Air Transat Ferry flights

[telex]

If it was not under the OC, how did they get into RVSM airspace? There's so little traffic out there today, maybe they just phoned each FIR and got approval? What about MNPS?

Maybe I missed the requirement to operate under AT OC for RVSM?

An operator shall ensure that aeroplanes operated in RVSM airspace are equipped with:
Two independent altitude measurement systems;
An altitude alerting system;
An automatic altitude control system; and
A secondary surveillance radar (SSR) transponder with altitude reporting system that can be connected to the altitude measurement system in use for altitude keeping. (IR-OPS SPA.RVSM.110, EU-OPS 1.872)

[Gilles Hudicourt]

I think your making this more than it is Gilles.

The last one (TXU) was exported to Austria, back to either the leasing company or the new operator. Just because it was Canadian registered doesn't mean anything. The C of R does not prove title to the aircraft and in fact it was de-registered the next day. Canadian companies can operate foreign registered aircraft in Canada for certain periods of time and vise versa.

Aircraft transactions both private and commercial are done this way all the time - where the registered owner is not necessarily the operator. The aircraft would simply be flown by the owner, contract company or new lease holder.

But - If you are worried about it....just bring it up to the union.

For a commercial aircraft to be flown, it must have an operator and it must be dispatched by the operator's dispatcher.

If the flight plan to this aircraft was supplied to ATC by Air Transat Dispatch, its an Air Transat Flight flown under the TSC Certificate. In which case Air Transat pilot must fly it.

Even for ferry and delivery flights, such as aircraft being exported, there is a chapter in the Ops Manual that covers such flights:

4.1.11 Flight with aircraft not on the AOC
The procedure for operating a flight on an aircraft that is not on the Air Operator Certificate is used for import, export or regulatory maintenance purposes. .......
C) Flight crew requirements
• Only Air Transat pilots will be assigned to these flights according to the Company policies and procedures.

If the aircraft was to be used by another operator while remaining for a short period of time registered to Air Transat, that is covered under CAR 203. Transport Canada maintains on online database of aircraft who are being operated under CAR 203 here:

https://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... &ts=L&ro=0

C-FTXZ is not listed.

There may be a legal method of doing this, but no one has explained it to me yet.

[ahramin]

I'm not so certain. If I have insurance for ferry flights, grab another pilot, jump in a commercially registered plane and fly it somewhere without an OC, what CAR am I breaking?

[ahramin]

If it was not under the OC, how did they get into RVSM airspace? There's so little traffic out there today, maybe they just phoned each FIR and got approval? What about MNPS?

Maybe I missed the requirement to operate under AT OC for RVSM?

An operator shall ensure that aeroplanes operated in RVSM airspace are equipped with:
Two independent altitude measurement systems;
An altitude alerting system;
An automatic altitude control system; and
A secondary surveillance radar (SSR) transponder with altitude reporting system that can be connected to the altitude measurement system in use for altitude keeping. (IR-OPS SPA.RVSM.110, EU-OPS 1.872)

Is it an ops spec? "An operator" means you need an OC no?

[boeingboy]

If the aircraft was to be used by another operator while remaining for a short period of time registered to Air Transat, that is covered under CAR 203. Transport Canada maintains on online database of aircraft who are being operated under CAR 203 here:

https://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... &ts=L&ro=0

C-FTXZ is not listed.

And it wouldn't be. CAR 203 only applies if AT was in legal custody and control of the aircraft. If the lease expired yesterday (as I expect)- then AT is out of the picture. The lessor now has 7 days to notify the Minister that it has reverted back to them and de-register it.

For a commercial aircraft to be flown, it must have an operator and it must be dispatched by the operator's dispatcher.

If the flight plan to this aircraft was supplied to ATC by Air Transat Dispatch, its an Air Transat Flight flown under the TSC Certificate. In which case Air Transat pilot must fly it.

Yes - your right - however the leaser no doubt has an OC and why not contract AT to do the flight plan? Nothing illegal about that, or maybe they did issue it. I don't know what their ops say and I don't know what AT's ops say. Again - If the lease had expired - then AT pilots could not fly it could they. There are fine details that could be included in the lease that no one knows about.

In any case - the odds that it was operated by Air Canada are next to impossible seeing as how the have no legal control over any AT assets yet.

There are too any details missing to say whether this was legal or not in the sense of your contract....however it can be done legally in the eyes of Transport Canada.

[altiplano]

This sounds like it's just fins getting sent back. Leases getting returned all around the world. Clearly lease companies, manufacturers, etc have means to move aircraft, doesn't have to be the ex-operator's pilots doing it.

[telex]

If it was not under the OC, how did they get into RVSM airspace? There's so little traffic out there today, maybe they just phoned each FIR and got approval? What about MNPS?

Maybe I missed the requirement to operate under AT OC for RVSM?

An operator shall ensure that aeroplanes operated in RVSM airspace are equipped with:
Two independent altitude measurement systems;
An altitude alerting system;
An automatic altitude control system; and
A secondary surveillance radar (SSR) transponder with altitude reporting system that can be connected to the altitude measurement system in use for altitude keeping. (IR-OPS SPA.RVSM.110, EU-OPS 1.872)

Is it an ops spec? "An operator" means you need an OC no?

Ferry flight... Is it a commercial flight?

[ahramin]

My guess is that the aircraft is on a ferry flight and does not require an OC.

Commercial flight or not though, doesn't RVSM require an ops spec? If so, then the aircraft would need to be on an OC or would need permission to operate in RVSM airspace.

[telex]

Fly the Blue Spruce routes.

Stay out of RVSM.

What's the problem?

[ahramin]

Not a problem, but that's not what the aircraft did. It was at 370 the entire flight.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

In any case - the odds that it was operated by Air Canada are next to impossible seeing as how the have no legal control over any AT assets yet.

Except that no one ever wrote that "Air Canada" had operated these ferry flights. Not on this thread anyway.

Some sources told me they were Air Canada pilots......not the same statement.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Any aircraft in the air has an Operator. That is never vague and is never a shared responsibility.

Nav Canada is billing an operator. These flights were insured by an operator.

The test used by the Canadian Transportation Agency is who has "operational control" of the aircraft.

[TFTMB heavy]

Any aircraft in the air has an Operator. That is never vague and is never a shared responsibility.

Nav Canada is billing an operator. These flights were insured by an operator.

The test used by the Canadian Transportation Agency is who has "operational control" of the aircraft.

Did you ask Air Transat?

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Did you ask Air Transat?

I didn't. But considering that this was brought to my attention by people in the Union.......

[ahramin]

Any aircraft in the air has an Operator. That is never vague and is never a shared responsibility.

Nav Canada is billing an operator. These flights were insured by an operator.

The test used by the Canadian Transportation Agency is who has "operational control" of the aircraft.

But in the case of a ferry flight, do CTA rules apply? If Transat signs over operational control back to the owner of the aircraft, aren't they able to reposition their aircraft as a private flight? The problem I see here is that if the owner is not a Canadian entity, they would not be able to take control of a Canadian registered aircraft that is physically in Canada would they?

[tbaylx]

In any case - the odds that it was operated by Air Canada are next to impossible seeing as how the have no legal control over any AT assets yet.

Except that no one ever wrote that "Air Canada" had operated these ferry flights. Not on this thread anyway.

Some sources told me they were Air Canada pilots......not the same statement.

They were contract pilots ferrying an aircraft. What does it matter where they work as a day job? They may not even be canadian depending on who the organization was that flew it and any waivers they obtained

[altiplano]

International equipment leases are governed by treaty. Ships and aircraft have additional treaties recognizing their movability.

You can pick it all apart, but the bottom line is the lessor has a right to recover, control, and relocate their property using reasonable means. Transat didn't have to sign over anything if a term of the lease wasn't met. I'm not saying that's what happened, but if it's going back... either that or Transat cancelled the leases and you just haven't heard yet.

Their are various modalities of registration/deregistration. It doesn't all end up on the internet immediately I'm sure.

[altiplano]

...

[jetpilot]

International equipment leases are governed by treaty. Ships and aircraft have additional treaties recognizing their movability.

You can pick it all apart, but the bottom line is the lessor has a right to recover, control, and relocate their property using reasonable means. Transat didn't have to sign over anything if a term of the lease wasn't met. I'm not saying that's what happened, but if it's going back... either that or Transat cancelled the leases and you just haven't heard yet.

Their are various modalities of registration/deregistration. It doesn't all end up on the internet immediately I'm sure.

It is just a winter lease that got stock with covid-19 in this case because of the limited resources they used a ferry company .

[altiplano]

International equipment leases are governed by treaty. Ships and aircraft have additional treaties recognizing their movability.

You can pick it all apart, but the bottom line is the lessor has a right to recover, control, and relocate their property using reasonable means. Transat didn't have to sign over anything if a term of the lease wasn't met. I'm not saying that's what happened, but if it's going back... either that or Transat cancelled the leases and you just haven't heard yet.

Their are various modalities of registration/deregistration. It doesn't all end up on the internet immediately I'm sure.

It is just a winter lease that got stock with covid-19 in this case because of the limited resources they used a ferry company .

There you go...