied with by industry without undue burden?

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

2. One of the aims was to primarily consolidate the current rules and carry over existing regulatory requirements. If you exclude the changes listed in the Summary of Proposed Changes, has this been achieved?

Please select one item
yes
some change/s required (please specify below)
no (please specify below)
Ticked not applicable

3. Are there any significant aviation safety risks which have not been addressed in the Part 91 of CASR draft regulations and MOS?

Please select one item
yes (please specify below)
Ticked some change/s required (please specify below)
no
not applicable
Comments
There is some technically incorrect information within the MOS, as follows: - Definitions (pg15) authorized weather report: (ii) "certificate" should be changed to "certificate of competency" as this is not a certificate provided under BoM RTO accreditation; (iii) RVR System should be added, "an automatic weather station or RVR System at an aerodrome..."; (v) pilot is only approved to supply reports of visibility at take off and landing (AIP GEN 3.5 4.5.2) and hazardous weather (AIP GEN 3.5 4.7.2/6.2.2), definition is inconsistent with specifications in AIP; TAF is now called an "aerodrome forecast" in Australia and with ICAO; TTF is now called "trend forecast" in Australia and with ICAO - Part 7 - 7.03 (3): Provisional aerodrome forecast not available in Australia since 2012 and not ICAO compliant. - Part 8 - 8.02 (2): Provisional aerodrome forecast not available in Australia since 2012 and not ICAO compliant. - Part 8 - 8.06 (1): "thunderstorm" is one word. - Part 8 - 8.06 (4): "BOM FM" remove BOM - Part 8 - 8.07 : "Trend Forecast (TTF)" remove "Type" from the word for national and international consistency. - Part 8 - 8.08 (c): Provisional aerodrome forecast not available in Australia since 2012 and not ICAO compliant. - Part 8 - 8.10 (1)(a): BOM is not the sole provider of authorised METAR/SPECI in Australia, instead "local METAR/SPECI from an automatic weather station approved by BOM". - Part 8 - 8.11 (4)(b): BOM is not the sole provider of observations and observations are not defined in the doc, suggest using "authorised weather report" if consistent with intent. - Part 8 - 11.05 (1)(c): an "automatic remote-reporting aerodrome sensor" is not defined suggest using wording such as "Automated Weather Information Service (AWIS) or Weather and Terminal Information Reciter (WATIR)" if consistent with intent. - Part 8 - 14.03 (1)/(2): Advice already provided to CASA regarding the need to review the list of "approved QNH sources" as the list does not reflect accuracy standards of data sources. - Figure 30.64 is incorrect. Please contact me if you require clarification or further information

Your priorities

1. When you reflect on the feedback you have provided throughout this consultation, what are the three matters you consider most important?

Priority 1
Safety
Priority 2
Technically correct information
Priority 3
Addition of previously unidentified content