Flight Time Vs. Air Time Personal Logbook

[Freewheel]

Appatently HQ has advised HAC that they weren’t aware industry was interpreting Flight Time to be anything other than Air Tine for skid equipped helicopters. Odd since the director of standards issued a Policy Letter in 2005, that remained in effect until 2011, that advised pilots, operators and inspectors to do just that...

As I inderstand it, the vast majority of FTUs are providing students with training towards licensing Flight time requirements under CARs part 4 using ICAO (rotors start to rotors stopped) and TC is issuing licences under the same premise. I guess we are supposed to beleive all inspectors just didn’t notice...

The likely answer is that TC has been choosing to enforce something other than what the CARs say, inspectors have been “looking the other way” for licensing requirements. Either that, or Flight time isn’t the same as air time...either way,; TC wants industry to comply with what they say...not what the actual CARs say.

i beleive Brian Jenner used to call this “CARs plus”

The problem: “it is contrary to principles that sustain our system of government. First of all because the Canadian Charter of Rights guarantees that every individual in Canada is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law no matter where they are.  Secondly, because the regulations impose on regional authorities the obligation to issue or amend documents based on compliance with CARs, as written.”  - Brian Jenner.

CARs also impose on TC the obligation to enforce the CARs AS WRITTEN.

The fact that they can’t answer basic questions or issue an advisory circular over a 6 month period suggests they wish to continue with this unethical behaviour and are still trying to come up with more BS that they think will pass a basic sniff test.

Good luck with that TC...

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.

[Freewheel]

If Flight Time is the same as Air Time, in this case, TC has been issuing licences using “CARs minus” (and enforcing “CARs MINUS” for all Flight Training Units in the country).

[gmcmachz]

I will just throw this out there for everyone to Digest..While I agree that there are some instances where the pilot sits at the controls of an aircraft for longer periods than they are actually in the air. this is not the norm, and I would think that if you were to average the amount of time a pilot spends behind the controls but not in the air you would find that it is below 10%.. I could be wrong, but from my time in industry this is what I see.. So I will ask all those that believe that "flight time" should go in your personal logbook this question...... Would you want someone who just received their licence,  to fly your aircraft only to realize that they were trained by a poor organization.  Who to inflate profit kept the students on the ground running for excessive periods allowing the student to build "flight time" towards their licence, so by the time they had their 100 hrs they actually only had 70-80 hrs in air????????  I know there are some that will use the arguement that there is no extra profit to be made if TC forces companies to use Flight time in the tech records of the aircraft.. But that will never happen.. It is not the rule for fixed wing or wheel equiped helicopters, and therefore will never stand up to be a stand alone rule for skid equipped ships.......

[Blackmac]

I don't care, do you?????   

ICAO is the boss for aviation regulations, not Transport Canada Aviation.  

ICAO is AUDITED by ISO 9000

Transport Canada Aviation is a department of the Federal Government and the Parliment of Canada.

Transport Canada has been screwing up and going downhill since the early fifties and is in need of a complete OVERHAUL.

If one uses The Worldwide Safety Management System as an Auditing Body, the House of Parliment is the governing body under the Inspector General to authorize a complete Auditing of Transport Canada Aviation and hopefully, it will be brought in line with its MANDATE.

Most of the problems can be eliminated by changing the whole structure and using ISO 9000 as an inspection Authority for transport and less BS for the industry.

IT CAN BE DONE, transfer the existing department to a Crown Corporation as was done with NAV Canada.

I actually worked on the original RFP for NAV Canada.

Nav Canada is one of the best Crown Corporation in Canada.  

[Freewheel]

12 hours ago, Blackmac said:

I don't care, do you?????   

ICAO is the boss for aviation regulations, not Transport Canada Aviation.   

I think you do care as demonstrated by your numerous posts in this forum.

Apparently others do too. I haven’t seen to many Canadian Helicopter forums with over 100,000 views. Has anyone else?

if ICAO was the boss the requirements for a Canadian commercial licence would be more like 150+ hours Flight Time and TC wouldn’t be  interpreting Flight Time to be the same as Air Time.

For the most part, I tend to agree with the rest of the post.

Mind you, I wasn’t around in the 50s...

[simpleton]

On ‎7‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 4:14 PM, Blackmac said:

I don't care, do you?????   

ICAO is the boss for aviation regulations, not Transport Canada Aviation.  

ICAO is AUDITED by ISO 9000

Transport Canada Aviation is a department of the Federal Government and the Parliment of Canada.

Transport Canada has been screwing up and going downhill since the early fifties and is in need of a complete OVERHAUL.

If one uses The Worldwide Safety Management System as an Auditing Body, the House of Parliment is the governing body under the Inspector General to authorize a complete Auditing of Transport Canada Aviation and hopefully, it will be brought in line with its MANDATE.

Most of the problems can be eliminated by changing the whole structure and using ISO 9000 as an inspection Authority for transport and less BS for the industry.

IT CAN BE DONE, transfer the existing department to a Crown Corporation as was done with NAV Canada.

I actually worked on the original RFP for NAV Canada.

Nav Canada is one of the best Crown Corporation in Canada.  

"I don't care, do you?????"   

Who knows what goes on in your head.

"ICAO is the boss for aviation regulations, not Transport Canada Aviation."

I can assure you we answer to Transport Canada, not ICAO

"ICAO is AUDITED by ISO 9000"

Whippity do...

"Transport Canada Aviation is a department of the Federal Government and the Parliment of Canada."

Thanks Captain Obvious.

"Transport Canada has been screwing up and going downhill since the early fifties and is in need of a complete OVERHAUL."

Ummm.....generalize much

"If one uses The Worldwide Safety Management System as an Auditing Body, the House of Parliment is the governing body under the Inspector General to authorize a complete Auditing of Transport Canada Aviation and hopefully, it will be brought in line with its MANDATE."

Bahahahahahahaha....thanks you for making me laugh

"Most of the problems can be eliminated by changing the whole structure and using ISO 9000 as an inspection Authority for transport and less BS for the industry."

Yeah sure it would.

"IT CAN BE DONE, transfer the existing department to a Crown Corporation as was done with NAV Canada."

Ummm......Nav Canada is not a Crown Corporation

"I actually worked on the original RFP for NAV Canada."

Neat

"Nav Canada is one of the best Crown Corporation in Canada. "

Except that it's, you know, not a Crown Corporation.

[Freewheel]

Simpleton  is right. NavCanada is a fully privatized, non-profit organization.

I’m not naive enough to beleive it would happen, but Maybe that’s the way to go for TC to bring some accountability back.

The flight time issue, and how TC is handling of it is just one example of a much larger issue. The lack of accountability is the root cause. An advisory circular does not address the root cause and won’t fix the bigger problem.

Let’s ask the Auditor General:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4685726

The AG does audit TC. The last time a scathing report identified many findings which they generally ignore.

 

[Blackmac]

Home > About Us > Vision, Mission & Objectives

Our Vision, Mission, and Objectives

Our Vision

NAV CANADA's vision is to be the world's most respected ANS:

• in the eyes of the public for our safety record;

• in the eyes of our customers for our fee levels, customer service, efficiency and modern technology; and

• in the eyes of our employees for establishing a motivating and satisfying workplace with competitive compensation and challenging career opportunities.

Our Mission

To be a world leader in the provision of safe, efficient and cost-effective air navigation services on a sustainable basis while providing a professional and fulfilling work environment for our employees.

Our Overarching Objectives

The Company will achieve its Mission by: 

1. Being amongst the safest ANSPs worldwide and driving continuous improvement in the reduction of operational safety risks;

2. Maintaining ANS customer service charges among the lowest of major ANSPs worldwide, and ensuring over the long term that the growth in operating costs does not exceed the growth in traffic; 

3. Providing value to our customers by contributing to improving their operational efficiency through the use of innovative technology and effective delivery of service, domestically and internationally; 

4. Having a work environment which places NAV CANADA amongst the best employers in Canada; 

5. Introducing measurable projects and initiatives which support a  reduction of the environmental footprint of the aviation industry wherever feasible.  

 

Simpliton, as usual, does not provide any solution to the problem of Transport Canada Aviation governance or lack thereof.

I made an error in stating that Nav Canada was a crown corporation, but as such is an extremely well run non-profit entity.

The Mission Statement Of TCA seems to be to confuse aviation industry as much as possible and since de-regulation has only increased its effort.

As TCA de-regulated the industry as a whole, it left the lower cast, small operators, to fend for themselves. 

THE ACTUAL REQUIREMENT FOR DE-REGULATION WAS THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY, SO THEY COULD COMPETE ON AN INTERNATIONAL BASIS.

TO THIS DAY TCA DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THE SMALL OPERATOR  IN CANADA ONLY, AS A SEPARATE ENTITY, AND HAS TO FOLLOW THE RULES APPLICABLE TO THE AIRLINES. 

CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FORUM ( 5-07-18)

 As usual, they ask for information and or help in passenger complaints and defer to another department. (Trump Doctrine)

They actually or so they say, are concerned with pax carrying oversized luggage and putting same in overhead bins, airline problem, but no enforcement.

The aircraft are becoming sardine cans as far as the narrow aisles and seat pitch is concerned. Again the (Trump Doctrine), CTA cannot do anything about that, it's a TCA problem.

WELL, as far as I am concerned certification of any aircraft flying in Canada is done by Transport Canada, and if so, certification for seat pitch and aisles width should be realistic and not governed by outside influences such as how many sardines you could put in a sardine can. Go back to the VICOUNT days re: seating/aisles width.

Transport Canada Aviation as a whole takes advice from the Transportation Safety Board, Canadian Transportation Agency but actually ignores most of them for political reason or whatever "RoketMan" can think of. 

SHOULD YOU WONDER WHY TRANSPORT CANADA AVIATION NEEDS AN OVERHAUL?????????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABOUT US

• Who We Are
• What We Do
• Vision, Mission & ObjectivesCurrently selected
• Governance
• Our Executive Team
• Investor Relations
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Environment

    

[simpleton]

50 minutes ago, Blackmac said:

TO THIS DAY TCA DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THE SMALL OPERATOR  IN CANADA ONLY, AS A SEPARATE ENTITY, AND HAS TO FOLLOW THE RULES APPLICABLE TO THE AIRLINES. 

CAR's 702, 703, 704, 705

Lol, Christ you are good for comic relief.

[Freewheel]

On 7/6/2018 at 2:26 PM, simpleton said:

CAR's 702, 703, 704, 705

Lol, Christ you are good for comic relief.

“ICAO AUDIT OF TRANSPORT CANADA CIVIL AVIATION OVERSIGHT - APRIL 2005

3.2.7 Adequate aircraft operation regulations have been established in the CARs, Part VII ─ Commercial Air Services (CARs 700 to 706) which contains seven subparts: General, Foreign Air Operators, Aerial Work, Air Taxi Operations, Commuter Operations, Airline Operations, and Aircraft Maintenance Requirements for Air Operators. A set of Commercial Air Services Standards (CASS 720 to 726) complement the CARs, which are incorporated by reference into the regulations. These standards provide the detailed requirements in the various areas of aircraft operations. The CARs and CAS are kept up to date on a quarterly basis. The regulatory structure is complemented by policy letters and guidance material such as policies, procedures, circulars and manuals.”

https://cfapp.icao.int/fsix/AuditReps/CSAfinal/Canada%20final%20report%202-2-06.pdf

Coincidentally the very same year General Aviation POLICY LETTER 2005-02 was issued by TC stating:

Action

In order to clarify the interpretation of the definition of "flight time" with respect to helicopters as it applies to flight crew licensing, "flight time" shall be as it is set out in Annex 1: "The total time from the moment a helicopter's rotor blades start turning until the moment the helicopter finally comes to rest at the end of the flight, and the rotor blades are stopped."