ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
7ECA
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1281
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by 7ECA »

https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases ... content=V1

ATAC asks the Minister of Transport not to impose the new "onerous" FDT regs, and instead bring Canada in line with FAA regs instead.
---------- ADS -----------
 
goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by goingnowherefast »

Aren't the US rules even more onerous than the proposed Canadian ones?
---------- ADS -----------
 
'97 Tercel
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:19 pm

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by '97 Tercel »

Should they then maybe adopt the FAA's 1500 hr rule too?
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL007
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by FL007 »

Definitely just trying to stall the system in a last ditch effort. When the regs are released this month that's that.

If they atac is suggesting FAA regs it would have to go through gazette I then Canada would have to do a cost analysis again, which could take years to implement.

Just look at how long these regs are taking. However I would have loved the Canadian rules to be on par with FAA rules.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by Heliian »

They're on par with ICAO.

They're not that restrictive and with the proper FRMS, they can be tailored to your operation. This is bringing fatigue and safety to the forefront and I think it's worth a try.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bobcaygeon
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by bobcaygeon »

The FRMS is useful. Even TC themselves has stated that the FRMS guidelines are unclear, often provide very little help and as currently written would require an operator to create a Risk analysis case and track every single pairing. At Porter that's would be approx 3000 pairings annually even though many pairings start and finish within 30 minutes of each other with the same # of legs, etc.

TC states in ?Gazette 1 last year that they expect only 2% of 704 carriers will use the FRMS. There are approx 82 704 carriers in Canada. That means TC acknowledges that less then 2 carriers will gain any benefits from this system. Why? the process is ridiculously complex, is unclear and extremely expensive.

The proposed rules are more restrictive than the FAA and often the EASA. ICAO is not the end all/beat all if others aren't following it. Like it or not the playing field needs to be level with the competition. The FAA rules are modern and will be a huge jump forward.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5930
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by digits_ »

bobcaygeon wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 2:35 pm The FRMS is useful. Even TC themselves has stated that the FRMS guidelines are unclear, often provide very little help and as currently written would require an operator to create a Risk analysis case and track every single pairing. At Porter that's would be approx 3000 pairings annually even though many pairings start and finish within 30 minutes of each other with the same # of legs, etc.

TC states in ?Gazette 1 last year that they expect only 2% of 704 carriers will use the FRMS. There are approx 82 704 carriers in Canada. That means TC acknowledges that less then 2 carriers will gain any benefits from this system. Why? the process is ridiculously complex, is unclear and extremely expensive.
Well maybe that should be a sign the FRMS shouldn't be used to bypass the new rules and limitations? If you are using FRMS for every pairing, maybe something is wrong with your pairings. It's supposed to allow deviations in certain circumstances, it's not supposed to be the norm.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
bobcaygeon
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am

Re: ATAC Asks MOT Not to Impose New FDT Regs.

Post by bobcaygeon »

That's not what I meant. A 0630 departure to for a Punta Cana turn shouldn't have to go through a complete approval process as a 0630 Puerta Plato turn. TC now has changed it up and now will require their blessing for every case. They don't have the resources to do anything in a timely manner as it is right now.

PS Ideally a robust SMS and FRMS should already be tracking this regardless if an FRMS exemption is required. It's the TC delay that will make it painful.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”