Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
Authorisation and permission — helicopter winching operations
Legislation
Subsection 98 (1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) provides that the Governor-General may make regulations for the Act and in the interests of the safety of air navigation.
Under subregulation 151 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988), it is an offence for the pilot in command of an aircraft to allow persons or objects to be picked up by the aircraft. However, under subregulation 151 (3), it is a defence if CASA gives prior written authority and conditions mentioned in the authority are complied with.
Under subregulation 157 (1) of CAR 1988, it is an offence for the pilot in command of an aircraft to fly lower than 500 feet.
Under paragraphs 250 (1) (c) and 250 (1A) (c) of CAR 1988, it is an offence for the operator or the pilot in command to permit a person to be carried on anything attached to the aircraft. However, under subregulation 250 (2), CASA may give permission for a person to be carried in this way, subject to compliance with conditions specified under subregulation 250 (3).
Under paragraph 251 (1) (c) of CAR 1988, it is an offence if crew members and passengers on an aircraft do not wear seat belts when the aircraft is flying below 1 000 feet.
These provisions have the effect of preventing helicopter winching operations. However, by means of Civil Aviation Order 29.11 (CAO 29.11), CASA has given authority and permission under subregulations 151 (3) and 250 (2) of CAR 1988, and also issued exemptions from paragraphs 157 (1) (b) and 251 (1) (c), thus allowing for helicopters to conduct winching operations, subject to various conditions mentioned in CAO 29.11.
Among the conditions in CAO 29.11 for helicopter winching operations, paragraph 5.1 requires an operating area of certain dimensions and characteristics — a diameter that is the longer of 30 metres or twice the length of the relevant helicopter; no obstructions within this circle higher than 3 metres; and a central zone, within the circle, of 5 metres diameter clear of all obstruction and reserved exclusively for the winching.
In addition, paragraph 7.1 of CAO 29.11 requires that for all winching operations over offshore platforms or vessels (the site), an operator may only use a multi-engine helicopter capable of hovering out of ground effect (HOGE) with 1 engine inoperative during the actual winching.
From time to time, helicopters malfunction or require maintenance while servicing sites with helidecks. Given the size of the helidecks, it is not always possible to manoeuvre the unserviceable helicopter out of the way to enable another helicopter to land with maintenance personnel and spares. Nor is it always possible to safely deliver or take off maintenance personnel and spares by boat. Either a dangerous offshore stairway may be used to enable disembarkation or embarkation, or a static landing crane may be used.
In extreme circumstances, repair of the unserviceable helicopter may be so delayed that with a blocked helideck the owner or operator of the site may have no alternative but to crane the helicopter off the site and into the sea in order to meet an emergency, continue to be supplied, or remain in operation.
Helicopter winching to land and take off maintenance personnel and spares is an alternative. However, most helidecks would not comply with the dimensional requirements of paragraph 5.1 of CAO 29.11. In addition, where a site is far offshore and distant from any refuelling possibility on a nearby site, the need to carry the weight of sufficient fuel to return to shore would eliminate any possibility of using HOGE capability during the actual winching operation. The operation would not, therefore, comply with paragraph 7.1 of CAO 29.11. Under paragraphs 5.2 and 7.3 of CAO 29.11, the helideck size and HOGE conditions would not apply to a winching operation for a rescue or other emergency. However, these provisions do not extend to the type of situation described above involving an unserviceable helicopter on a site.
Bond Helicopters Australia Pty Ltd, Aviation Reference Number 800160 (the operator), has sought a suitable authority and permission under subregulations 151 (3) and 250 (2) of CAR 1988 that would enable its helicopter pilots to winch maintenance personnel and spares to and from sites using the heave-in line technique and without compliance with paragraphs 5.1 and 7.1 of CAO 29.11. The heave-in line technique involves angled winch delivery to a site while the helicopter hovers over the adjacent sea rather than directly above the site. The instrument is subject to a series of safety conditions.
CAO 29.11, other than paragraphs 5.1 and 7.1, must be complied with. The exemptions from height restrictions and seat belt requirements in CAO 29.11 would apply. Operations, which may only be carried out in daylight, must use the heave-in line technique in accordance with the procedures set out in the operator’s operations manual as at the date of this instrument, or as varied with the written agreement of CASA. Each operation must be the subject of a safety assessment and written approval by the operator’s chief pilot. The owner or operator of the site must give written permission for the operation, and the operator and the pilot in command must comply with any conditions in the permission. During the operation the helicopter may not hover wholly or partially over the site but must remain over the sea.
The helicopter must operate at the minimum weight and minimum fuel load necessary to complete the operation, return to shore, and to fly away from the site in the event of engine failure. The operation may only be conducted at the safest working area of the site that allows fly-away alternatives for the pilot in command. The maintenance personnel who may be winched to or from a site must have successfully completed training for such an operation as set out in the operator’s operations manual. The operator must report to CASA after each operation.
Legislative Instruments Act
Subregulation 5A (1) of CAR 1988 declares, in effect, that an instrument that affects the operation of CAO 29.11 is a disallowable instrument. Under subparagraph 6 (d) (i) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (the LIA), an instrument is a legislative instrument for section 5 of the LIA if it is declared to be a disallowable instrument under legislation in force before the commencement of the LIA. The authority and permission affect the operation of CAO 29.11 and the instrument is, therefore, a legislative instrument. It is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LIA.
Consultation
Consultation under section 17 of the LIA has not been undertaken in this case. The instrument is similar to other instruments issued to other operators who met the safety requirements.
Compatibility with human rights and freedoms
A statement of compatibility with human rights is at Attachment 1.
Commencement and making
The instrument commences on the day after registration. It stops having effect at the end of 31 March 2016, as if it had been repealed by another instrument.
The instrument has been made by a delegate of CASA under subregulation 11.260 (1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
Attachment 1
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011
Authorisation and permission — helicopter winching operations
This legislative instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
Overview of the legislative instrument
The legislative instrument enables helicopter pilots of Bond Helicopters Australia Pty Ltd to winch maintenance personnel and spares to and from sites using the heave-in line technique and without compliance with paragraphs 5.1 and 7.1 of Civil Aviation Order 29.11. The issue of the instrument is subject to a series of safety conditions.
Human rights implications
This legislative instrument does not engage any of the applicable rights or freedoms.
Conclusion
This legislative instrument is compatible with human rights as it does not raise any human rights issues.
Civil Aviation Safety Authority