Jump to content

Freewheel

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    778
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    77

Everything posted by Freewheel

  1. There are numerous cases of civilian pilots who have lost control of their aircraft, directly related to a “high speed low level pass”.
  2. I am sure that’s not correct.
  3. If you mean that simply posting on Vertical Forums (or ranting or complaining) won’t effect change, I agree with ya With that being said, a forum like this could be one tool used to effect change. Of course, you can’t expect change to occur without actually using the formal mechanisms that are already built into our regulatory systems. This site does provide a great forum for people in our industry (from coast to coast) to discuss and identify industry related issues. They are also very helpful for gaging how the regulator is applying the regulations and they can be a deterrent to “Regional Disparity”. It’s well known that recent “guidance material” (and changes to regulatory interpretations) from Transport Canada was developed as a direct result of at least one forum on this site. I suspect at least a few of the 137,000+ views were from Transport Canada. Of course, formal mechanisms were used as well as this forum. https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/services/aviation/reference-centre/advisory-circulars/ac-700-052.html
  4. Without knowing your situation completely, I have to agree with you. Either way it looks like you are doing your research. As you can see there are more than a few Canadian pilots who have paid for a licence, before they realized the industry was not at all what they expected. Best of luck with whichever avenue you choose...
  5. That’s a fair reply. Just be aware that it will likely be more than 2 or 3 years of extended tours away from family. In reality, there is a good possibility you will not fly for 2 or 3 years, if ever. Once you do get flying: CARs currently allow for a pilot to work 42 days straight, with 5 days off before and after the tour. Then you can be asked to return to work for another 42 days straight. These “days off” do not need to be away from the job site. You just need to have no company assigned duties. You can do this 6 times per year. While tours are getting better, (and the CARs are changing for air taxi...maybe lol) your employer will likely expect a strong commitment from you early on (as you both try to get you enough hours to work most contracts). Client minimum Flight Time requirements seem to be always increasing, despite the growing shortage of pilots. Aerial work jobs will still be under the limits above even when(if) the new CARs limits do come into effect. if you do decide to get your licence, choose your Flight Training Unit wisely and ask them how they log and bill you flight time.
  6. Longest day 12.3 hours Flight Time/ 9.2 Air Tine 😎
  7. President’s Message - HAC Appeals to Minister Garneau Over the New Interpretation of “Flight time” http://mediaedgedigital.com/supplierinsights/hac/presidents-message-15/
  8. https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/services/aviation/reference-centre/advisory-circulars/ac-700-052.html
  9. May 8/19 email: Dear Sir, We continue to work the file in addition to a number of other priority files. Please note we do not send back the disposition documents to individual commenters, but will be sending the AC out again prior to being finalized. As such, you will be able to assess how your feedback would have been dispositioned. Regards, Robert Sincennes, P.Eng. Director, Standards Branch Tel: 613-991-2738 cell: 613-859-2796 facsimile / télécopieur : 613-952-3298 Internet: [email protected] Transport Canada | Transports Canada
  10. Excerpt from April 16/19 e-mail: “I am responding on behalf of Robert Sincennes who is currently away. TCCA has received many comments on Draft Advisory Circular (AC) 700-052 - RECORDING FLIGHT TME FOR SKID-EQUIPPED HELICOPTERS and it has now completed a disposition of all comments. These will be sent out shortly for all persons and operators who submitted them and when the consultation period and processes are complete, the AC can be issued.” Best Regards,Pierre RuelPierre RuelChief | ChefFlight Standards| Normes des Opérations AériennesStandards Branch| Direction des NormesTransport Canada | Transports Canada330 Sparks St, 4th floor | 330 rue Sparks, 4e étage (AARTA)Ottawa, Canada K1A [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>613-998-9855
  11. And n the form of a stamp of approval on behalf of the minister (in my COM]. Like I said “Good to go” ...for the time being at least. At the rate TC moves, that could be quite awhile.
  12. We’ve already involved all parties and done the work...now it’s up to them. This circus has been going on since 2015. According to Airbus I’m good to go with Class C loads. That’s what their letter says. They have also been advising several operators of this since 2015. According to anything I have in writing from TC, I’m also currently good to go. That includes correspondence from TC Standards, Certification and Regional Operations and my COM approval. I’m confident that constitutes “approval from the responsible authority in accordance with the applicable operational regulations” as indicated n the operating limitations of the Flight Manual. With that being said, standards and my region have advised they will be releasing a CASA to advise of the implications of Airbus’ position. The point of my post was simply to ask if anyone else had received any news on this front (and also pass on what I know to others who may be conducting Class C in AS350s).
  13. Additionally, Airbus has been circulating the attached letter (to Transport Canada and many operators) since June 2015. Also attached is the November 2017 letter from TC certification (to Airbus). In this letter TC Certification states that they have completed their review, validate the "major change affecting Airbus Helicopters AS350B2" and find the changes acceptable. 13530660.pdf AS 350 and EC 130 series helicopter - External load certification.pdf
  14. That it does. So let's look at the Operating Limitations section in the latest amendment (06-17) to the supplement for the Cargo Swing on the AS350 B2, approved by Transport Canada themselves in November 2017. "The cargo hook system is approved for lifting external load which is jettisonable and lifted free from land or water during rotorcraft operation. Operation with an external load which remains in contact with land, water or any fixed structure is not demonstrated by the manufacturer. These operations shall not be conducted without approval from the responsible authority in accordance with the applicable operational regulations." Now, what are your thoughts if an operator has an approval e-mail (like the one in my December 21, 2017 above) from Transport Canada Standards (and have Class C loads approved in their COM)? We also received an e-mail from our Primary Ops Inspector stating approval of Class C loads in the AS350 is granted. Our COM also contains approval for Class C loads, but does not specify in which aircraft.
  15. FYI: Earlier this month, 4 TC inspectors and the Associate Reginal Director advised us (verbally) that TC standards have changed their position with regards to AS350 Helicopters and their certification for Class C external,loads. We asked to receive their position in writing and we’re told that TC is preparing a Civil Aviation Safety Alert (CASA). A follow up email to the standards department garnered this April 19 reply: With respect to operations with Class “C” loads by the AS 350 series helicopters, TCCA will be advising operators through their regional POI’s and through the issuance of a CASA of the implications of the position of Airbus Helicopters on these operations with this series of helicopter, as stated in the Limitations Section of the AS 350 Rotary-wing Flight Manual. Transport Canada is not planning any separate regulatory action on these operations at this time.Best Regards,Pierre RuelPierre RuelChief | ChefFlight Standards| Normes des Opérations AériennesStandards Branch| Direction des NormesTransport Canada | Transports Canada330 Sparks St, 4th floor | 330 rue Sparks, 4e étage (AARTA)Ottawa, Canada K1A [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>613-998-9855 Has anyone received further clarity through their POI? We were advised the CASA was to be released in the very near future, but have yet to see it...
  16. I suspect this is one of those issues where the approach from TC is far from standardized. Depending on what exactly you want to use the IPad for, how you mount it and most importantly, which inspector you ask, the expectation likely varies from “nothing required in the COM” to a very complex system (documented and approved in the COM). if you just went through all of this with TC, care to share your inspectors expectation?
  17. My mistake. It used to be CAW, now it’s Unifor,; aka the “Super Union” lol https://www.unifor.org/en/whats-new/news/caw-cep-merge-super-union
  18. My point was that averaging agreements are not solely intended for “seasonal jobs” and they can be legally implemented for 24/7/365 operations. Heliian clearly stated that it could not be legally introduced since it is only for seasonal jobs. In fact it can be introduced: If the nature of the work in an establishment necessitates irregular hours due to seasonal or other factors. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/labour-standards/reports/hours-work.html https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/laws-regulations/labour/interpretations-policies/averaging-hours.html As stated she is in a union (CAW local 103), but the Canada Labour Code still applies equally to unionized work places. The standards in the collective bargaining agreement can differ, but at a minimum, must comply with the CLC. As with most pilots in our industry, the averaging agreement was in place when she was hired. Union or not an averaging agreement must be approved by a Labour Affairs Officers (LAOs) who ascertain whether the criteria that qualify an employer to adopt averaging have been met and whether averaging provisions are being correctly applied. Her hours are averaged over a 4 week period/160 hours. She is regularly required to works 15 hours daily. One recent shift was 21 hours with almost 80 hours worked that week. if you are really interested in their averaging agreement see the following link. Page 11 is where the rules for hours of service and O/T is discussed. While the agreement in the link expired Dec 2018, this averaging system has been in place for decades with no significant changes. https://www.sdc.gov.on.ca/sites/mol/drs/ca/Transport/482-15180-18%20(506-0024).pdf
  19. Without some sort of averaging agreement, you would be generally limited to a maximum of 48 hours of work per week...wouldn’t you? https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/employment-standards/federal-standards/work-hours.html Then what is the point of the CARs limit of 60 hours Flight Time in 7 days?
  20. My wife is a full time employee at a unionized transportation company (that is also funded by the Ontario government) and operates 24/7/365. They operate under an averaging agreement. Like our industry, Ontario Northland Rail is also federally regulated (and under the Jurisdiction of the Canada Labour Code).
  21. HAC comments on Draft advisory Circular submitted to TC http://news.mediaedge.ca/assets/Flight%20Time%20Submission_%20February%2015%202019%20FINAL.pdf
  22. In accordance with the Canada Labour Code it’s illegal not to pay overtime. Most private operators do,pay overtime, but it’s based on an averaging agreement over 52 weeks. So an employee needs to be paid OT when he works more than 2080 hours in a year (minus vacation, stats etc). Perhaps the question should be: Does ORNGE operate under an averaging agreement similar to almost all private operators? if they are paying huge amounts of OT, then I’d suggest that managent Is not managing as efficiently as they could be. This would hold true for any manager in any sector. Paying OT regularly indicates the justification for additional Human Resources and the hiring of additional pilots.
  23. Thank you for clarifying Brian. I’m not trying to read anything into your statements. Despite the fact you loath responding, you continue to bring up the ICAO minimum requirements (multiple posts).. I was just wondering your personal opinion On the matter because of your posts. 1) no comment 2) agreed. then a risk assessment should easily demonstrate an equivalent level of safety (in accordance with TCs own national objectives (and ICAOs)). 3) agreed. That’s why we directly challenged the the Chief of Standards and Director of Standards...the result is this AC. 4) Agreed.. but even the interpretation offered in this AC is a significant change from Flight time = Air time in that respect. Start and shut down for most operators and FTUs is less significant than the time spent on the ground on intermediate landings. I think Fred’s estimate of 10% difference between flight time and air time is at the low end of the spectrum. Start and shut down might account for 10% (as stated in the TC AC). The multiple landings on many flights accounts for a larger percentage. This is really evident when you use something like an Aerodyne system which calculates air time with a squat switch on the skid gear. Given this fact we have increased the difference between ICAO and Canadian licensing requirements with this AC. Have a nice weekend Brian
  24. Here’s what your successor at the HAC had to say about the new Draft Advisory Circular. http://mediaedgedigital.com/supplierinsights/hac/flight-time-v-air-time The communique was circulated yesterday. and asks for comments from members; apparently the deadline for comments was extended until today. That doesn’t give much time to comment but members are asked to submit comments to [email protected] No mention of Canada’s reduced licensing requirements vs. ICAO licensing requirements.
×
×
  • Create New...