Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
OGEgirl

Flight Time Vs. Air Time Personal Logbook

Recommended Posts

Maybe the hour requirements keep going up because pilots with the required hours can't do the job because they are logging time sitting on the ground???

 

Regardless, that doesn't change what the LAW says and the Law hasn't changed. By my count Transport Canada have offered 3 different conflicting "official" interpretations of the definition for flight time in the past 15 years (yet the CARs remain unchanged)

 

1) flight time = air time (COM statement that TC distributed) or skids up to skids down

2) as per ICAO (GAPL 2005-02) or "rotors start turning to rotors stop turning" - GAPL 2005-02 is copied and pasted in the first post in this forum by OGEgirl

3) from first lift off to last landing (CAIRS responses from Director standards and confirmed by Yves Lemieux)

 

No wonder we are all confused...to top it off they meant to cancel 2005-02 in 2009 but forgot until 2011.

 

While I don't agree with your assumption, who really cares how they want it done as long as it is consistent for all Heli pilots...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the above reason and a few others is why we should be going to a skills based assessment for determining if someone can do a certain job like landing in a gas lease, fighting fire, hover exit, etc.. It for the most part takes padding your log book out of the equation. Hours really don't tell the whole story.

 

W.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that won't work....many with "3000 hours" of lease to lease experience now probably would not pass,,,,although this is meant to be humorous it is also true that have seen first hand a pilot with this experience not able to work front end seismic in the same area where the 3000 hours were attained. Padding of logbooks by putting in idling time is the surest way for a pilot to have his peers think he/she does not have the skills. Agree though that there can be methods installed into mentoring which allow for new pilots to break into this work without huge hours. Things such as pilot operators for example,,,why not have a second lower time pilot shadow the experienced fellow for length of time he or she is safe? No reason R44 cannot carry two pilots is there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3) from first lift off to last landing (CAIRS responses from Director standards and confirmed by Yves Lemieux)

 

 

Look at Yves Lemieux interpretation of carried on luggage. I think we could all agree that doesn’t work for heli ops or if he’s right I guess there will be a huge change to our operations.

 

 

 

For the above reason and a few others is why we should be going to a skills based assessment for determining if someone can do a certain job like landing in a gas lease, fighting fire, hover exit, etc.. It for the most part takes padding your logbook out of the equation. Hours really don't tell the whole story.

 

W.

 

 

 

Very true and I hope all employers’ start doing this. Sadly they wont know till they have the person there in which they would have already picked the person who looks better on paper. Then there will be a ton of time and money wasted on training someone who has a bunch of hours sitting on the ground, when they could have hired someone with less hours who has more time actually flying the helicopter.

 

I have never questioned someone on there hours when they say how many hours they have until this thread has started. In the last year I have seen some interesting things with people claiming to have all these hours and can’t do the job.

 

All and all I don’t have much to loose either way as my logbook will be correct or I will gain a ton of hours till then I will wait till transport makes a decision to which ever way we shall log our time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I don't agree with your assumption, who really cares how they want it done as long as it is consistent for all Heli pilots...

It's not that I don't care...I just think that the most important thing is that the law is interpreted, applied and enforced equally with all individuals.

 

Otherwise you end up with individuals benefitting under the law, and others who aren't receiving equal protection from the law. This is contrary to the basic freedoms spelled out in our charter of rights and the principles that sustain our system of government.

 

In my opinion, ensuring the law is enforced consistently, is much more important than what method we ultimately use to log flight time...this is the much larger issues and it goes on all the time. Just as others have pointed out, have a look at the Carry-on Baggage Requirements and the new and extreme interpretations being offered by several TC Representatives; not just Yves Lemieux.

 

In the "Flight Time" case, the Director of Standards Jacqueline Booth offered the first clarification in her CAIRS response; later Cheif of Standards Arlo Speer was involved in the discussions along with Yves Lemieux (who further reiterated Jacquelines interpretation (3) was correct). (Well actually Mr. Lemieux first, responded in writing saying that interpretations 1) and 3) were consistent with each other...when pressed he folowed up in writing to confirm that they were not consistent and 3) was the correct interpretation..LOL.). The point is, these may be organizational issues that should not be hung on one person.

 

There were also other inspectors and TC personel from HeadQuarters that were adament that Flight time equals Air Time. So...if they don't know, HOW ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO KNOW?

 

If we are going to go with method 1), I think we are required to file a "difference" with the ICAO Convention (which I beleive is required by member states).

 

It sounds like whatever side of the fence you are sitting on, most agree, there can be a significant difference in flight time depending on whether you use method 1)Flight Time =Air Time, as opposed to, 2) ICAO - rotors start/rotors stop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To keep things equal for operators you have to take in consideration of operating costs. An operator who uses the method of what goes into the aircraft JLB goes into your personal will be lower then one that uses the other method. Pilots will be timing out faster creating that operator to have a larger staff, more frequent crew changes and so on to do the same job.

There is a lot more to it then just pilots benefitting to getting more hours.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To keep things equal for operators you have to take in consideration of operating costs. An operator who uses the method of what goes into the aircraft JLB goes into your personal will be lower then one that uses the other method. Pilots will be timing out faster creating that operator to have a larger staff, more frequent crew changes and so on to do the same job.

There is a lot more to it then just pilots benefitting to getting more hours.

 

EXACTLY!

Flip the coin: the cost of getting a licence at most Flight Training Units goes up by about 20-30 percent if you use interpretation 1).

 

Yet...the CARs definition is the same for all of us and has never been amended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of this talk about costs should matter to Transport Canada Civil Aviation; their mandate is aviation safety and ensuring Regulatory Compliance in an impartial manner.

 

The regulations impose on Regional authorities the obligation to issue or amend documents based on compliance with the CARs, as written. Respect for Democracy and the law is a condition of any TC employees employment.

 

So what is taking so long to clarify the law (when they acknowledge widespread confusion created by their own organization)? I recently had a discussion with a Cabin Safety Inspector that stated on numerous occasions : "You must be compliant" (no matter what). I guess that only applies in some cases.

 

When this type of thing starts to become "common practice", you can't help but start questioning the integrity of the organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations OGEgirl. The forum you started is now the most viewed forum on the Vertical Forums Website...and it took two years less than the forum it passed (Cougar Crash)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I assume you were more interested in receiving clarity and answers (as opposed to notoriety).

Over 32000 views (not bad considering there are only approximately 5000 Heli-pilots in Canada) and 26o+ replies, yet as an industry it seems we are all as confused as ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...