Military vs civilian adherence to rules

[rigger 47]

I'm sure you can add the pilot vessel to the list of boats that cut that corner greater than 12kts.  Don't see why they should on a return trip - just means poor time keeping!

From memory they had an exemption.

Often they are going from one job to another. A minor delay that is not their fault snowballs - one example was a small boat anchored in the middle of the channel that would not shift.

 

What is the wake like that the new pilot boat Wakatere puts out?

[ScottiE 174]

I've no doubt they have an exemption - that's not the point

[rigger 47]

The point - I think you mean they are still responsible for their wake - so if you think it an issue report it to the HM, or if you think it is their speed likewise report to the HM.

 

If I have your point wrong please enlighten me.

[ScottiE 174]

Yup - both points are my concerns

[wheels 543]

I found out just a weeny bit more about this. Only in that the Ship was on exercise, training NZ Crew in navigation and as it was under exercise, it had sort permission to travel at it's speed through the Sounds. Permission from Whom exactly is the rather open question. It seems it was not the Local Harbormaster. So more than likely, permission from big Brass and maybe even (although my speculation here) perhaps the Minister of Defense.
The actual speed is not really the issue as such. Firstly it was guestimated. No one actually confirmed any speed. (Question, would a military vessel have AIS?) The Guestimate was 20 to 25Kts. The Ferry's can travel at 18 through to 21Kts. So high speed is not really the argument. The arguments were from the wake and being so close to shore while making such wake. Although once again, the distance from shore has been guestimated. Even though they are under exercise, they are not allowed to endanger the lives of others, so safe speed and distance from other Boats still needs to be adhered to. In saying that, no one is aware of any complaints from any boats out on the water.
     The Person complaining just happens to be the Head Honcho of the committee for protecting the Sounds. Not accusing him that he, in anyway was making false accusations, but at the same time, interesting that it was him that had the concerns. It is this group that had the Fast Ferries removed from the Sounds and the same group that opposes Salmon and Mussel Farms and whatever else. So I guess you can read into that which ever way you want. If the Ship had not produced a Wake that caused problems, then there would be no complaint. His complaint was that his boat was tied to his dock and the wake caused it to slam against the Dock and that caused significant damage. The Harbormaster was still to look into that at the time I was discussing this with my "source", so I can't say how much or how serious the damage was.
 

[erice 732]

exactly

 

our navy have to practise high speed emergency manoeuvres in sounds like areas to have a better chance of surviving aircraft attack etc ie falklands 

 

 

and sometimes with their lights + gps off at night!

 

it's better for everyone if specific military zones are not created

 

but that comes with the cost of "sharing" spaces and not holding them to civilian laws

 

how many of our soldiers have nz firearms licences?

 

how many of our pilots, pilot's licences? 

[rigger 47]

Question, would a military vessel have AIS?

Many do but they turn them off alot in my experience. Warramunga has AIS fitted.

[erice 732]

All of them.

 

sure on that?

 

this doc seems to suggest that military pilots do not have civilian licences

 

sure they can apply for them

 

but i doubt it would go well for them to fly civilian planes without civilian licences

 

Private Pilot Licence (Aeroplane)

NZDF Pilots

A NZDF pilot in current military flying practice in aeroplanes who wishes to apply for the issue of a NZ PPL(A), must meet the requirements prescribed in Civil Aviation Rule 61.153 for the issue of a PPL...

 

https://www.caa.govt.nz/pilots/Armed_Forces_Recognition_Reqs.pdf

[wheels 543]

I hope I world this the right way to make sense. It is a bit of a mix and complicated.  A none Military Pilot has to hold a CAA license because they are flying under the CAA rules/restrictions etc. Every individual pilot is responsible for the Law. Commercially, a Pilot is still as an individual, responsible for following the Law. If AirNZ told a Pilot to break the Law, (while they could be prosecuted I assume) the Pilot is still responsible and has a right/protection under NZ laws to disregard such a request and adhere to normal CAA requirements.
Military Pilots are different. They Fly under the umbrella of the RNZAF(or which ever military arm) The RNZAF hold the license you could say. The Pilot as an individual, does not really exist. There may at times, due to a mission requirement, a Military aircraft needs to fly outside of the legal limitations of CAA. In saying that, there are also times/incidences where RNZAF rules are actually tougher than Civilian, which seem silly. Simply, Pilots must follow orders. They can not defy an order simply because it is against normal CAA law.
If a Military Pilot has a day off and decides to go fly a private civilian aircraft, they do so as an individual under the civilian laws and must have a civilian license.
Getting a Civilian license is pretty easy for ex RNZAF Pilots. You could say it is "cross Credited" to a fair degree. They have to meet the requirement under the law as erice posted the link to. RNZAF Pilots are greatly sort after by AirNZ, but they still need to gain a commercial license as well, plus they need to have a qual for the particular aircraft they are going to fly.
    For Motor Vehicle licenses, it is similar. Expect they must adhere to normal NZ Road Laws, while on NZ roads, during normal Peacetime activities. However, because they too must follow orders, they have to be exempted from NZ laws and thus the Army hold the "license"you could say and the Driver is not an individual responsible. Should some Vehicle crash or break the law, and for that matter, an RNZAF aircraft crash, most of the time, both Pilots and Drivers would be dealt with and prosecuted under Military Court Martial, not Civilian law/Court system.

[AJ Oliver 154]

The military thinks a big part of their job is to intimidate. 

Navies are particularly egregious in this respect. 

Don't let them. 

Veterans For Peace 

[wheels 543]

AJ, fortunately, or maybe it should be unfortunately, our Military is a little too polite. Our Navy chases illegal fishing boats in the Southern Ocean and when they say, "we want to board you" and the illegal fishing boat say "naf off" our boys said "oh...OK" err, ummm, what now? our training didn't cover what to do if the bad boys wont play nice.
Our Airforce at Operational Base Whenuapai can't fly late at night or on weekends, because some cranking Woman around the area phone up the Base Commander and complain about the noisy aircraft and tell him he has to put his planes away.

[Black Panther 1,587]

Perfect, that's why I like NZ.

[wheels 543]

And further information to light, Apparently the Ozy Navy did advise the Harbor Master that they would be operating at speeds of up to 24kts.