Flight Time Vs. Air Time Personal Logbook

[Blackmac]

22 hours ago, Blackmac said:

It would be helpful, if you explained your rationale for such a statement or are you with the plaintiff or TC????

If you read the Judges Summary,  you would notice that for some reason he seemed to take the plaintiff arguments for fact, when in fact they could say what they want and back it up with BS.

ICAO terms are not recognized in the CARS as stated by Transport Canada.

All that the judge had to do was have Transport Canada go into Mustangs office and cross check invoice charges with actual AIRTIME entered in the aircraft Technical Log

(airframe & engine(s), if they are equal to the time recorded in Journey Log for AIRTIME.

If Flight Time was used and is in excess of AIRTIME, the plaintiff is at fault.

Actual Auditing by Transport Canada leaves a lot to be desired. When was the last time the plaintiff was AUDITED??????

 

[simpleton]

What the **** are you talking about?

 

The court case Freefall linked to was Wildcat Helicopters. Where is Mustang coming into this?

 

 

[Blackmac]

1 hour ago, simpleton said:

What the **** are you talking about?

 

The court case Freefall linked to was Wildcat Helicopters. Where is Mustang coming into this?

 

 

So, I made a mistake on the name of the company ( I am thinking of buying one) I apologize To Mustang.

What is being said by me applies to the Industry as whole and from now on I will call the plaintiff,   Simpleton Helicopters.

[simpleton]

Reading your ramblings, I think the industry would be better off if you owned nothing....

[Freewheel]

On 2017-12-05 at 0:04 PM, simpleton said:

The Judge wasn't wrong at all.

At least 1 TC Ontario inspector disagrees. This was sent out to 7 Ontario Helicopter operators last week:

Gentlemen

 Please see the email chain below and the attached official interpretation of “air time” versus “flight time” for skid equipped helicopters.  To the point, air time and flight time are interpreted to be the same in skid equipped helicopters, this applies to all skid equipped helicopter operations.  Therefore there should be no difference in values entered in the Journey Log Book air time column from those entered into Flight and Duty Records, Pilot Training Records (CAR Subpart 7 operations) and Pilot Training Records (PTRs – CAR Subpart 4 operations) or any other regulatory requirement to record “Flight Time”.

 Please comply with this interpretation from receipt of this email  if you have not already done so.

[simpleton]

When isn't anything out of Ontario messed up....

[Blackmac]

On 12/16/2017 at 8:53 AM, Freewheel said:

At least 1 TC Ontario inspector disagrees. This was sent out to 7 Ontario Helicopter operators last week:

Gentlemen

 Please see the email chain below and the attached official interpretation of “air time” versus “flight time” for skid equipped helicopters.  To the point, air time and flight time are interpreted to be the same in skid equipped helicopters, this applies to all skid equipped helicopter operations.  Therefore there should be no difference in values entered in the Journey Log Book air time column from those entered into Flight and Duty Records, Pilot Training Records (CAR Subpart 7 operations) and Pilot Training Records (PTRs – CAR Subpart 4 operations) or any other regulatory requirement to record “Flight Time”.

 Please comply with this interpretation from receipt of this email  if you have not already done so.

Freewheel: I would like to see a copy of that email, if possible. Finally one inspector who knows what's cooking.  We need more of the same, somebody who thinks logically.

Thanks be the Lord.

[Freewheel]

On 2017-12-17 at 3:52 PM, simpleton said:

When isn't anything out of Ontario messed up....

Not much to debate there

Doesn’t seem to have much of of an effect on the flow of out of province helicopters into Ontario 

Precisely why it’s Federal Jurisdiction

[Freewheel]

On 2017-12-16 at 8:53 AM, Freewheel said:

At least 1 TC Ontario inspector disagrees. This was sent out to 7 Ontario Helicopter operators last week:

Gentlemen

 Please see the email chain below and the attached official interpretation of “air time” versus “flight time” for skid equipped helicopters.  To the point, air time and flight time are interpreted to be the same in skid equipped helicopters, this applies to all skid equipped helicopter operations.  Therefore there should be no difference in values entered in the Journey Log Book air time column from those entered into Flight and Duty Records, Pilot Training Records (CAR Subpart 7 operations) and Pilot Training Records (PTRs – CAR Subpart 4 operations) or any other regulatory requirement to record “Flight Time”.

 Please comply with this interpretation from receipt of this email  if you have not already done so.

December 11/17 reply:

That’s quite interesting. Thank you for providing me with enough info to answer most of our safety survey questions on behalf of TC. We will take this into consideration.

Question 3 is still a problem for me though. Do you know if TC AOHS plans on changing its recent interpretation of when an aircraft is “in-operation” under the Canada Labour Code?

Because, the answer to question 3 is currently false (in accordance with TC/AOHS & Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) - Labour Program interpretation and TCCA’s interpretation of Flight Time). Is that the position TC is taking?

If the CARs are meant to be interpreted in plain language (which they are: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/geninfo-generalinfo-116.htm#2_ ) and Labour Canada is “committed to providing clear and consistent interpretation of its regulations in plain language to enable businesses to meet regulatory requirements” then there is an issue in my opinion. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/laws-regulations/labour/interpretation.html

Q3. Applicable Definitions

"in operation" is described in paragraph 128(5)(  of Part II of the Canada Labour Code. An aircraft is "in operation" from the time it first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking offin Canada, until it comes to rest at a destination in Canada. 

June 2016 TC AOHS Interpretation: Confirmation has been received from ESDC-Labour that for Aviation Occupational Health and Safety purposes, a helicopter would be considered to be “in-operation” the entire time its engines are running and blades are turning, for the purposes of taking off. As a result, the Aviation Occupational Health and Safety Program would have jurisdiction over the on-board employees during the entire time the aircraft is in operation

"flight time" - means the time from the moment an aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking off until the moment it comes to rest at the end of the flight; (temps de vol)

Based solely on the above 2 definitions (as written), is the following statement true or false for a domestic flight in a skid helicopter?

Time "in operation" = Flight Time          

A3.TRUE/FALSE  ?

Really?

Given the responsibility of the employer to provide training to employees to ensure they understand the applicability/Jurisdiction  of the Transport Canada Aviation Occupational Health and Safety Regulations (vs. ESDC Labour program OHS Regulations), I feel there is still conflicting information coming from TC. The definitions are the same, but interpreted differently…We will also raise these concerns with ESDC Labour Program when we file our Hazard Report.

 With regards to question 7:

 Can you confirm that this “Interpretation Bulletin” is being distributed with the same vigour Nationwide?

 As we’ve seen in the Wildcat c Ellis, Supreme Court of BC Case, it appears that some operators from other regions have been held to a different standard by TC. It appears that it may have even influenced the judge’s ruling in the case. https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc2214/2016bcsc2214.pdf

Is there any intention to publish actual guidance material such as an Advisory Circular?

·         This being directly related to numerous licensing requirements under the CARs, it is not just an issue for Ontario Commercial Air Operators and Flight Training Units, but applies to 604 Private Operators and all General Aviation Helicopter Operations Nationwide. Clearly the confusion is widespread across all sectors of the “helicopter world” in Canada.

 Kind Regards,

 

[Brian Jenner]

On 12/6/2017 at 12:39 PM, Blackmac said:

If you read the Judges Summary,  you would notice that for some reason he seemed to take the plaintiff arguments for fact, when in fact they could say what they want and back it up with BS.

ICAO terms are not recognized in the CARS as stated by Transport Canada.

All that the judge had to do was have Transport Canada go into Mustangs office and cross check invoice charges with actual AIRTIME entered in the aircraft Technical Log

(airframe & engine(s), if they are equal to the time recorded in Journey Log for AIRTIME.

If Flight Time was used and is in excess of AIRTIME, the plaintiff is at fault.

Actual Auditing by Transport Canada leaves a lot to be desired. When was the last time the plaintiff was AUDITED??????

 

Invoicing has nothing to do with « flight time » « air time »; it must conform to tarrif which must comply with the National Transportation Act not the Aeronautics Act.