Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Last summer it came into question with Ontario MNR about "aircrew" accomidation requirments. Im sure somewhere it states something along the lines "Aircrew require seperate acomidations" etc..etc... I just can't find it. Any help???

Cheers

Swede

Link to post
Share on other sites
Last summer it came into question with Ontario MNR about "aircrew" accomidation requirments. Im sure somewhere it states something along the lines "Aircrew require seperate acomidations" etc..etc... I just can't find it. Any help???

Cheers

Swede

It is in Part 1 subpart 1, Interpretation CAR 101

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regserv/...t1/Subpart1.htm

"suitable accommodation" - means a single-occupancy bedroom that is subject to a minimal level of noise, is well ventilated and has facilities to control the levels of temperature and light or, where such a bedroom is not available, an accommodation that is suitable for the site and season, is subject to a minimal level of noise and provides adequate comfort and protection from the elements;

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do Engineers qualify for this suitable accommodation as well?

 

I was on an OMNR job in the late 70's where my Pilot demanded a private room and in the same conversation sugguest to me that I could live in the supply tent in order to guard our spares and to be close to the helicopter so He could be ready to fly first thing in ths morning.

 

Needless to say I told the pilot my answer......He probably still thinks I am an Ahole but I don't care

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do Engineers qualify for this suitable accommodation as well?

 

I was on an OMNR job in the late 70's where my Pilot demanded a private room and in the same conversation sugguest to me that I could live in the supply tent in order to guard our spares and to be close to the helicopter so He could be ready to fly first thing in ths morning.

 

Needless to say I told the pilot my answer......He probably still thinks I am an Ahole but I don't care

 

 

Kinda like some hunchbacked troll living under a rock, just existing to serve the lord master who controls the flying magic machine. I hope you set all of his clocks out by a few hours when he was out flying first thing in the morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Needless to say I told the pilot my answer......He probably still thinks I am an Ahole but I don't care

[/quote: Elvis]

 

i think the title of 'pilot' obviously went to someones friggin head! :down: too self absorbed i guess.

that's the sort of person that reminds me of a quote by lawrence bell; "a man who will not do the little things, cannot be trusted with the big things".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know its a little off topic, I had a pilot tell me that he was "pilot in command" so that is how it was to be done. This was all over arranging a crew change not aircraft operation. I told him to do something that in retrospec was probably physically impossibe, and the best part is he didn't speak to me for over half a year and insisted that I didn't work with him. No skin off my you know what, for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get too excited about single rooms guys.

 

It is hard to find a regulation requiring "suitable accomodations" in the actual CARs.

You can see it when a split duty-day is required i.e. spraying.

 

Also note that it says "where such a bedroom is not available".......

This means you may end up sleeping in a tent in a swamp.

 

The best hope you have is that some provinces put out a policy manual covering these things.

It usually gives the aircrew clearer provisions of accomodation than the CARs do, though they always leave enough leeway in the rules to put you out in a swamp.

 

Happy camping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the single most important aviation safety concern is the psychological well-being of crews. How TC could not recognize that the often deplorable living conditions and the ludicrous standard of working 42 consecutive 14 hour days to which pilots are subject contributes to accidents is puzzling. Two explanations are possible. Either TC and the operators are just too stupid to realize how important living and working conditions are or they do realize it but refuse to change it because of the costs involved. I believe the latter is the case. Profit concern trumps safety concern. This is pathetic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well John....I will have to agree with what you said, it is pathetic. That is a prime example why an association such as HEPAC, would be able to lobby for better clarification within CARS for "suitable acomodations".

Link to post
Share on other sites

JM, I think what you said

" Either TC and the operators are just too stupid to realize how important living and working conditions are or they do realize it but refuse to change it because of the costs involved. I believe the latter is the case." is probably correct.

As for the 42 day rule, unfortunately many pilots support this rule as they want to make as much money as they can while the opportunity exists. How anyone believes that they are not exhausted as they near the end of that tour of 14 hour days is beyond me, even if they were suitably accommodated, let alone in some swamp. There are some old standards that exist that will only change after a rash of serious accidents proves them wrong.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...