Jump to content

Notice: Effective July 1, 2024, Vertical Forums will be officially shut down. As a result, all forum activity will be permanently removed. We understand that this news may come as a disappointment, but we would like to thank everyone for being a part of our community for so many years.

If you are interested in taking over this Forum, please contact us prior to July 1.

Ice creme cake


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, DGP said:

My pic here of the S-58 was taken in Vermilion Bay...near Dryden...we were parked just off the transCanada highway...we could walk across the road to a greasy spoon to get feed...nobody ever complained...we were working on Dryden 18....this was 1974...reg was FZM.

I was on Dryden 18 as well, Hughes 500 C model, probably ate at the same place you did as well - parked off HWY 17 and walked over to the highway joint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say we must have been at the same place...I remember 3 Hughes 500 parking next to us in yellow and black paint jobs...we probably ate at the same place...same time...and then we met up years later in Wpg...small world...take care buddy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Torque Split said:

Transport as far as I know, has not provided a definition of a built up area.  Any one else have any info on this?

 

Policy Letter 145 was guidance material from Transport Canada on this very topic. “

Policy Letter 145

Helicopter Landings and Take-offs within the Built- up Areas of Cities and Towns

It was cancelled in December 2020 after being in circulation for many years. Unfortunately I don’t have a copy anymore. 
 

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/reference-centre/civil-aviation-document-cancellation-history/cancellation-notice-documents-updated-tp-4711

If I’m not mistaken it’s purpose was to eliminate Special Flight Operations Permit applications that were  unnecessary but required by TC inspectors who misinterpreted the regulation. 
 

While guidance material is advisory in nature, and does not override regulations, I found it very useful. It provided good real world examples and even referenced case law, which sets precedence, and becomes the standard, when regulations are found to be ambiguous...which this one clearly is.

with that being said, it’s well known that many regions/inspectors have been imposing higher standards in recent years. Maybe that’s why they cancelled it. Perhaps they want to set higher standards than the case law, without actually going through the process of amending the regulation.

 

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...