Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Freewheel

Carry-On Baggage Requirements

Recommended Posts

Items held on laps or loose on the floor is not considered as meeting the requirements to be stowed or restrained.

 

Does the former include infants? (I lost the will to live on trying to read I it all) I remember once that the guys at Niagara tried to load 10 people into my 407 once - 5 were infants on laps with no restraint! (We didn't go)

 

As for the latter, the last time I rode Air Canada, my carryon was in fact behind my feet, and it usually is on every trip I do. Nobody has pulled me up on it yet.

 

Phil

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" I lost the will to live on trying to read I it all"...yes I know and I apologize for that...but TC's inability to respond in a timely fashion leads to this...also the fact that whenever an issue arises they pass it of to someone else doesn't help matters. I wonder sometimes if "giving someone the runaround" is part of their initial job training. Hardly something you would expect from an organization that is fostering a reporting culture and understands the need for good relations with industry stakeholders.

 

Lately I have been questioning the "integrity" of the organization and some individuals... It seems they rather allow this confusion to exist than actually admit error on their part. Unfortunately, they are not fulfilling their industry responsibilities of monitoring compliance; as a result, it is impossible for operators like us to ensure we fulfil our compliance responsibilities. Next thing you know I'll be getting another finding...maybe that is why they like the confusion...it makes concocting findings much easier.

 

Perhaps the only way to force them to deal with issues to is to challenge them and force them to take enforcement action; then fight it through the Transportation Appeal Tribunal. As ridiculous as it sounds; how else am i supposed to get answers. I have been advised of a future PVI and Cabin Safety will be attending. We are considering securing purses to the seats with seat belts for the ramp inspection...if a finding is made we will refuse to submit a corrective action plan.

 

By the way, I am also still waiting for approval of our COM and Safety Briefing Videos which I will require to be compliant very soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" I lost the will to live on trying to read I it all"...yes I know and I apologize for that...but TC's inability to respond in a timely fashion leads to this...also the fact that whenever an issue arises they pass it of to someone else doesn't help matters. I wonder sometimes if "giving someone the runaround" is part of their initial job training. Hardly something you would expect from an organization that is fostering a reporting culture and understands the need for good relations with industry stakeholders.

 

Lately I have been questioning the "integrity" of the organization and some individuals... It seems they rather allow this confusion to exist than actually admit error on their part. Unfortunately, they are not fulfilling their industry responsibilities of monitoring compliance; as a result, it is impossible for operators like us to ensure we fulfil our compliance responsibilities. Next thing you know I'll be getting another finding...maybe that is why they like the confusion...it makes concocting findings much easier.

 

Perhaps the only way to force them to deal with issues to is to challenge them and force them to take enforcement action; then fight it through the Transportation Appeal Tribunal. As ridiculous as it sounds; how else am i supposed to get answers. I have been advised of a future PVI and Cabin Safety will be attending. We are considering securing purses to the seats with seat belts for the ramp inspection...if a finding is made we will refuse to submit a corrective action plan.

 

By the way, I am also still waiting for approval of our COM and Safety Briefing Videos which I will require to be compliant very soon.

 

This sh!t is so ludicrous. Have you given any thought to going public ? With the Lac Megantic accident, the spotlight is on TC. You probably wouldn't have too much trouble finding a journalist interested in showing how disconnected TC inspectors are from reality and issues of real concern for the industry...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is another example of fix wing standards leaking through to rotary operations. The landing and take off phase differs in that the aircraft, in the case of a helicopter is not hurtling away from or towards the ground at 150 knots. Any incident at this speed can make even a flight supplement a hazardous projectile. All the bits spinning around up top are the greatest threat to passengers and crew during the landing and take off phase of rotary wing flight. The emphasis should be on the crew stowing all their equipment properly before the take off and landing phase of flight. The crew compartment contains exposed flight controls which can easily be comprised by loose equipment. When I look at the interpretation of the regulations being proposed in this forum, I would think it necessary to secure passengers headsets with duct tape.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems they rather allow this confusion to exist than actually admit error on their part.

 

It sure looks like it.

 

"Losing the will to live" BTW was not targeted at you :) You have my every sympathy. If it's any consolation, it's worse in Europe. In fact, it's an international joke.

 

Phil

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This #### is so ludicrous. Have you given any thought to going public ? With the Lac Megantic accident, the spotlight is on TC. You probably wouldn't have too much trouble finding a journalist interested in showing how disconnected TC inspectors are from reality and issues of real concern for the industry...

As a matter of fact we have given the going public idea some thought. To some extent this was reasoning for posting on this forum . I have actually had several communications with various media outlets about the safety issues that affect our industry. in many cases, these organizations have contacted us wanting to discuss safety in the Canadian helicopter industry. These calls are more frequent these days (in light of recent events in out backyard - like an unexplainable Government of Ontario Medevac accident which we responded to) Unfortunately , with some of questionable reporting that goes on our there, we would need to find the a reputable agency, review and approve any finished product before it is aired. Anything less could reflect poorly on our organization and would be professional suicide..

 

An email was sent to the Minister of Transport along with a link to this forum. CBC and the fifth estate were copied on the e-mail.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone interested in having an open discussion about how they maintain (or intend to maintain) compliance with 602.86 in light of Mr. Lemieux's recent response that was received by email August 27, 2013. Copied on the email was Janice Berling, Lisa Witton, Terry Long, Joseph Szwalek and Imi Walji)

 

Good day Mr. Calaiezzi,

 

I wish to thank you for all the effort you and your team have dedicated to the development of the passenger briefing videos for each of the aircraft types operated by Expedition Helicopters.

 

With regards to your email dated May 15, 2013, the information provided to you by members of the Ontario Region Cabin Safety team is clear and accurate and is consistent with HQ Standards Group. I also fully endorse the interpretation of the regulations with regards to Passenger Safety Briefing and Carry-on Baggage.

 

Please note that the safety briefing requirements identified by our Cabin Safety team target the carriage of passengers under the CAR 703 rules.

 

Under CAR 702 operations, with regards to the requirement for briefing of non-flight crew persons, 722.23(3) states “ The safety briefing need not be provided if the pilot-in-command has ensured that the person has completed a currently valid training program covering the safety briefing requirements for the aircraft.”

 

On the other hand, regarding the issue of carry-on baggage and cargo in the cabin, CAR 602.86 (1) applies equally to all segments of the aviation industry, including CAR 406, 604, 702, 703, 704, 705 operations. CAR 602.86 is a general operating rule.

 

When an air operator applies for and receives an Air Operator Certificate, the Accountable Executive (AE) commits to conduct the enterprise’s operations in accordance with all the applicable Canadian Aviation Regulations and Standards. The AE and any company staff can’t willfully ignore any of the CARs regulatory requirements.

 

That some operators or segments of the industry sanction and actually defend non-compliant practices is disconcerting. Operators who fail to comply with safety regulation requirements are subject to enforcement actions.

 

I responded to the questions you submitted in your email by inserting comments and my responses near the appropriate text of your original email.

 

I thank you for highlighting these examples (links included in the original email) of serious operational non-compliance in the helicopter industry. We will ensure that they are addressed across the country.

 

Sincère,

 

Yves Lemieux

 

Associate Director Operations-East/Directeur associé opérations-est

Civil Aviation/Aviation civile

Transport Canada/Transports Canada

4900 Yonge Street, North York, Ontario M2N 6A5/4900 rue Yonge North York (Ontario) M2N 6A5

[email protected]

Telephone/Téléphone 416.952.0173

Facsimile/Télécopieur 416.952.0179

Government of Canada/Gouvernement du Canada

 

 

 

 

 

From: Chad Calaiezzi [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 5:21 PM

To: Lemieux, Yves

Cc: Todd Calaiezzi; Clair Warren; Guylain Mainville; Sarah Pawson; 'Fred Jones' ([email protected]); Bionda, James; Turcotte, Bill; Long, Terry; Lorenzo Girones; Grover, Tom (CSR) ([email protected]); [email protected]; Christie Ulvstal; Walsh, Ken; Pearce, Richard; Berling, Janice; Witton, Lisa

Subject: FW: Passenger Safety Briefing & Carry-on Baggage Issues

 

Hi Yves,

Thank you for the e-mail and the attached letter (which I have included for those of you who have not seen it). Could you please try to include me in the e-mails that concern regulatory compliance issues? I am sure you are aware, as Operations Manager, I am the person assigned the duty and responsibility to liaise with regulatory authority on all matters concerning flight operations.

 

With regards to the Passenger Briefings I will forward copies of our Cabin Safety Videos to Terry for review by mail. We have just moved the ELT on Aircraft FJBQ (Bell 206 L1C30) in an effort to standardize the fleet. I have attached a copy of JBQ’s newly amended Safety Features Card. Sarah will be making the ELT changes to the video shortly; I will mail you copies of the audiovisual presentations for each aircraft type on CD.

 

I have to say, your timing is impeccable. When Todd received your e-mail, we were sitting in a board room with 7 of our pilots and a senior official from the OMNR Wildfire Division. He came down to do an Annual Regional Fire Briefing. We were actually discussing the official Transport Canada interpretation of CAR 602.86 (that we have received from Transport Canada Cabin Safety Inspectors) and the requirements for stowage of carry-on baggage. We also discussed the interpretations offered with regards to the requirements for passenger briefings. Everyone in the room agreed that the interpretations offered by TC were not at all in tune with what happens throughout the commercial VFR helicopter industry. The OMNR official commented that the interpretations we received are in complete contradiction to many of the common practices currently occurring on Forest Fires across Canada.

· “Common practices” do not trump the CARs requirements. There appears to be misunderstanding between the briefing requirements for 702 (trained persons) and 703 (passengers who must be briefed before every flight). The requirements specified by our Cabin Safety Specialists focused on getting Expedition Helicopters CAR 703 operations compliant with regards to passenger briefings.

 

 

While you are right, “that Expedition Helicopters has been provided with the official Transport Canada interpretation of Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 602.86 and requirements for the stowage of carry-on baggage, in writing, several times”, we believe these interpretations are contrary to what is going on throughout the industry and the regulations are not being enforced equally from one operator to the next. We also feel that some of the interpretations offered were not correct.

· Again, “common practices” do not trump the CARs requirements. Please review 602.86 (1) (a) and (B).

 

You are also right when you say “Because each operational environment and conditions may be unique, the operator can choose from a number of acceptable means to meet this regulatory requirement”. What we are trying to do here, is have an open discussion about what are the “acceptable means”. I notice you believe there are a number of acceptable means…so let’s discuss them openly. Janice and Lisa have advised that there are very few (if any) acceptable means. I will now ask you a few basic questions and would appreciate an answer to each question.

 

1. Do you believe carriage of Cargo in the cabin of the Bell 206 helicopters is approved?

a. Here is what Bell Helicopters has to say: “Our engineering has defined loading limits to be in the aft cabin, 75 Lbs. per square inch and in the baggage compartment, of 86 Lbs. per square inch, provided the limits indicated in the 206 series Flight manuals are not exceeded. The carriage of cargo in the cabin of the Bell 206 is permitted providing the cargo is “ restrained so as to prevent them shifting during movement of the aircraft on the surface and during take-off, landing and in-flight turbulence” as per CAR 602.86 (1) (B). The cargo weight must not exceed the cabin floor limits.

 

2. Do you believe baggage can be carried on a seat of a helicopter conducting 702/703 operations?

a. Janice Says No in her February 21/13 e-mail: “approval to use a seat for other than its original function of retaining an occupant will require a demonstration of compliance that the installation meets all applicable requirements in the aircraft basis of certification.” Please review this e-mail from Janice for her explanation in its entirety.

b. Bell Helicopters says: “According to CAR 602.861b, BHT would find acceptable to carry cargo or carry-on luggage on seats in the aft cabin provided it does not exceed the weight of 100 Lbs. per seat as defined in Service Instruction 206-2051 applicable to the 206L series helicopters. Weight shall be properly secured to meet requirements of the CAR602.86.”. Since passenger seat belts are certified to restrain human bodies, using them to restrain a variety of objects including cargo can’t be authorised since there is no certainty the seatbelt could restrain to the requirement of 602.86 (1) (B). Janice’s email is very clear with regards to getting approval to secure/restrain cargo or carry-on baggage on passenger seats. “Additional means (besides the seatbelt) to successfully (and legally) restrain seat-loaded baggage would almost certainly be necessary. Such means, and its installation in each aircraft in which it is to be used, shall be approved by, or on behalf of, the Minister (persons delegated with authority to approve on behalf of the Minister include Design Approval representative (DAR) and Airworthiness Engineering Organizations (AEO)). Note that a similar approval process could be followed to install a means to restrain baggage, cargo, etc, to the floor of the cabin.

 

3. Do you believe a pilot can use a seat belt to secure/restrain small baggage in the seat to comply with CARs 602.86?

a. Janice Berling says NO (in her Feb 21/13 e-mail): “I am confirming that securing a purse or anything else that is considered as carry-on baggage in a seat with a seat-belt is not permitted: (a) stowed in a bin, compartment, rack or other location that is certified in accordance with the aircraft type certificate in respect of the stowage of carry-on baggage, equipment or cargo;

Baggage, equipment and cargo that is transported in the cabin of an aircraft must be stowed and restrained in a manner that ensures continued compliance with the applicable operating regulations (such as section 602.86) as well as the standards of airworthiness specified in the basis of certification for the aircraft.” I have asked her to show me where it discussed standards of airworthiness (with regards to means of restraint) in the 702/703 CARs. I agree that under CARs 705.42 this is correct (as it is clearly discusses restraint requirements in 705 CARs…not so for 702/703).

b. Bell Helicopters Product support and engineering states with regards to 206/407 helicopters: “YES, provided the seat belt secures the cargo or carry-on baggage appropriately in order to prevent any movement or weight shift during dynamic flights. It is the responsibility of the operator/owner and pilot-in-command to ensure this prior to flight departure.” I agree with Janice’s position. Carry-on baggage, equipment and cargo that is transported in the cabin of an aircraft must be stowed and/or restrained in a manner that ensures continued compliance with the applicable operating regulations (such as section 602.86). Furthermore, passenger seat belts are certified to restrain human bodies not an assortment of objects, packages or bags.

 

4. Can Baggage or Cargo be placed on the floor of the Bell 206 aircraft as per the standards of airworthiness specified in the basis of certification for the aircraft?

a. Here is what Bell Helicopters Product support and engineering have to say “some cargo or carry-on baggage can be placed on the floor as long as limits described above are not exceeded and the aircraft C.G. remains in the envelope prescribed by the flight manual.” Agree provided they are restrained so as to prevent them shifting during movement of the aircraft on the surface and during take-off, landing and is-flight turbulence as per CAR 602.86 (1) (B).

 

5. Can small carry on-baggage ever be restrained by a passenger on their lap?

a. Janice says NO in March 21/13 e-mail: “I am confirming that carrying a packsack on your lap is not in compliance with 602.86” Agree with Janice.

b. Lisa says NO in March 28/13 e-mails: “Items held on laps or loose on the floor is not considered as meeting the requirements to be stowed or restrained” Agree with Lisa.

 

6. Is a person carrying a pillow on their lap compliant with CARs? Surely it would be restrained to prevent shifting and is “packaged and covered” to prevent injury. No while the aircraft is moving on the surface, during take-off and landing, and in-flight turbulence as per 602.86 (1).

 

7. Is a person carrying a small soft covered bag on their laps compliant with CARs? No while the aircraft is moving on the surface, during take-off and landing, and in-flight turbulence as per 602.86 (1).

 

8. Is a person carrying a camera on their lap/in their hands compliant with CARs? No while the aircraft is moving on the surface, during take-off and landing, and in-flight turbulence as per 602.86 (1).

 

9. Is a person carrying a laptop used for aerial surveying/mapping on their lap compliant with CARs? No while the aircraft is moving on the surface, during take-off and landing, and in-flight turbulence as per 602.86 (1).

 

10. Is a person carrying and restraining a Net Gun/Tranquilizer Gun in their arms Compliant with CARs? No while the aircraft is moving on the surface, during take-off and landing, and in-flight turbulence as per 602.86 (1).

 

11. Is an MNR fire boss carrying a Fire boss kit/document bag in the front seat compliant with CARs ? No while the aircraft is moving on the surface, during take-off and landing, and in-flight turbulence as per 602.86 (1).

 

NOTE: Except for infant, for scenarios 6-11, securing/restraining any objects, cargo, baggage in one’s hand or with one’s arm does not meet the requirement of CAR 602.86 (1).

 

12. Are you able to provide me with another CARs reference or supporting documentation that supports Janice Berling’s belief that a pilot conducting 702/703 operations cannot secure an item in the cabin or seat of the aircraft if it is not “stowed in a bin, compartment, rack or other location that is certified in accordance with the aircraft type certificate in respect of the stowage of carry-on baggage, equipment or cargo;”? Review 602.86 (1) (B), and the answer to 2 b. above.

 

You are also right: “The requirements for passenger briefing and the securing of carry-on baggage are not new and apply to every segment of air operations regardless of the certificate types”. I can easily demonstrate that the current policy and interpretations being offered by Janice Berling, Terry Long, Lisa Witton MOST CERTAINLY ARE NEW! At least in the Commercial Helicopter sector…

The requirements for passenger briefing and the securing of carry-on baggage is clear and not easy to misunderstand, in my opinion . Compliance to the CARs is the responsibility of every air operator and aviator and wilful disregard of any parts of the CAR is an enforceable offence.

 

Firstly, these interpretations that you discuss were provided to the President of the Helicopter Association of Canada (Fred Jones). As you are aware, in an e-mail the HAC joined our opposition to these interpretations and referred to them as “new and extreme”. Fred also stated: “not only is it inconsistent with other regions, but it is inconsistent with long-standing accepted practice in the Canadian helicopter industry”.

Considering its many excellent initiatives to improve the safety of helicopter operations in Canada, one would expect organizations such as HAC to champion compliance with the CARs within every sector of Commercial operations.

 

When this issue was sent to Tom Grover, Bell Helicopter Sales Representative he had this to say in e-mail: “It has been pretty much industry standard practice to carry operational equipment, spares and personal baggage in the cabin if the baggage compartment is full when ferrying to and from the job site. In addition, you have to respect the maximum weight limits of the baggage compartment and normally operation gear, spares and personal baggage will exceed this limit so some has to be carried in the cabin. I would further suggest this applies to all makes and models of helicopters, not just Bell Helicopter products.”

I agree that operation gear, spares and personal baggage can be carried in the cabin of any helicopter provided the requirements of CAR 602.86 (1) are complied with.

 

I have also provided several photos and videos at the (end of this e-mail) demonstrating the longstanding industry practice of carrying cargo in the cabin of helicopters. Note that many of these items were posted on the Operator’s Website (by the Operator); they are being used as marketing material. Based on this fact I suspect they feel that they are in compliance of the CARs.

Noted. However, it does not justify/rationalize non-compliance. All operators and their employees must comply with every applicable regulation and standard.

 

It is quite obvious to me, that there are only 2 possibilities here:

 

· Widespread Non-compliance with 602.86 is occurring industry-wide across Canada; or It appears to be the case particularly in your sector of commercial helicopter operations. This must be addressed by every helicopter operators involved in the types of operations similar to yours. Wilful disregard of these CAR requirements is not acceptable at any level and particularly at the management level.

 

· Transport Canada is not applying the CARs equally to all operators and the interpretations offered are not correct. Transport Canada can’t witness and verify compliance of every operations. TC relies on company management to comply with every applicable regulations. With regards to the two issues under discussion, the CARs requirements are clear and simple and therefore, should not be subject to interpretation. The arguments being made by some suggest that they view the requirements as simply inconvenient, not consistent with the “common practices” and therefore, are considered wrong i.e. “not correct”. It is difficult to explain how these CARs requirements can be misinterpreted. Attempts to justify or rationalize non-compliance is even more troubling.

 

As for your comment: “Our responsibility is to ensure that every sector of the aviation industry is compliance with the Canadian Aviation Regulations. To the end, when regulatory non-compliance is uncovered, we work cooperatively with the organization or individual to resolve the issue(s) of non-compliance”; I expect you will work co-operatively with operators involved in the photos and videos below to resolve the issues of non-compliance (as per Janice and Lisa’s interpretations). I am sorry, it seems TC is failing miserably at ensuring compliance with in our sector of aviation industry (if the interpretations we have received are correct),and we fail to see TC working co-operatively in our dealings.

It is the Accountable Executive responsibility to “ensure compliance” within its enterprise. When an air operator applies for and receives an Air Operator Certificate, the Accountable Executive commits to conduct the enterprise’s operations in accordance to all the applicable Canadian Aviation Regulations and Standards. Operators who fail to meet this commitment may be subject to enforcement actions.

 

13. What actions are you taking to correct what is obviously a much larger systemic issue of widespread non-compliances industry wide?

· TC will take immediate actions to alert the industry to this wilful disregard of the subject CARs requirements once the appropriate means of doing so is determined by Headquarters.

· Within the Ontario Region, the process of verifying compliance for our helicopter air operators was initiated immediately following the discovery of the non-compliant practices at Expedition Helicopters.

 

 

Note: I removed all the links that were included in the original email to reduce the size of this file. Yves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question, where is the flight manual stored which has to be within reach of pilot on a new aircraft such as B3e, B2, EC130, BH07?

 

The "standard" location for the AFM in the newer Astars and EC130 is a pouch mounted behind one of the forward seats. If you put it behind the cojo's seat, you can access it in flight. Unfortunately, given the thickness of the AFM, putting it there exposes it to rear pax abuse. Last year I was flying some workers out of camp when I turned around to find a passenger reading the AFM. This guy took my suggestion to read the passenger safety card pretty seriously ! :) It also gets in the way when loading oversized cargo. At another company where I worked, they had it stored in a high-vis orange soft pouch velcroed to the forward left side of the pedestal, along with the CofR, Cof A, radio license, gas cards and so forth. No way to access it from the driver's seat in flight though.

 

The funny thing about all of these regs is they don't / can't be realistically applied to day VFR ops. The number of cautions/warnings and applicable procedures are such that every pilot should know them by heart. In the airline world, they call these "memory actions"; or procedures that crew should not need to consult the FCOM or QRH about (like what do you do if the stick shaker activates).

 

This is but one more example of TC's "one-size-fits-all" approach to regulation... <_<

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...