July 1, 2017

[timel]

The day Transport Canada finally released Gazette I for:

Vol. 151, No. 26 — July 1, 2017

Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I, VI and VII — Flight Crew Member Hours of Work and Rest Periods)

http://www.canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1 ... g2-eng.php

[ZBBYLW]

I'm no laywer but it looks good.

[Broker]

I am no lawyer but it will take one to determine flight duty periods.

[Heliian]

I can't wait for all of the FRMS experts to start hawking their programs. That's the key here, you'll be able to tailor a system to your operation, most likely with very little actual change, just a whole pile of c.y.a. and b.s. paperwork to appease the overseers. Better buy some stock in lay-z-boy.

[TailwheelPilot]

The scheduled guys can use a FRMS, but could a charter operator? In order to set-up the FRMS you must provide:
(b) a description of the flight that will be operated under an exemption set out in section 700.100;
(or a series of flights with the same flight crew, per a previous CAR) including:
(d) a description of the manner in which the flight will vary from the requirements of the provisions referred to in paragraph (c); and
(f) a description of the safety case that will be developed for the flight;

I just noticed that 702 pilots are superhumans that can fly 1200 hours per 365 days safely. What makes them superior to every other pilot? Why is a pilot unsafe to fly a charter flight under 703, but that same pilot is perfectly safe to go do some 702 flying? Seems to me that plenty of 702 flying (say, heli-logging, aerial application, and firebombing) would be more demanding/fatiguing than most 703 charter work hauling people and/or cargo from place to place...

[timel]

Great advancement for prescriptive requirements. 18+ legs if 30 mins and less .
Ok, not all bad, good stuff in here but..


FRMS is going to be the sinew of war. Hopefully all the unions involved will be very careful,
it appears to be tricky, and it could be the new way for airlines to screw around.

[897]

I would agree I think FMRS is really going to make things challenging.

I think it's going to make for a few surprises as far as hiring goes in that you accept a job with a great schedule only to find out they have some wild duty time rules approved under their FRMS.

I see we are also going to end up going to 12 hours bottle to throttle now. I don't really think it's going to improve safety. It's only going to keep the honest ones, honest. Not going to prevent what happened at Sunwing.

[timel]

I see we are also going to end up going to 12 hours bottle to throttle now. I don't really think it's going to improve safety. It's only going to keep the honest ones, honest. Not going to prevent what happened at Sunwing.

Policy and regulation isn't the same. It is easier to get away with policies if regulations are less restrictive. It will be much harder now.

I would rather put emphasis on pilot support programs and education, but it is easier to vote regulations. It should be part of the pilot culture to look after each other on pairings and be caring if we see colleagues struggling with alcohol.

[Redneck_pilot86]

These regs are great. Lets stuff a bunch of underqualified pilots into seats and cut them lose to fill the gaps created by every airline in the country suddenly needing more pilots. That 500 hour Caravan captain will be wide awake, so there won't be any trouble at all.

[timel]

.

[digits_]

If I am reading this correctly, it will be the end of:
- split duty days? (not mentioned anywhere)
- the difference between on-call / on-reserve? So the end of 24/7 on call stuff?

[Marinth]

So if this was just put in the gazette part 1, does that mean we're still about 2 years away from actually being law for 705?

[FICU]

And once registered...

"Air operators who are subject to Subpart 705 would have one year to implement the new requirements, upon their coming into force, while air operators subject to Subparts 703 and 704 would have four years."

"Coming into Force
20 (1) These Regulations, except for sections 2, 9, 12 and 13, come into force on the day on which they are registered.

(2) Sections 2, 9, 12 and 13 come into force on the first anniversary of the day on which these Regulations are registered."

[TailwheelPilot]

Split duty days are 700.50 and .64

The only reference to being 'on call' is in the 702 sections. I am no lawyer, but I would guess the reserve rules are intended to replace any previous 'on call' situations, unless one can get an FRMS to cover their situation.

[Spokes]

The scheduled guys can use a FRMS, but could a charter operator? In order to set-up the FRMS you must provide:
(b) a description of the flight that will be operated under an exemption set out in section 700.100;
(or a series of flights with the same flight crew, per a previous CAR) including:
(d) a description of the manner in which the flight will vary from the requirements of the provisions referred to in paragraph (c); and
(f) a description of the safety case that will be developed for the flight;

I just noticed that 702 pilots are superhumans that can fly 1200 hours per 365 days safely. What makes them superior to every other pilot? Why is a pilot unsafe to fly a charter flight under 703, but that same pilot is perfectly safe to go do some 702 flying? Seems to me that plenty of 702 flying (say, heli-logging, aerial application, and firebombing) would be more demanding/fatiguing than most 703 charter work hauling people and/or cargo from place to place...

That brings up something I am having a hard time figuring out. If all this does not apply to 702, what will be the rules for that part? Same as the old ones? None?

[TailwheelPilot]

Search the document for '14 Part', it is the section with amendments to 702 regulations. From a quick look, everything looks about the same as it is now.

[Spokes]

Search the document for '14 Part', it is the section with amendments to 702 regulations. From a quick look, everything looks about the same as it is now.

That worked better than my search of '702'. Thanks. And it does look pretty much the same. I guess we are super men!

[timel]

New pilot-fatigue rules criticized by unions, airline industry

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/report ... ndmail.com&

[bobcaygeon]

Do you really think FRMS is going to be a piece of cake for the operators to set up and maintain? It's by no means a "blanket rating" that you get.

Have you looked at the regs to comply with? It's going to take a lot of work and it will only take a a few disgruntled people to end a legitimately safe system.
A variance of 5% is very little wiggle and it will only take a few reports to shutdown the FRMS at places like AC. Good luck even getting volunteers to back up a valid case with science.

All you need is a one person who flies a route twice a month to complain and its done. It doesn't matter that 19 of the last 20 days everyone else was fine with it.

I don't see a FRMS having much overall success at anywhere but maybe AC/WJ and a few very unique routes.

[AuxBatOn]

Search the document for '14 Part', it is the section with amendments to 702 regulations. From a quick look, everything looks about the same as it is now.

That worked better than my search of '702'. Thanks. And it does look pretty much the same. I guess we are super men!

It has nothing to do with pilot safety but public safety. Since you do not transport passengers on 702 flights, the risk safety to general public is not really reduced than a 705 with 300 Pax onboard.

It is a risk vs reward game. Try to get as much done as possible with the most reasonable risk (note that I did not say with no risk) to the general public.