.Evan. Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 Hi all, I'm on the verge of completing the required hours before I can go for my passenger endorsement and I'm very much looking forward to it! I have been doing some reading in preparation for the test and noticed the RA-Aus Ops Manual Syllabus Section 3.04, Item 1.6 states: "Pilot briefs passenger on legal requirements for flight" I'm having trouble finding what these legal requirements exactly are. Are they in the Ops Manual somewhere? I've looked and not found them as yet. I've also looked through John Brandon's tutorials - no luck there it seems. Am I missing something? Is it staring me in the face? Any help would be great, thanks in advance! Evan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazda Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 CAO 20.11, under 14, briefing of passengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Evan. Posted June 27, 2011 Author Share Posted June 27, 2011 Thanks Maz and CFI. Makes sense now. I guess smoking in the toilets of the Jabiru is a big problem!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Evan. Posted June 27, 2011 Author Share Posted June 27, 2011 Haha!! Love it, Don! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 If you want a laugh, take a look at CASA's draft Part 91 rule 567 for passenger briefings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 If you want a laugh, take a look at CASA's draft Part 91 rule 567 for passenger briefings. Great!... so it's an offence not to brief passengers on a whole range of, what for RAA aircraft are, irrelevant matters, but if you gave them the briefing in writing, containing irrelevant items would be an offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Don, I love it and pretty close to the truth!!! On a serious note!!!... One of the reasons I retired from instructing was the amount of BS that didn`t/doesn`t/ shouldn`t apply to recreational operations! As the BS got worse, I came to the conclusion that though I had quite a bit of insurance cover for my school, it was nowhere near enough to cover what Fran and I had to loose ( A life time of work,all we own ) in the event of a worst case scenario!!! In my opinion, no amount of briefing will save anyone from a law suit!..... Prove you even gave it or that your pax understood it, or,............................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Evan. Posted June 28, 2011 Author Share Posted June 28, 2011 It's a sad state of affairs, Frank! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Sorry, Made a blue!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastmeg2 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 CAO 20.11, under 14, briefing of passengers. I don't see any mention there of having to spell out your level of insurance cover . . . Did anyone see my emergency exit? I can't find it? (See my avatar) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Eastmeg, you are correct there is no mention or requirement for insurance cover and yes the question was about legal requirement,therefore, cfi prety much covered it, requiring no furthur discussion on legal requirement. Simply trying to stimulate discussion! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 CASA's draft rule 91.567 requires the passenger briefing to include, amongst other things, the safety standards to which the aeroplane is operating and insurance of the passenger. Interesting that if the passenger is not an adult then the briefing must be given to an adult accompanying the child on the flight! A lot of issues with these draft rules so I hope they will not proceed without a major rewrite and further consideration of recreational flying. I include insurance in my briefing for some-one doing a TIF - unlike a joyflight where they would be a passenger they are part of the crew, being a student pilot, therefore their injury or death are not (normally) covered by any insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Possibly,I`ve missunderstood Eastmegs post! Sorry if I have ! I initaly took it to mean that I didn`t need to spell out my insurance situation in my previous post! Possibly any furthur discussion,from the legal requirements, should be held in general discussion!!! I brief my Pax, before they get in the AC, also once in, on what I believe is necessary for what I`m doing in the Drifter, not what is required in a 737! I no longer carry insurance and always point out that they are not covered by insurance and the choice to get into the AC is solely theirs and that I can`t gurantee their safety! I follow by saying, " What I can gurantee,is that I`ll give you the best of my ability"! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 CASA's draft rule 91.567 requires the passenger briefing to include, amongst other things, the safety standards to which the aeroplane is operating and insurance of the passenger. Interesting that if the passenger is not an adult then the briefing must be given to an adult accompanying the child on the flight! A lot of issues with these draft rules so I hope they will not proceed without a major rewrite and further consideration of recreational flying..... Apart from the obvious issues with part 91, it's scope is much greater than just recreational. It at least covers GA. We should assume that some of this will end up in Part 103. As I understand the objective of putting "all the rules in one place", Part 103 should stand alone, and thus contain only the items from Part 91 that are applicable to recreational aircraft, along with any special conditions for same. The reason for the recent CAO updates was that there was no hope of completing Part 103 in a reasonable timeframe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suitman Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Did anyone see my emergency exit? I can't find it? (See my avatar) Eastmeg, you have just a few less than me ... "The emergency exits are located here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here!" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngster Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 CASA's draft rule 91.567 requires the passenger briefing to include, amongst other things, the safety standards to which the aeroplane is operating and insurance of the passenger. Interesting that if the passenger is not an adult then the briefing must be given to an adult accompanying the child on the flight! A lot of issues with these draft rules so I hope they will not proceed without a major rewrite and further consideration of recreational flying. I'm with you on this one, a re-write is needed. My reading of the draft rule 91.567 is that you must explain to your passengers that whatever compilation of sticks, glue, and tablecloths they are about to take off in may not have all the same safety features of an RPT aircraft. Just another example of the nanny state if you ask me. I'm pretty sure that any mildly intelligent person about to go up in an ultralight does not expect oxygen masks in the ceiling and a line of lights on the cabin floor to direct you to the nearest exit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazda Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 About 10 years ago CASA put out a brochure about safety ratings of aircraft and it has merit in my view. Passengers have a right to be informed, and when that extends to fare paying passengers (joy flights etc) it is imperative that they understand the level of safety. While we understand the differences in aircraft categories, some people really do think we all have parachutes, air traffic control (with radar) is everywhere, and ALL types of flying are safer than driving (because the media says flying is safer). The truth is that private flights are much riskier. I don't think it is a bad thing to let people know, especially if it adds to the 'adventure' of the flight. In these times of being wrapped in cotton wool, many people are seeking that little bit of adventure. They probably couldn't wait to tell people if they few in an aircraft built in their mate's garage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Mazda, These days I only take someone up for free,for the joy of flying! If it`s someone new to Ultralight flying,which happens often, among other things, I tell them that things can and do go wrong some times, and we can have an engine failure in flight!..... If they can`t accept that, I won`t take them up!.... Believe me, I`ve never had anyone change their mind. As for the adventure of it, I know from experience that you are correct!!! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 If you want a laugh, take a look at CASA's draft Part 91 rule 567 for passenger briefings. That one is so far out of left field it may never get here. In my view, there is no head of power that allows CASA to legislate a requirement to brief on the level and type of 3rd party liability insurance covering the aircraft owner and the pilot against claims in the event they cause loss or damage to property or persons. kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 I can't figure out how having insurance makes it safer? Perhaps not having insurance would make the pilot less cavalier, if s/he also owns the aircraft! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Kaz, it sometimes happens that Governments amend a simple Act which doesn't allow ongoing flexible decisions, buy giving basic power to an authority to permit operations which exceed what's laid down in the Act by setting Rules. This often works well in the early stages but bureaucrats will be bureaucrats, and the rules becme more and more complicated and out of touch. These Rules bypass Parliament, so you don't get the detailed debate in both Houses to make sure the Rule is reasonable. Not only do you miss out on Parliamentary debate, but you get rules which are often very poorly crafted. The only way to fix it usually is the shut down the body, and amend the Act, debating it in the Parliament, which is what should have happened in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Evan. Posted June 29, 2011 Author Share Posted June 29, 2011 Thanks for all your help, guys... Because today I qualified for my passenger endorsement! My instructor was impressed by my preparation and pre-reading of the legal requirements, weights and balances, etc. Thanks again Recreational Flying team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Congratulations Evan. Good work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Evan. Posted June 29, 2011 Author Share Posted June 29, 2011 Cheers, David! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suitman Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Congrats, Evan. Well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now