Ame Duty Time Limits

[twinstar_ca]

hey, BR... are you talking transwest formerly known as athabaska airways?? i'm thinking splitty is still thinking of the other transwest!!!

[Guest Bullet Remington]

hey, BR... are you talking transwest formerly known as athabaska airways?? i'm thinking splitty is still thinking of the other transwest!!!

 

Yeahm they partnered up with La Rounge Avaition a few yeards back. They do have fling wing as well as planks.

[splitpin]

hey, BR... are you talking transwest formerly known as athabaska airways?? i'm thinking splitty is still thinking of the other transwest!!!

 

You're right Twinny, I was. But I don't think Transwest Air has any 212's. Only one 205 and a bunch of little girls helicopters.

Even so. I can't understand why they havn't beat a path to my door and offered me $700/day, FULL expences, new truck with gas supplied, with 2 weeks on 4 weeks off (paid). After all, Engineers of my caliber are few and far between. There!! That's my crock-of-shyte for the day. I'll now go back to my chair in the sunshine and enjoy my retirement! :up: :up:

John Nixon

 

http://www.transwestair.com/services/helicopter

 

[offset]

My two cents,

 

From my point of view you can't legislate common sense. (stole that one from a friend) If your to tired to safely do your job. Then put your tools away. The fact those of us that work VFR bush operations we don't have the luxury of a duty day.

When I'm at a remote base or a camp I am expected to answer the phone take bookings maintain op's gear and fix the camp generator if I want the coffee maker to work.

So having all those duties during the day I have a machine sometimes multiple machines to maintain. All this, sleep, eat, and rub one out in a 24 hr period.

 

The pilot has the luxury of working set hours and pulling the pin when the clock runs out. I think that was a huge step foward for safety in this indusry when it came down the pipe.

 

The enviroment in which I find myself the last few years has put the responsibility squarely on my shoulders. The rotation I work is the one I choose. None of this set days off and knowing where I'm going to be a month in advance. I have enough experience on enough types to go where I want and work for who I choose. So I must want and like it this way or else I'm just a sadist. But if we work in this industry for long enough we have to be a little sadistic to stay with it.

Some operators have a better system than others when it comes to scheduling and manpower they have to make it a priority and usually. When it cost them $ it gets put on the back burner until its mandatory. ie SMS and the lack of leadership from the operators on that topic but thats another thread.

 

No way Transport is going to be able to control this! Somebody please explain to me how this would work. I think it would force operators to have qualified guys in the wings to cover duty times for Engineers. REALLY you've got to be kidding that directly affects the amount of Flight pay I earn. When you screw with my paycheck then it gets personal.

Having said all that I would embrace a system in which I can have more time off.

But I would like to see the draft for legislation of this type before they put it into force I think we all would have some opinions on that.

 

Ohh got to go there goes the phone/fax/generator again...

 

offset

 

[dimit]

I'm pretty much with you, Offset. We're supposed to be grownups and highly trained professionals, and therefore able to make good decisions. If it weren't for the unscrupulous trying to pressure the vulnerable, personal responsibility would be the way to go!

 

Who else has taken the time to contact the authorities on this issue? Any results?

 

DM

[Zazu]

TC can legislate anything they want. But while "what happens in the bush stays in the bush" can have it's advantages it can also have it's disadvantages. Your clients will set the schedule and the standard ie if it ain't fixed they'll boot ya! Not to mention their subcontractors. Get the "Money" on board and you have a chance. Don't forget to get the subcontractors on board though too...ie seismic companies, drillers and don't forget Forrestry. All these guys are on the payroll and anytime a machine goes AOG their bills go up as does the pressure on the one guy doing the midnight run to fix it...

 

Be carefull what you ask for though. The oil companies got a guy a few years back that told us that you needed a 1000 hours to fly a 44 into a lease site...They listened in the interests of safety.

 

I like to think I was the first guy in line concerned for my wrenches welfare, and mine. And I know it's an issue. But the fact is that you are going to have to get eveyone to pay more and wait more for it to happen. How you fix that I don't have the foggiest.

 

Regards and good luck...

Good on ya Love Glove

 

Zazu

 

 

[CD]

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

 

FATIGUE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP

TERMS OF REFERENCE

 

BACKGROUND

 

Transport Canada’s current flight and duty time (FDT) regulations were published in 1996. The requirements are based on an agreement made by the Commercial Air Service Operations Working Group in 1994. Since then, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has amended Annex 6 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation to include a series of recommendations for developing FDT requirements. While Transport Canada remains in compliance with the Annex, a review of the recommended practices and the latest science on fatigue is required to ensure that Transport Canada’s regulatory framework is current as it relates to this subject.

 

Since the FDT requirements were published, Transport Canada along with the government of Canada has shifted its approach to regulatory development from being prescriptive to being performance-based. This shift has provided a more, output-based approach to rule making that has facilitated the development of a risk management-based approach to safety and compliance management. In addition, advocates of fatigue management are looking beyond the prescriptive FDT approach to fatigue management and are promoting a performance-based approach to managing fatigue-related hazards through a fatigue risk management program (FRMP).

 

PURPOSE

 

This purpose of the Working Group is two-fold:

1. To review the existing FDT requirements in the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) using the current ICAO FDT recommended practices for potential updates to the Canadian requirements.

2. To assess the feasibility of implementing an alternate regulatory framework that would manage crew fatigue related to flight operations, using fatigue risk management principles.

 

OBJECTIVES AND GOALS

 

The Working Group will provide the Executive Director of the CARs Part VII Technical Committee with a report that identifies variances between the CARs and ICAO recommendations related to FDT and that proposes amendments to the CARs.

 

The Working Group will make recommendations to the Executive Director of the CARs Part VII Technical Committee regarding the development of an alternate regulatory framework that would manage crew fatigue related to flight operations through a systems approach.

 

The Working Group will base its work on scientific data that is defensible and readily available. In addition, the Working Group will consider the work already completed by Transport Canada in regards to FRMS, as well as the regulatory proposals of other States in an effort to adopt and harmonize best practices with those States, wherever possible.

 

SCOPE

 

The Working Group will:

· Review the existing FDT requirements in the CARs, the ICAO fatigue management standards and recommendations, and best practices employed by other regulatory authorities.

· Develop a set of recommendations with respect to FDTs, rest periods, standby duty, transmeridian travel, and any other considerations as per ICAO Annex 6.

· Review the FRMP NPA to CARs Part V, ICAO’s proposed FRMP recommendations, and other States’ FRMP regulations to determine the basic components of the FRMP.

· Develop a set of recommendations with respect to FRMP.

· Review alternate fatigue management methodologies and develop recommendations in respect to their adoption, where appropriate.

· Review existing fatigue data collection models and scientific data that support the Working Group’s proposals and provide the basis for developing guidance material on fatigue.

· Any other work deemed necessary to adequately complete the project.

 

DELIVERABLES

 

The Working Group leader will provide a bilingual final report in hardcopy and electronic format that contains:

· a set of recommendations with respect to implementing fatigue management programs within the context of the Canadian operating environment;

· a list of verifiable data sources related to fatigue; and

· guidance in relation to a methodology for gathering scientific data related to fatigue that is usable in all organizations.

[snark]

Sounds touchy-feely, and likely to put anyone in non-conformance for having a license in the first place. I hope one day to see a real set duty day for an engineer. This is the hours you can work, during this time. Beyond that get more personnel. probably won't ever happen though as too many owners sit on the HAC style lobby boards and complian if they were forced into it they could'nt operate anymore.

[splitpin]

probably won't ever happen though as too many owners sit on the HAC style lobby boards and complian if they were forced into it they could'nt operate anymore.

 

Been saying that for years---- and years----- and year----- and yea----- and ye-----yawn---

[212wrench]

My two bits, I am not going to put much faith in anything that CARAC is going to mandate. I know they dictate what is going to be in the CARS but I know they don't have my best interests in mind.