[DRAFT] International Aircraft Safety

[Kaboomlandia]

The author has asked for a category check.

I can't see any discussion of this from the floor and the author himself hasn't suggested an alternative choice. We'll have a look when the GA posters have kicked this specific question around a bit, if it proves impossible to resolve.

If you're in any doubt, I'd strongly advise against submitting it yet.

Not a ruling, but an argument for holding fire: this looks to me like an idea that would fit nicely in the first area of effect of the proposed Regulation category. You could work on that assumption and have it ready to go when we get the category finalised. Debating a specific proposal could also help fine-tune the new category descriptions.

Thanks. I've been wondering why there's no counterpart to Free Trade.

[Imperializt Russia]

'The ruling of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is that the use of the comma here, in '3,400 G', is in the French manner, hence referring to an acceleration of 3.4 standard gravitation accelerations, since a resistance to acceleration of 3 400 times gravity would be in the words of His Royal Highness, Clark Webley, Duke of Kent, "ridiculous"'.

1) the fact that it is not displayed as 3,4 but instead as 3,400 should be more than enough to suggest the general anglophonic use of the comma as a thousands delineation.
2) what makes a resistance to acceleration of "3 400" times the force of gravity "ridiculous" exactly?

[Kaboomlandia]

I will likely archive this as a factbook until such time as the Regulation category comes up.

[Imperium Anglorum]

'The ruling of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is that the use of the comma here, in '3,400 G', is in the French manner, hence referring to an acceleration of 3.4 standard gravitation accelerations, since a resistance to acceleration of 3 400 times gravity would be in the words of His Royal Highness, Clark Webley, Duke of Kent, "ridiculous"'.

1) the fact that it is not displayed as 3,4 but instead as 3,400 should be more than enough to suggest the general anglophonic use of the comma as a thousands delineation.
2) what makes a resistance to acceleration of "3 400" times the force of gravity "ridiculous" exactly?

OOC: The JCPC makes joke interpretations of proposed and passed resolutions.

[Normlpeople]

"Ahh, reactionary writing is a wonderful thing. How about small aircraft that do not have a cockpit? Or commercial use small aircraft containing a single pilot? Oh? and should the pilot wish to use the restroom on a long flight they seem out of luck.

It's better than prior attempts, however is still full of micromanagement and does nothing that I feel isnt already adequately covered in existing resolutions. I would suggest changing it to a) have the definition actually target what you want to cover and b) convince me this is necessary and not covered adequately already."

[Kaboomlandia]

"Ahh, reactionary writing is a wonderful thing. How about small aircraft that do not have a cockpit? Or commercial use small aircraft containing a single pilot? Oh? and should the pilot wish to use the restroom on a long flight they seem out of luck.

I mainly wrote this to cover commercial and long-haul aircraft. Also, on long-haul flights, there will usually be a third or fourth pilot to cover for the other guys. I may require flights to have some sort of switching-off system to cover this.

It's better than prior attempts, however is still full of micromanagement and does nothing that I feel isnt already adequately covered in existing resolutions. I would suggest changing it to a) have the definition actually target what you want to cover and b) convince me this is necessary and not covered adequately already."

The reason why this is "on hold" is to wait for a new "Regulation" category that is in the works. International Transport Safety doesn't cover this topic that I've written about in much detail.

[Kaboomlandia]

After having a conversation with Voltrovia, the author of the Aviation Regulation Charter draft, I'm going to reboot this. Seeing as their draft was Free Trade, this might fit into the same way.

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

You can't gravedig your own proposal thread. If you were to let it sit for five years, and then make a post it would not be gravedigging as you can resurrect your proposal at any time.

[Flibbleites]

Oh? and should the pilot wish to use the restroom on a long flight they seem out of luck.

Actually, I don't think so, long flights like that would typically be done by larger planes which should have sufficient room to have at least three people certified to fly said plane on board.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Kaboomlandia]

Anybody got ideas for a sort of clause that would get this under "free trade"?

[Separatist Peoples]

Anybody got ideas for a sort of clause that would get this under "free trade"?

"Rewrite the whole thing. Don't shoehorn it into the category with one clause. Reactionary and incremental wiring is bad, m'kay?"

[Terricon]

You should add "appropriate evacuation equipment for all accounted passengers" into the required installations section.

[Kaboomlandia]

You should add "appropriate evacuation equipment for all accounted passengers" into the required installations section.

Added.

[Separatist Peoples]

You should add "appropriate evacuation equipment for all accounted passengers" into the required installations section.

Added.

"This has gone from a proposal facilitating investigations of downed aircraft to a laundry list of safety features that are unnecessary and, more importantly, now completely outside the purview of any single category, making this a hideously illegal monstrosity. Its looking increasingly as though the only way to salvage this idea is to blow it away in fiery doom and start over."

[Ceni]

I agree that only commercial planes should get this. Private pilots aren't going to be doing much >2,000 km flying over water.

Cough cough. Private jets.

Also, IRL, small private planes (like the Cessna you started out with) aren't required to have data recorders, and they definitely don't have slides, etc., because they don't have enough room.

What is your definition of "commercial"? Would the aforementioned Cessna that carries 3 family members to the lakeside house not be required to have safety measures but the same Cessna who carries 3 paying passengers would?

As for clause number 9, that is worded in such a way that the pilots are trapped in the cockpit forever if this resolution is passed.

How is Clause #7 going to improve safety? Pilots with 0 hours total flying over 2000 km of water is about the same as a pilot with 2,000 hours total and 0 hours of experience flying over 2000km over water: they don't have any experience flying over water.

[New havannah]

I think we are all aware that estimates for such aircraft equipment will be well over 1billion per fleet of planes. If we do this it may make some country's economically broke.

[Jarish Inyo]

Who is gonna provide the satellites for tracking purposes?

Seems like a good time to switch our passenger aircraft to computer controlled craft.

[Imperium Anglorum]

This entire resolution is now pointless. As His Excellency, Ambassador Bell pointed out, don't just keep tacking on things to the proposal. It makes a mess of things and is bad for everyone.

[Great Eldaria]

I agree that only commercial planes should get this. Private pilots aren't going to be doing much >2,000 km flying over water.

Cough cough. Private jets.

Also, IRL, small private planes (like the Cessna you started out with) aren't required to have data recorders, and they definitely don't have slides, etc., because they don't have enough room.

What is your definition of "commercial"? Would the aforementioned Cessna that carries 3 family members to the lakeside house not be required to have safety measures but the same Cessna who carries 3 paying passengers would?

As for clause number 9, that is worded in such a way that the pilots are trapped in the cockpit forever if this resolution is passed.

How is Clause #7 going to improve safety? Pilots with 0 hours total flying over 2000 km of water is about the same as a pilot with 2,000 hours total and 0 hours of experience flying over 2000km over water: they don't have any experience flying over water.

Answering the discussion about Clause#7, a pilot that has flown 2000 total hours will be better experienced to handle emergency situations than a pilot that has has flown 0 total hours.
A problem will be handled similarly, no mater if you fly over water or ground. But getting ashore with a problem that is still active (lets say a loss of engine) is the hard part. Now a pilot that has flown 2000 total hours will handle the problem faster than a pilot that has flown 0 total hours. Therefore more time to concentrate about landing the aircraft on an airport on land.

[Kaboomlandia]

Cough cough. Private jets.

Also, IRL, small private planes (like the Cessna you started out with) aren't required to have data recorders, and they definitely don't have slides, etc., because they don't have enough room.

What is your definition of "commercial"? Would the aforementioned Cessna that carries 3 family members to the lakeside house not be required to have safety measures but the same Cessna who carries 3 paying passengers would?

As for clause number 9, that is worded in such a way that the pilots are trapped in the cockpit forever if this resolution is passed.

How is Clause #7 going to improve safety? Pilots with 0 hours total flying over 2000 km of water is about the same as a pilot with 2,000 hours total and 0 hours of experience flying over 2000km over water: they don't have any experience flying over water.

Answering the discussion about Clause#7, a pilot that has flown 2000 total hours will be better experienced to handle emergency situations than a pilot that has has flown 0 total hours.
A problem will be handled similarly, no mater if you fly over water or ground. But getting ashore with a problem that is still active (lets say a loss of engine) is the hard part. Now a pilot that has flown 2000 total hours will handle the problem faster than a pilot that has flown 0 total hours. Therefore more time to concentrate about landing the aircraft on an airport on land.

That was my intention. If an airplane has engine trouble over a massive ocean, do you want a ten-year vet or a total rookie in the cockpit handling it?

Also, I haven't actually dropped the idea; it's just on the back burner due to the GA Rules Consortium.

[Kaboomlandia]

Submitting this under Free Trade/Mild.

[Kaboomlandia]

Apparently this got pulled for a category violation.

I'm happy that the mods were nice enough to give me a list of approvals at the time it was yanked.

[Kaboomlandia]

Going to revive this, with a clause added on air marshals and an eye more towards the category of International Security.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Going to revive this, with a clause added on air marshals and an eye more towards the category of International Security.

Those air marshals reminded you?

[Great Eldaria]

Going to revive this, with a clause added on air marshals and an eye more towards the category of International Security.

Nice! I would be happy to help (if possible).