Jump to content


Advanced Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by CD

  1. There was also this one in 2003: http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2003/a03w0194/a03w0194.asp " Fuel unporting is a phenomenon whereby fuel flows away from the fuel pick up in the fuel tank, and will result in a power loss or engine failure due to fuel starvation. Unporting is a function of the amount of fuel available (usually very small quantities), the attitude of the helicopter, and sloshing of the fuel in the tank."
  2. It looks like a new ARAC group in the U.S. will be looking at this issue: New Task Assignement: Rotorcraft Occupant Protection Working Group
  3. Info on UAV/UAS from TC, FAA, EASA and ICAO: TC - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle - UAV FAA - Unmanned Aircraft Systems - UAS EASA - Unmanned AIrcraft Systems (UAS) and Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) ICAO Cir 328 - Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)
  4. Speaking of duty time limitation, there is a CARAC meeting the week of June 28th where a Fatigue Management Working Group will be established. Although it appears that the group will be looking to develop recommendations for "operations", part of the Scope refers to the fatigue risk managment regulatory proposals for Part V, which are the limitations previously proposed for maintenance. CARAC NPA System: Technical Committee Meeting Details - Meeting Date: 2010-06-28 Terms of Reference - Fatigue Management Working Group
  5. Responses to Transportation Safety Board Recommendations - General Responses to Transportation Safety Board Recommendations - TSB Aviation Recommendations
  6. I guess that's maybe why they decided to withdraw the proposals and not bother with AME duty times...
  7. Now there is a great question. There was some discussion here back in 2004 on the regulations that the Department was bringing forward to address the fatigue issue in the maintenance field: Fatique Risk Management, duty times for engineers There were two regulatory proposals brought forward to the CARAC meeting in May 2005 and both were withdrawn: Special Joint Technical Committee Meeting on Maintenance and Manufacturing (M&M)-Part V and Commercial Air Service Operations (CASO)-Part VII May 31 - June 1, 2005 Now, it looks like it's possible that they aren't going to re
  8. Probably a good idea to pay attention to what's going on. Over on AvCanada, there are 22 pages of discussion (so far) and some of it is actually interesting: AvCanada: College of Pilots? The College is looking to assume responsibility for all Canadian working pilots:
  9. Although there is no Canadian aviation regulatory requirement to review the date of the car seat, here is some information for those of you who might own one: Consumer Information Notice 2007-C10 E - Children's car seats and booster cushions: How long are they safe?
  10. The existing regualtory requirements apply equally to all aircraft (other than a balloon, as noted): 605.22 - Seat and Safety Belt Requirements 605.26 - Use of Passenger Safety Belts and Restraint Systems Personally, I would recommend the use of a child restraint system for an infant: 551.501 - Child Restraint Systems 605.28 - Child Restraint System AC 605-003 - Child Restraint Systems
  11. As requested: AWM Chapter 537 - Airworthiness Standards Appliances 537.203 - Child Restraint System 537.203 is eventually going to be replaced with an updated list of acceptable standards in Chapter 551, including devices meeting TSO-C100b. The content of that standard can be reviewed at the following NPA link: NPA 2003-009 AWM Chapter 551, Section 501 (New Section) Child Restraint Systems Subpart 605 - Aircraft Requirements 605.28 - Child Restraint Systems Advisory Circular AC 605-003 - Child Restraint Systems Basically, if the child restraint is properly marked
  12. Why, through exemption of course: EXEMPTION FROM SUBPART 604 OF THE CANADIAN AVIATION REGULATIONS Some interesting reading here as well, although it is getting a bit dated now: REPORT ON AIR SAFETY AND SECURITY - Report of the Subcommittee on Transportation Safety of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications - June 2000
  13. I was going to say that I didn't think the generic manuals had a Chapter 9... Here is a link to what the 703 generic manual used to contain: Archived - 703 Company Operations Manual
  14. There was some discussion on that 'other' forum recently too: AvCanada: Failed to Report on Final?
  15. Bryan is based on the west coast but has conducted courses in Ontario as well. Not sure what his schedule is like but you can contact him from the following site: Aviation Egress Systems
  16. Nothing other than what is available on the website so far...
  17. Perhaps ... but many of the requirements outlined in the section you highlighted already occur, in one form or another, as part of the CARAC consultation process and the Service Charter. As for money or specific contracts, I would think that would likely be linked to broader government decisions. A good comparison would be to know what was provided to the CBAA? Whatever they received is likely to be what can be expected by other organizations proposing to provide oversight to their respective segments of the industry.
  18. Actually, the implementation dates for SMS are not impacted by the ongoing delay to the Aeronautics Act amendments, which have been in the pipeline since the late 90's. Implementation may, however, be delayed by the new CDSR requirements.
  19. Interesting... So are you (and by extension HEPAC) suggesting that there is no need to establish duty time limitations for maintenance personnel? Do you believe that fatigue management is a "dead issue" because fatigue is not a hazard that should be controlled? There have been many studies conducted indicating that fatigue is a legitimate hazard and it is somewhat surprising to hear that some in the industry may still need more evidence of the problem. How to mitigate the hazard is a worthy topic of discussion -- to suggest that yet more proof is required to determine if control of t
  20. Unfortuately, I do not think so. As I recall, those proposals were all withdrawn and I don't think that new ones have yet been brought forward...
  21. Discussed a few years ago here: Fatique Risk Management, duty times for engineers Not sure when new proposals might see the light of day...
  22. Much discussion on the new Ontario law here: Ontario Restricting CPL instruction Ontario Flying Schools Yell Mayday - Province Demands Fees; Already regulated by Transport Canada, schools say
  23. Here's the provision the pilot was charged with violating: 602.14 - Minimum Altitudes and Distances
  • Create New...