At 19:08 05-07-02 +0930, Redmond wrote: >The GFA Ops Regs are mandated by CASA under clause 4.1(b) of CAO 95.4. ie >because annual checks are required by the Ops Regs they are in fact >mandated indirectly by CASA. > >Changes to the GFA Ops Regs require CASA approval. > > Redmond
This is indeed strange logic. CASA most certainly did NOT direct the GFA to write this particular requirement in their Op Regs - hence it is a GFA requirement that CASA has given regulatory backing to - as with all other requirements of the Op Regs - in order to support the operational regime that the GFA has requested to have in place. Having been involved in the entire history of the GFA Operational Regulations, I can say quite unequivocally that CASA has NEVER "directed" the GFA to put any particular wording into them, nor done any more than to suggest an improved way of saying something that is "the law" for all airspace users when the original draft may have been less clear or less accurately reflect the law. Equally, the GFA has often sought advice and had the primary say on what went in and what did not. CASA continues to pay the GFA to assist in developing standards for glider pilots, which is the situation as it has been since 1949 when the GFA proposal to administer gliding was first accepted by the old DCA, and since CAO 95.4 first appeared in 1956, and since the Cabinet decided in 1983 to put Government funding of gliding through the Department of Aviation's budget allocation (for regulatory aspects - there were also Sports Commission funds available in years gone by). Wombat A private response from my private computer. -- * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list. * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information.
