[ABANDONED (forever)]On Airspace Regulation

[Dos Linuos]

Title: On Airspace Regulation

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

Need for this Regulation:

The General Assembly ;

REALIZING that air is a rapid of transport, along with being the most economic as wella rapid, efficient and popular mode of transport, used for both goods and passengers,

UNDERSTANDING that aircrafts are susceptible to unforeseen and unwanted incidents,

HOPING to enhance the safety and security of air transport in general, of both goods and people,

Terms and Definitions used:

DEFINES the following terms for the purpose of this resolution :
a) Airspace: The path to be followed by civilian commercial aircrafts between any two locations.
b) Allowed Deviation Limit: The Allowed Deviation Limit (ADL) is the maximum straight line distance that an aircraft can deviate from airspace.
c) Permissible Altitude & Speed: The Permissible Altitude & Speed (PAS) is the standard velocity-altitude combination to be followed by an aircraft, dependent on its engineering, capacity, volume and related information.

Allows for the following measures to be taken Enforces the following mandates:

1. MANDATES the following regulations for a nation:
a) The nation is solely responsible for deciding the Airspace and Allowed Deviation Limit for any route within the country, as soon as the aircraft enters its borders. The Airspace must be decided upon looking towards ease of navigation.
b) The nation is responsible for any and all changes in the Airspace, must provide an intimation to the aircraft (to be travelling within that Airspace) and respective corporations, about such changes at least 72 hours before the aircraft's entry into the Airspace.
c) In any unforeseen situation, nations must have a "Back-up" landing site for incoming aircrafts within the limit of an accessible radius of the main landing site. The "Back-up" landing site must be well maintained with bi-annual checks, and is compulsory for all airports having an air traffic more than an average air traffic per day.
d) The nation demarcating its Airspace must ensure of the accessibility of the Airspace to incoming aircrafts, and must promote healthy corporation-nation relations, in the event of an emergency as described in Mandate 2.a) below.

2. FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a Global Positioning Device that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least and can call attention to any aircraft leaving the Allowed Deviation Limit, or exceeding the Permissible Altitude and Speed. The corporation must ensure that the location of the aircraft, within a given Airspace, is accessible at all times, and that on deviation from the ADL and/or PAS, the corporation is notified in the minimal possible time period, as permitted by the distance of the aircraft from the location of takeoff, or landing, whichever is closer.
b) The corporations must also ensure of communication with any aircraft in violation of mandate 2.a) above, and in a situation of no response, mobilize a safety unit within the region of this violation. Corporations must ensure, in case it is not of an international nature, that it has a unit of contact within the Nation or Region of flight, which may be contacted for support
c) The corporation holds sole responsibility of a pilots mental and physical health, and must create safety and regulations check for such purposes.
d) The corporation is responsible for maintaining all terms and regulations set in by a nation, in accordance to Mandate 1.d) above, and ensure that due to an internal disagreement, or otherwise, any aircraft within an Airspace, or one scheduled to enter it, should not be endangered.

Conclusion:
HEREBY hopes to achieve a higher standard of safety and security for civilian aircrafts at minimum economic overlay.
-------------------------------------------------
This is a first time attempt. I know that it is not very refined, but I hope it has a little bit of hope of existing....
RED: Version 1 Edit
BLUE: Version 2 Edit

Title: On Airspace Regulation

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

Need for this Regulation:

The General Assembly ;

REALIZING that air is a rapid of transport, along with being the most economic as well,

UNDERSTANDING that aircrafts are susceptible to unforeseen unwanted incidents,

HOPING to enhance the safety and security of air transport in general, of both goods and people,

Terms and Definitions used:

DEFINES the following terms for the purpose of this resolution :
a) Airspace: The path to be followed by civilian commercial aircrafts between any two locations.
b) Allowed Deviation Limit: The Allowed Deviation Limit (ADL) is the maximum straight line distance that an aircraft can deviate from airspace.
c) Permissible Altitude & Speed: The Permissible Altitude & Speed (PAS) is the standard velocity-altitude combination to be followed by an aircraft, dependent on its engineering, capacity, volume and related information.

Allows for the following measures to be taken:

MANDATES the following regulations for a nation:
a) The nation is solely responsible for deciding the Airspace and Allowed Deviation Limit for any route within the country, as soon as the aircraft enters its borders. The Airspace must be decided upon looking towards ease of navigation.
b) The nation is responsible for any and all changes in the Airspace, must provide an intimation to the aircraft (to be travelling within that Airspace) and respective corporations, about such changes at least 72 hours before the aircraft's entry into the Airspace.
c) In any unforeseen situation, nations must have a "Back-up" landing site for incoming aircrafts within the limit of an accessible radius of the main landing site. The "Back-up" landing site must be well maintained with bi-annual checks, and is compulsory for all airports having an air traffic more an average air traffic per day.

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a Global Positioning Device that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least) and can call attention to any aircraft leaving the Allowed Deviation Limit, or exceeding the Permissible Altitude and Speed.
b) The corporations must also ensure of communication with any aircraft in violation of mandate a) above, and in a situation of no response, mobilize a safety unit within the region of this violation.
c) The corporation holds sole responsibility of a pilots mental and physical health, and must create safety and regulations check for such purposes.

Conclusion:
HEREBY hopes to achieve a higher standard of safety and security for civilian aircrafts at minimum economic overlay.

Title: On Airspace Regulation

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

Need for this Regulation:

The General Assembly ;

REALIZING that air is the fastest mode of report, along with being the most economic as well,

UNDERSTANDING that aircrafts are susceptible to unforeseen incidents,

HOPING to enhance the safety and security of air transport in general, of both goods and people,

Terms and Definitions used:

DEFINES the following terms for the purpose of this resolution :
a) Airspace: The path to be followed by civilian commercial aircrafts between any two locations.
b) Allowed Deviation Limit: The Allowed Deviation Limit (ADL) is the maximum straight line distance that an aircraft can deviate from airspace.
c) Permissible Altitude & Speed: The Permissible Altitude & Speed (PAS) is the standard velocity-altitude combination to be followed by an aircraft, dependent on its engineering, capacity, volume and related information.

Mandates suggested by this Resolution

MANDATES the following regulations for a nation:
a) The nation is solely responsible for deciding the Airspace and Allowed Deviation Limit for any route within the country, as soon as the aircraft enters its borders. The Airspace must be decided upon looking towards ease of navigation.
b) The nation is responsible for any and all changes in the Airspace, must provide an intimation to the aircraft (to be travelling within that Airspace) and respective corporations, about such changes at least 72 hours before the aircraft's entry into the Airspace.
c) In any unforeseen situation, nations must have a "Back-up" landing site for incoming aircrafts within the limit of 300 kilometers radius of the main landing site. The "Back-up" landing site must be well maintained with bi-annual checks, and is compulsory for all airports having an air traffic more than 300 aircrafts per day.

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a navigation chip that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least) and can call attention to any aircraft leaving the Allowed Deviation Limit, or exceeding the Permissible Altitude and Speed.
b) The corporations must also ensure of communication with any aircraft in violation of mandate a) above, and in a situation of no response, mobilize a safety unit within the region of this violation.
c) The corporation holds sole responsibility of a pilots mental and physical health, and must create safety and regulations check for such purposes.

Conclusion
HEREBY hopes to achieve a higher standard of safety and security for civilian aircrafts at minimum economic overlay.

[Wallenburg]

REALIZING that air is the fastest mode of report, along with being the most economic as well,

"Actually, Wallenburg's light rail is far more efficient, and sometimes even faster."

UNDERSTANDING that aircrafts are susceptible to unforeseen incidents,

"I agree. The anti-aircraft artillery in Georgia was quite a surprise to me."

HOPING to enhance the safety and security of air transport in general, of both goods and people,

"This sounds ominously like 'Civilian Aircraft Accord'."

Mandates suggested by this Resolution

"Optionality is illegal, Ambassador."

MANDATES the following regulations for a nation:
a) The nation is solely responsible for deciding the Airspace and Allowed Deviation Limit for any route within the country, as soon as the aircraft enters its borders. The Airspace must be decided upon looking towards ease of navigation.

"This looks very exploitable. The foreign aircraft may be assigned an 'airspace' it cannot reach, after all."

b) The nation is responsible for any and all changes in the Airspace, must provide an intimation to the aircraft (to be travelling within that Airspace) and respective corporations, about such changes at least 72 hours before the aircraft's entry into the Airspace.

"What about nations without corporations?"

c) In any unforeseen situation, nations must have a "Back-up" landing site for incoming aircrafts within the limit of 300 kilometers radius of the main landing site. The "Back-up" landing site must be well maintained with bi-annual checks, and is compulsory for all airports having an air traffic more than 300 aircrafts per day.

"Why the arbitrary numbers?"

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a navigation chip that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least) and can call attention to any aircraft leaving the Allowed Deviation Limit, or exceeding the Permissible Altitude and Speed.
b) The corporations must also ensure of communication with any aircraft in violation of mandate a) above, and in a situation of no response, mobilize a safety unit within the region of this violation.
c) The corporation holds sole responsibility of a pilots mental and physical health, and must create safety and regulations check for such purposes.

"All the more reason why Wallenburg should not allow corporations to form again. Also, why the arbitrary numbers? And what's a 'navigation chip'?"

This is a first time attempt. I know that it is not very refined, but I hope it has a little bit of hope of existing....

OOC: Ah, fresh meat! Welcome to the Festering Snakepit! Stick around and within a year people might stop calling you names.

[Abacathea]

OOC: Ah, fresh meat! Welcome to the Festering Snakepit! Stick around and within a year people might stop calling you names.

A year....

[Wallenburg]

OOC: Ah, fresh meat! Welcome to the Festering Snakepit! Stick around and within a year people might stop calling you names.

A year....

Well, I did say might...

[Breaking Benjamins Benjamin Burnley]

A year....

Well, I did say might...

Who cares?

This is the internet, people should expect trolls, random stuff and incoherence etc.

[Dos Linuos]

First of all, thank you for taking the time to go through this so meticulously. I didn't think it would be so easy to tear apart!

REALIZING that air is the fastest a rapid mode of report, along with being the most economic as well,

"Actually, Wallenburg's light rail is far more efficient, and sometimes even faster."

All right, point taken. Will the above mentioned edit do? If so, I'll change the draft accordingly.

:bow: Can we trade those sometime? I really like rapid rails. I'd be willing to exchange the Ultra Fast Airliner 0.9997c!

UNDERSTANDING that aircrafts are susceptible to unforeseen incidents,

"I agree. The anti-aircraft artillery in Georgia was quite a surprise to me."

That, I think, is just the politically correct way of saying "When things start blowing up on ground zero". However, if its politically too correct, I can change it to simply "incidents".

HOPING to enhance the safety and security of air transport in general, of both goods and people,

"This sounds ominously like 'Civilian Aircraft Accord'."

Is it too similar? If it is really a carbon copy, I'll change it, but I tried to keep a theme. I've not read this Resolution yet...

Mandates suggested by this ResolutionAllows for the following measures to be taken:

"Optionality is illegal, Ambassador."

I'd be really grateful for any synonymous collocation of texts. Is the suggested edit better?

MANDATES the following regulations for a nation:
a) The nation is solely responsible for deciding the Airspace and Allowed Deviation Limit for any route within the country, as soon as the aircraft enters its borders. The Airspace must be decided upon looking towards ease of navigation.

"This looks very exploitable. The foreign aircraft may be assigned an 'airspace' it cannot reach, after all."

Well, the aircrafts "foreign" to your nation, disallowed by your government to enter, can be deftly handled by the Air Force (if you have one, of course). But most probably, the aircraft will be carrying goods and people relating, directly or indirectly, to your national economy, would not want to be suspended in eternal tandem over a lost airport, and I don't think you would welcome such a decision yourself. But if you do, this resolution gives you the right to.

b) The nation is responsible for any and all changes in the Airspace, must provide an intimation to the aircraft (to be travelling within that Airspace) and respective corporations, about such changes at least 72 hours before the aircraft's entry into the Airspace.

"What about nations without corporations?"

Here, corporations essentially means the company, national or privatized, that is carrying the goods/passengers. In a country, without money making institutions that are a symbol of a capitalist economy, I believe that there would be some affiliated group of like minded individuals who deal with the subject of air transport. However, if there are none, well, this resolution is not at all for those nations, and no article in the proposal is valid anyway for such nations.

c) In any unforeseen situation, nations must have a "Back-up" landing site for incoming aircrafts within the limit of 300 kilometers radius an accessible radius of the main landing site. The "Back-up" landing site must be well maintained with bi-annual checks, and is compulsory for all airports having an air traffic more than 300 aircrafts per day heavy air traffic.

"Why the arbitrary numbers?"

Well, they are not completely arbitrary. They are calculated, but with rough approximations and using real life scenarios. But I don't think that will work, hence the above edit. Do you think anything better can make its way here?
I think that the edits are slightly ambiguous, and will leave a lot to perception, so I'm quite unsure about this one.

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a navigation chip Global Positioning System that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least) and can call attention to any aircraft leaving the Allowed Deviation Limit, or exceeding the Permissible Altitude and Speed.
b) The corporations must also ensure of communication with any aircraft in violation of mandate a) above, and in a situation of no response, mobilize a safety unit within the region of this violation.
c) The corporation holds sole responsibility of a pilots mental and physical health, and must create safety and regulations check for such purposes.

"All the more reason why Wallenburg should not allow corporations to form again. Also, why the arbitrary numbers? And what's a 'navigation chip'?"]

"navigation chip" was just a misnomer. I was unable to think of something less advanced which does the same function (tracking). Do you suggest any other tracking devices that can withstand change in pressure? "Arbitrary numbers" answered above. "Corporations" answered above.

This is a first time attempt. I know that it is not very refined, but I hope it has a little bit of hope of existing....

OOC: Ah, fresh meat! Welcome to the Festering Snakepit! Stick around and within a year people might stop calling you names.

OOC: Thanks for the warm welcome. Can I get a three month discount on the name calling at least?

[Wallenburg]

First of all, thank you for taking the time to go through this so meticulously. I didn't think it would be so easy to tear apart!

"Actually, Wallenburg's light rail is far more efficient, and sometimes even faster."

All right, point taken. Will the above mentioned edit do? If so, I'll change the draft accordingly.

"It still isn't accurate in its claim that air travel is the most economical mode of transportation. It may be true in your nation, but the same cannot be said for others."

:bow: Can we trade those sometime? I really like rapid rails. I'd be willing to exchange the Ultra Fast Airliner 0.9997c!

OOC: I'm afraid I don't involve myself in economics and trade on NS. Sorry.

"I agree. The anti-aircraft artillery in Georgia was quite a surprise to me."

That, I think, is just the politically correct way of saying "When things start blowing up on ground zero". However, if its politically too correct, I can change it to simply "incidents".

"I'm not really concerned about political correctness, especially in that clause. I'm simply agreeing that aircraft can encounter unforeseen difficulties."

"Optionality is illegal, Ambassador."

I'd be really grateful for any synonymous collocation of texts. Is the suggested edit better?

"I'm afraid that is still optional."

"This looks very exploitable. The foreign aircraft may be assigned an 'airspace' it cannot reach, after all."

Well, the aircrafts "foreign" to your nation, disallowed by your government to enter, can be deftly handled by the Air Force (if you have one, of course). But most probably, the aircraft will be carrying goods and people relating, directly or indirectly, to your national economy, would not want to be suspended in eternal tandem over a lost airport, and I don't think you would welcome such a decision yourself. But if you do, this resolution gives you the right to.

"I have difficulty imagining my nation's military firing on a civilian aircraft."

"What about nations without corporations?"

Here, corporations essentially means the company, national or privatized, that is carrying the goods/passengers. In a country, without money making institutions that are a symbol of a capitalist economy, I believe that there would be some affiliated group of like minded individuals who deal with the subject of air transport. However, if there are none, well, this resolution is not at all for those nations, and no article in the proposal is valid anyway for such nations.

"Curious. Madame Majority Leader will be pleased."

"Why the arbitrary numbers?"

Well, they are not completely arbitrary. They are calculated, but with rough approximations and using real life scenarios. But I don't think that will work, hence the above edit. Do you think anything better can make its way here?

"I suggest you leave the numbers to the member states, and simply require reasonable values for those measurements."

"All the more reason why Wallenburg should not allow corporations to form again. Also, why the arbitrary numbers? And what's a 'navigation chip'?"]

"navigation chip" was just a misnomer. I was unable to think of something less advanced which does the same function (tracking). Do you suggest any other tracking devices that can withstand change in pressure? "Arbitrary numbers" answered above. "Corporations" answered above.

"My objection to this 'tracking device', Ambassador, is that my nation possesses no such technology. Aircraft in Wallenburg track their own movement. Ground services do not do that for them."

OOC: Ah, fresh meat! Welcome to the Festering Snakepit! Stick around and within a year people might stop calling you names.

OOC: Thanks for the warm welcome. Can I get a three month discount on the name calling at least?

OOC: Nope.

[Excidium Planetis]

"This proposal has failed to account for the fact that nearly all our aircraft are also spacecraft. As such, any interplanetary route taken by such craft is defined as airspace by the proposal, even with the absence of air during the route.

"And then we come to this:

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a Global Positioning Device that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least)

"This is complicated not only by the fact that many nations possess aircraft but not positioning satellites, as Ambassador Ogenbond stated, but also by the fact that spacecraft may leave the area administered by a GPS network, or at the very least get far enough away that 21 minutes is not a sufficient time for electromagnetic signals to reach the craft and return to the satellite with information. Essentially, there are circumstances where our craft could not meet these standards."

[Tinfect]

REALIZING that air is a rapid of transport, along with being the most economic as well,

OOC:
There's an entire thread in P2TM for Polandball-Speak. This is not it.

[Dos Linuos]

First of all, thank you for taking the time to go through this so meticulously. I didn't think it would be so easy to tear apart!

All right, point taken. Will the above mentioned edit do? If so, I'll change the draft accordingly.

"It still isn't accurate in its claim that air travel is the most economical mode of transportation. It may be true in your nation, but the same cannot be said for others."

All right. How about "rapid, efficient and popular"? All claims are subjective.

:bow: Can we trade those sometime? I really like rapid rails. I'd be willing to exchange the Ultra Fast Airliner 0.9997c!

OOC: I'm afraid I don't involve myself in economics and trade on NS. Sorry.

OOC: I figured, but it was worth a try, eh? If you change your mind, I'm around...

That, I think, is just the politically correct way of saying "When things start blowing up on ground zero". However, if its politically too correct, I can change it to simply "incidents".

"I'm not really concerned about political correctness, especially in that clause. I'm simply agreeing that aircraft can encounter unforeseen difficulties."

All right. Point noted.

I'd be really grateful for any synonymous collocation of texts. Is the suggested edit better?

"I'm afraid that is still optional."

All right, how about "Enforces the following mandates"? Its legally binding, and a simple judicial way of saying "Do It!"

Well, the aircrafts "foreign" to your nation, disallowed by your government to enter, can be deftly handled by the Air Force (if you have one, of course). But most probably, the aircraft will be carrying goods and people relating, directly or indirectly, to your national economy, would not want to be suspended in eternal tandem over a lost airport, and I don't think you would welcome such a decision yourself. But if you do, this resolution gives you the right to.

"I have difficulty imagining my nation's military firing on a civilian aircraft."

See, I understand the difficulty, but look at it this way. An aircraft which does not have authority to enter your national airspace, I'm sure will not be of civilian nature. Vice versa, if an aircraft is civilian, and does not carry a threat, it should have no problem obtaining a nod for entry into the national airspace. Surely, any aircraft that goes against this particular order will not be of a civilian nature, or may simply be posing as one.
On similar grounds, I don't think that a nation would want to strand a perfectly innocent, and permitted aircraft, from landing, by assigning a path that is not directly reachable by that aircraft. It seems a contradiction to me.

Here, corporations essentially means the company, national or privatized, that is carrying the goods/passengers. In a country, without money making institutions that are a symbol of a capitalist economy, I believe that there would be some affiliated group of like minded individuals who deal with the subject of air transport. However, if there are none, well, this resolution is not at all for those nations, and no article in the proposal is valid anyway for such nations.

"Curious. Madame Majority Leader will be pleased."

Well, they are not completely arbitrary. They are calculated, but with rough approximations and using real life scenarios. But I don't think that will work, hence the above edit. Do you think anything better can make its way here?

"I suggest you leave the numbers to the member states, and simply require reasonable values for those measurements."

I didn't quite understand that. Can you please elucidate?

"navigation chip" was just a misnomer. I was unable to think of something less advanced which does the same function (tracking). Do you suggest any other tracking devices that can withstand change in pressure? "Arbitrary numbers" answered above. "Corporations" answered above.

"My objection to this 'tracking device', Ambassador, is that my nation possesses no such technology. Aircraft in Wallenburg track their own movement. Ground services do not do that for them."

Again, point taken. I just introduced this clause for two reasons:
1. Tracking of aircrafts by ground crews reduces the risk of hijacking by anti-social elements. If the aircraft is tracked, then exceeding PAS limits, or relieving from airspace or Designated areas without a reason, would be considered suspicious, and necessary actions can be taken accordingly.
2. It also brings to notice the chances of pilot suicide cases among airlines, so they can address the issue. A pilot wishing to commit suicide endangers the life of passengers, and causes economic losses. The pilot will cross the above mentioned boundaries, and hence action can be taken to prevent it.
I know the clause is sort of dicey, but I would sincerely appreciate suggestions to improve it.[/quote]

[Dos Linuos]

I have made a few changes, to make the draft a little more readable. Please let me know if I have succeeded

[Dos Linuos]

"This proposal has failed to account for the fact that nearly all our aircraft are also spacecraft. As such, any interplanetary route taken by such craft is defined as airspace by the proposal, even with the absence of air during the route.

"And then we come to this:

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a Global Positioning Device that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least)

"This is complicated not only by the fact that many nations possess aircraft but not positioning satellites, as Ambassador Ogenbond stated, but also by the fact that spacecraft may leave the area administered by a GPS network, or at the very least get far enough away that 21 minutes is not a sufficient time for electromagnetic signals to reach the craft and return to the satellite with information. Essentially, there are circumstances where our craft could not meet these standards."

I have changed the tracking period, and removed "Global Positioning". I realize that the globe is not exactly where all of Nationstates' nations are. Anyways, I have defined the path between the two locations, of takeoff and landing, as Airspace, but not used the presence of atmosphere (or air) as a criteria for its allocation. The word airspace has been used due to the lack of synonyms (other than route and path, mundane, and Space-space, that sounds like a milk chocolate brand).

[Araraukar]

Anyways, I have defined the path between the two locations, of takeoff and landing, as Airspace, but not used the presence of atmosphere (or air) as a criteria for its allocation.

Except you start with "air" in the preamble. If you want to specify not-land-not-water, you might want to go with something along those lines instead.

Also, your definitions, what are they good for? Additionally, your "airspace" definition should include your "does not need to be actual air" way of looking at it. The "PAS" definition isn't used for the rest of the proposal text.

There's a lots of other things wrong with it (OOC: some made me actually facepalm in real life), but those were the first couple of things that stuck out, based on what you said most recently.

[Dos Linuos]

"This proposal has failed to account for the fact that nearly all our aircraft are also spacecraft. As such, any interplanetary route taken by such craft is defined as airspace by the proposal, even with the absence of air during the route.

"And then we come to this:

FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):
a) The corporation must ensure that every aircraft is "tagged" with a Global Positioning Device that allows its location to be accessed every 21 minutes (at least)

"This is complicated not only by the fact that many nations possess aircraft but not positioning satellites, as Ambassador Ogenbond stated, but also by the fact that spacecraft may leave the area administered by a GPS network, or at the very least get far enough away that 21 minutes is not a sufficient time for electromagnetic signals to reach the craft and return to the satellite with information. Essentially, there are circumstances where our craft could not meet these standards."

---

Anyways, I have defined the path between the two locations, of takeoff and landing, as Airspace, but not used the presence of atmosphere (or air) as a criteria for its allocation.

Except you start with "air" in the preamble. If you want to specify not-land-not-water, you might want to go with something along those lines instead.

Also, your definitions, what are they good for? Additionally, your "airspace" definition should include your "does not need to be actual air" way of looking at it. The "PAS" definition isn't used for the rest of the proposal text.

There's a lots of other things wrong with it (OOC: some made me actually facepalm in real life), but those were the first couple of things that stuck out, based on what you said most recently.

Facepalm? That bad? Please don't hurt yourself on this worthless thing! I'm trying to make it better, but I don't think its working.

Actually, I realized a sort of fallacy, and I need some help fixing it. Recommendations would be very, very useful. The concept of airspace is only useful for intra-planetary travel (within the planet) or between two such that both have defined boundaries. But during longer space travels, I realized that that is not applicable. further, the position of "help" fails in that context as well.

As for the definitions, they have been used in the Mandate section. ADL and PAS have both been used. I'll underline them for clarity if that's useful.

[Araraukar]

Actually, I realized a sort of fallacy, and I need some help fixing it. Recommendations would be very, very useful.

I have one. Leave the draft on the table and step well away. *unshoulders her flamethrower*

[Dos Linuos]

Actually, I realized a sort of fallacy, and I need some help fixing it. Recommendations would be very, very useful.

I have one. Leave the draft on the table and step well away. *unshoulders her flamethrower*

Oh... please don't..... I put a lot of effort into making that foolproof flameproof. Seriously, is it hopeless?

[Araraukar]

Oh... please don't..... I put a lot of effort into making that foolproof flameproof. Seriously, is it hopeless?

I can do a vivisection on it if you want, but I doubt that's going to change my recommendation.

[Dos Linuos]

Oh... please don't..... I put a lot of effort into making that foolproof flameproof. Seriously, is it hopeless?

I can do a vivisection on it if you want, but I doubt that's going to change my recommendation.

Look, I would really appreciate it if you could do such an analysis, but if its so bad that its not worth the effort, I'll abandon this draft. This was my first time drafting, so I am sort of attached to it, but not anything that I can't let go of....

[Excidium Planetis]

"Perhaps you can define 'airspace' as any atmospheric flight path to be taken by aircraft?"

[Araraukar]

At the author's request, a vivisection. *pulls out the Proposal Scalpel and plugs ears to avoid being deafened by the screaming* Now then, let's see what the innards of this beastie look like.

Title: On Airspace Regulation

There are ambassadors around here, who go ballistic (no pun intended) when a proposal title starts with "On". Just simple "Airspace Regulation" would work, would look more professional and would cause fewer blood pressure incidents.

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

Proposal Rules wrote:

Free Trade - A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.

We shall see if it fits the category.

Need for this Regulation:

The fuck? Kill that line.

The General Assembly ;

OOC: I realize this is the GA, but around here, in the IC reality, the SC basically doesn't exist, so GA = WA. I would suggest changing this line to "The World Assembly".

REALIZING that air is a a rapid, efficient and popular mode of transport, used for both goods and passengers,

No, air is a mixture of gases. (OOC: This is why spoilering old drafts is preferable to colour and strike editing.) I think you mean "air travel". As for rapid, that's debatable (OOC: Have you ever traveled by an airplane? The time you spend at the terminal is often longer than the time you spend in the plane itself, unless we're talking about intercontinental flights, and sometimes even then!), efficient, only if your rail and road systems for some reason don't work and waterways are unreachable (OOC: even in RL, the vast majority of goods is transported via water, and then further via roads and rails), and popular only if they aren't banned, as they are in many nations, or at least for non-military applications.

In general, I think that sentence needs a lot of work.

UNDERSTANDING that aircrafts are susceptible to incidents,

Gee, can you give us another platitude, Captain Obvious? Like, "water is wet", or "it's a bit hard to breathe in a vacuum". As long as you don't specify what an "incident" is, it could as well be a normal take-off or landing. (OOC: Please note that the Captain Obvious thing is aimed at your ambassador by my ambassador, who is a snarky woman *points to siggy* and not by me the player at you the player. This applies to the rest of this post as well. OOC comments are clearly marked as OOC.) In general I don't understand why this is here, unless it's the aborted fetus of an earlier statement that actually made sense.

HOPING to enhance the safety and security of air transport in general, of both goods and people,

Now this is where you should start with the preamble. Although I should point out that your chosen category means you should make fewer regulations that impede the airliner CEOs from rolling in cash on a regular basis.

Terms and Definitions used:

No such thing. Kill.

DEFINES the following terms for the purpose of this resolution :

An unnecessary space after "resolution". And it's a good thing you've remembered the "for the purposes of this"... actually, cancel that, you need to pluralise your purpose there.

a) Airspace: The path to be followed by civilian commercial aircrafts between any two locations.

Unnecessary space before a), and it applies to every other definition too. Also, are you sure leaving civilian non-commercial flights out of this is a good idea? Military ones I can sort of understand; after all, how else are militant nations supposed to shoot down civilian planes for target practice, if they aren't allowed to avoid being regulated on?

b) Allowed Deviation Limit: The Allowed Deviation Limit (ADL) is the maximum straight line distance that an aircraft can deviate from airspace.

...what? That sentence literally makes no sense.

c) Permissible Altitude & Speed: The Permissible Altitude & Speed (PAS) is the standard velocity-altitude combination to be followed by an aircraft, dependent on its engineering, capacity, volume and related information.

I think you need to think simpler (OOC: is this copy-pasted from somewhere?) and write simpler too. This doesn't actually define anything, it just looks like it does. It's like "defines that a flower is the thing that has all the characteristics of a flower".

Enforces the following mandates:

Not needed. Starting with "MANDATES" makes it clear enough. Also, instead of "a nation" below, use "member nation", to avoid looking like you're legislating for nonmember nations, which isn't allowed.

1. MANDATES the following regulations for a nation:
a) The nation is solely responsible for deciding the Airspace and Allowed Deviation Limit for any route within the country, as soon as the aircraft enters its borders. The Airspace must be decided upon looking towards ease of navigation.

"Airspace" usually means "the piece of atmosphere that's directly above the planet's surface bits that the nation controls", so deciding airspace sounds very weird and out of place. That added to your nonsense definition makes this one mandate about as clear as a cupful of manure. (OOC: Instead of entering borders, the planes usually enter the airspace, so the above really is nonsense.)

b) The nation is responsible for any and all changes in the Airspace, must provide an intimation to the aircraft (to be travelling within that Airspace) and respective corporations, about such changes at least 72 hours before the aircraft's entry into the Airspace.

Same applies as above, get your terminology cleared up. Also, you should probably switch all mentions of corporations to air carriers for clarity.

c) In any unforeseen situation, nations must have a "Back-up" landing site for incoming aircrafts within the limit of of the main landing site. The "Back-up" landing site must be well maintained with bi-annual checks, and is compulsory for all airports having an air traffic more per day.

This is why hack-and-slash editing is never a good idea, it makes your lines read like the pawprints (OOC disclaimer: not aimed at Bears or any other non-human sapient animal species) of some weird critter that ran through a pool of blood before tap-dancing on the proposal pages... Actually, hold that thought, I think something escaped when I wasn't looking. *fries something under the operating table with her flamethrower, then focuses back on the proposal*

I really do suggest re-reading your sentences with all the editing taken out of them, and correcting things that slipped by.

d) The nation demarcating its Airspace must ensure of the accessibility of the Airspace to incoming aircrafts, and must promote healthy corporation-nation relations, in the event of an emergency as described in Mandate 2.a) below.

I've never heard of a nation needing to set the borders to its airspace (OOC: why is that capitalized?), since, as I mentioned before, airspace usually means the air above the nation's surface area. Also, this reads like the nation can't set no-fly zones... although if the military are allowed to shoot down anything entering their turf, I guess that can be bypassed. Gonna be a few losses before the airliners start marking their maps with DO NOT FLY OVER HERE on them.

Also remember that not all airliners are corporations and that not all nations even allow corporations. Or airspace violations for that matter...

2. FURTHER MANDATES the following regulations for all Air Carrier Services (goods or passenger):

Only goods or passenger? (OOC: Most passenger jets still carry a lot of cargo.)

a) The corporation must ensure that the location of the aircraft, within a given Airspace, is accessible at all times, and that on deviation from the ADL and/or PAS, the corporation is notified in the minimal possible time period, as permitted by the distance of the aircraft from the location of takeoff, or landing, whichever is closer.

...what? Again with the gobbledy-gook language. The location of the aircraft, when it's in flight, is where the aircraft is. How can that location be "accessible at all times", considering that it contains a lot of mass that is the airplane and whatever is inside it. (OOC: If you're thinking of GPS systems, remember that the WA nations are not limited to a single planet, and that not all nations have satellite technology. Heck, some don't have airplane tech.)

b) The corporations must also ensure of communication with any aircraft in violation of mandate 2.a) above, and in a situation of no response, mobilize a safety unit within the region of this violation. Corporations must ensure, in case it is not of an international nature, that it has a unit of contact within the Nation or Region of flight, which may be contacted for support

(OOC: The colour editing on this one made it difficult to see if you wanted the whole thing visible, or if you forgot to use strike. Again, spoiler old drafts, don't edit them with colours and strikes.) So wait, the commercial airliners have to ensure communication with any aircraft, even one that isn't theirs? How in the nine hells are they going to achieve that? (OOC: It sounds more like something a nation should do, but don't write that into it, since there's no way that the nations with militaries would allow commercial jet pilots to listen in on their own chatter.) Also... "unit of contact"? What?

c) The corporation holds sole responsibility of a pilots mental and physical health, and must create safety and regulations check for such purposes.

...I am now imagining the pilots being kept in medically-induced coma while their bodies are made to exercise with carefully applied electronics, and being fed each nation's version of "happy pills" until such time that they are actually needed for flying the plane.

Not that any nation I know would actually do that... *shifty eyes*

d) The corporation is responsible for maintaining all terms and regulations set in by a nation, in accordance to Mandate 1.d) above, and ensure that due to an internal disagreement, or otherwise, any aircraft within an Airspace, or one scheduled to enter it, should not be endangered.

So wait, are you saying the air carriers need to adhere to national laws, or only to the ones set in this resolution?

Conclusion:

Kill.

HEREBY hopes to achieve a higher standard of safety and security for civilian aircrafts at minimum economic overlay.

...economic overlay? I don't think that means what you think it means.

My conclusion: this thing has a lot of fiddly bits that do nothing, the rest is incomprehensible, and it seems to duplicate and/or contradict some existing resolutions. The kindest thing is to pull the plug, now that we have it sedated anyway.

This is a first time attempt. I know that it is not very refined, but I hope it has a little bit of hope of existing....

Did you read the International Transport Safety resolution before crafting this one?

----------------

OOC: This really doesn't look like it's going anywhere, at least without a major overhaul (the kind where, if this were a plane, you'd strip it down to its wings and then start over), and you might want to limit this to international flights in any case. I get what you're trying to do, and unlike my IC ambassador, I have a fairly good vocabulary when it comes to aviation, but if regular people need to start looking up terms that you've supposedly defined for them from Wikipedia or even further afield, you've got a problem.

If you decide to abandon this, change the thread title from [DRAFT] to [ABANDONED] (edit the first post's subject line), so the thread can sink out of first page without too many people jumping up to pee on its grave. However, leave the first post intact if you do that, so curious people can read the gravestone at least.

Don't be discouraged by failure, they're a part of the learning process. Make up a name and some personality for your IC ambassador and poke your head into other debates to ask questions and give suggestions. And there's always the Strangers' Bar for fleshing out your ambassador. Just don't make the mistake of ordering drinks for everyone - that's likely to bankrupt your nation!

[Dos Linuos]

Thank you so much for that "vivisection". Currently, I'm full of energy, and its vacation time anyway, so I wouldn't exactly have had a problem rewriting this. However, I think that "Civilian Aircraft Accord" and "International Transport Safety" have done all that was necessary for this draft!
Anyways, thanks a lot, Wallenburg, Excidium Planetis and Araraukar for the insights, it helped me understand what is seen and talked about in a proposal, and hopefully, I'll master the art in only a few million tries.

Don't be discouraged by failure, they're a part of the learning process. Make up a name and some personality for your IC ambassador and poke your head into other debates to ask questions and give suggestions. And there's always the Strangers' Bar for fleshing out your ambassador.

Shall be done!

Just don't make the mistake of ordering drinks for everyone - that's likely to bankrupt your nation!

*Fights back tears* I'll try....