FAR 121

[Farside]

Hello Gladiator, First of all a happy new year, and let's start right away with a good question about our 3 man trouble here in Sin. Your posting on FAR 121.543 concerning crewmembers at controls was very helpfull and is quoted almost word for word at the ALPA-S site. Now my question is: can you use these same rules in the Singapore context, knowing that the Singapore ANO's don't realy adress this problem. I realize that the JAR's are almost identical to the FAR's and I personally can not see that the Singapore ANO's would be totally different. How could you get a legal "standing" on this, since we are still operating under the same old 3 man crew rules.

[titan]

Greetings Farside!
Do I detect a note of cynicism, or are you honestly interested?
If you are, then you will find it covered under the following:

Singapore Air Navigation Act
Chapter 6
Revised Edition of 1985
Part 2
Section 3-(1)(a)

This is where you will find the Singaporean law that empowers the Chicago Convention.

[Farside]

Greetings Titan
I am very serious and thanks for the info. Although I disagree on certain stands that the Gladiator takes I have to agree more and more on a lot of other things. I also realise that he has a very clear understanding of certain legal queries. I want to use this forum in a positive way and realized a few month ago that the mudslinging we all did ( me included!) is a total waste of time and energy, and that the very positive exchanges I had lately with Gladiator and some other participants make it possible for me to come up with some good points to use in our disagreements here. I strongly believe that this is the only way to get things world wide improved if we as a group start to bundle intellectual resources and exchange ideas. If we continue the mudslinging we only undermine our proffessional stand. I got more info out of two Gladiator listing in one minute than two days of me dragging through unfamiliar legal documents. For me this is PPRUNE at its best.
Happy new year Titan and again thanks for your information.

[Carthorse]

Well said

[Farside]

Hello Titan
I cannot find
Singapore Air Navigation Act
Chapter 6
Revised Edition of 1985
Part 2
Section 3-(1)(a)
I only could get the 1996 version and went through it but couldn't find anything relating to the Chicago Convention. It would be great if I had some jurisdiction on this that could help me tieing up the Singapore regulations to the FAR's or JAR's
Any suggestions?? Thanks anyhow

[Gladiator]

Happy new year to you also Farside.

In regards to three pilot operations, one Captain, two co-pilots, FAR 121/JARs do interface with the Singapore ANO in terms of chapter headings. The problem is that the the ANO contents are outdated and does not fit B747-400/A-340 type operations.

Part of FAR 121.543 (also ICAO Annex 6) parameters are in SIA Flight Administration Manual (but not correctly), Line Operations, page 3.39.1, the rest are in the Singapore ANO under Chapter 33, page 47, and Chapter 19, page 30.

As in FAR 121.543 there are three considerations:

a) When a crewmember can leave his duty station.
b) Pilot license held by the pilot occupying the pilot-in-command's duty station, the LHS.
c) Training level of the pilot occupying the pilot-in-command’s duty station.

Let us look into each in detail.

a) When a crewmember can leave his duty station.

SIA FLIGHT ADMINISTRATION MANUAL, LINE OPERATIONS

Cockpit seats/A340 Crew Rest Facility Seats

Operating Crew

For take-off and landing, the required operating crew members of the minimum crew complement shall be in their assigned seats. In all other phases of flight, both pilot’s seats and, if applicable, the flight engineer’s seat must be manned by the operating crew except when:-

1. a crew member’s absence is necessary for the performance of duties in connection with the operation of the flight; or
2. a crew member’s absence is in connection with physiological needs.

Item number 1 above does not comply with ICAO Annex 6/ or not the same as 121.543 because, a crewmember’s absence is allowed for the performance of duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft.

SIA’s FAM uses the word ‘OPERATION OF THE FLIGHT’ as opposed to ‘OPERATION OF THE AIRCRAFT’. Operation of the flight is too vague and ambigious.

Singapore ANO

Pilots to remain at controls (page 47)

33(1) The commander of a Singapore aircraft, being a flying machine or glider, shall cause one pilot to remain at the controls at all times while the aircraft is in flight. If the aircraft is required by or under this Order to carry two pilots, the commander shall cause both pilots to remain at the controls during take-off and landing. If the aircraft carries two or more pilots (whether or not it is required to do so) and is engaged on a flight for the purpose of the public transport of passengers the commander shall remain at the controls during take-off and landing.

As you can see this paragraph belongs in the days of the Stratocruiser/Lancasters.

b) Pilot license held by the pilot occupying the pilot-in-command's duty station, the LHS.

Singapore ANO

Members of flight crew licenses (page 30)

19(1) Subject to this paragraph, a person shall not act as a memeber of the flight crew of a Singapore aircraft unless he is the holder of an appropriate license granted or rendered valid under this Order:

19(6) An appropriate license for the purpose of this paragraph means a license which entitles the holder to perform the functions which he undertakes in relation to the aircraft concerned and the flight on which it is engaged.

19(8) Notwithstanding anything in this paragraph--

(a)the holder of a license granted or rendered valid under this Order being a license endorsed to the effect that the holder does not satisfy in full the relevant international standards, shall not act as a memeber of the flight crew of a Singapore aircraft in the aterritory of a Contracting State other than Singapore, except in accordance with permission granted by the competent authority of that State;

Paragraphs 19 (2), (3), (4), (5), and (7) are not mentioned here because they are not relevant.

19(1) Is self explanatory.

19(6) The key controlling word becomes 'functions which he undertakes'. Obviously in this case the pilot occupies the pilot-in-command's duty station, the LHS.

19(8) This is the important one. The key controlling words are, 'holder does not satisfy in full the relevant international standards, shall not act as a member of the flight crew of a Singapore aircraft'.

Singapore ANO is pushing the responsibility to the regulations of 'international standards'. This would be ICAO.

ICAO Annex 1 covers Personnel Licensing (let me know if you want full details). It boils down to what ICAO implemented in 1988/89, it covers aircraft certified for two man crew, (nowdays all the modern aircraft). The co-pilot has to either hold an ATPL or have passed the ATPL exams in order to act in the capacity of co-pilot.

c) Training level of the pilot occupying the pilot-in-command’s duty station.

I guess the qualifications of the pilot replacing the pilot-in-command in cruise depends on the level of safety the carrier wishes to provide it’s passengers. Is it going to be minimum level of safety or optimum level of safety?

Qualifications now becomes a grey area. My opinion is in order to act as pilot-in-command relief one should, (i) have an acceptable ATPL, (ii) training and base checks from the LHS in at least, emergency procedures as PNF, unusual attitude training, emergency descent, CAT II/III training.

As in our previous discussions, remember under the FAA system a type rating means qualified from the LHS.

[Farside]

Thanks a million Gladiator, I will now have to digest this very carefully and will get back to you. I just want to have enough ammunition to be able to legally stick to the 2 man crewduty limits when scheduled for a three man crew trip. I will have to work on this a little bit.
Cheers.
F

[Farside]

Gladiator, Good Morning.
The good news is that rumour has it that the 3 man crew is being scrapped for the time being. Hope it is true.
Cheers
F

[Gladiator]

Good morning Farside,

Since this whole thing started I feel like a go in between but not sure between what.

Tons of e-mail from probably SIA first officers complaining about 3-pilot crew violations. I tell them the same thing every time, write to CAAS. For some reason they fear some kind of retaliation (probably justified).

It is not hard to do, use latex gloves to type and mail a letter to CAAS.

Now I am getting e-mails from the same group complaining that, this is a good one,

The FSI 00-14/744 TCC 712 M states:

The civil Aviation Authority of Singapore has withdrawn the approval for the 3rd pilot of a 3-pilot crew to occupy the left-hand seat while the Commander is taking in-flight relief during cruise.

Now commanders have created their own loop hole. They are placing the '2nd pilot of a 3-pilot crew in the left-hand seat' since the FSI disallowed the '3rd pilot of a 3-pilot crew'. Tricky tricky.

Please keep me updated. Let me know when you have a US trip, how about getting together for a few beers.

[Farside]

Gee that is a new one never occured to me that perhaps legally there is a loop hole where you could put the 2nd pilot in the left seat and the third one in the right, however it is playing with words and the real cause is not attacked. I fully agree with you that the only way to tackle this problem is to bombard the CAAS with reports but have you seen the level of competence in that departement??. The independance of the CAAS should be without question, but you and I know that we talk here about Singapore Airlines: Departement CAAS.
But again I have hope that things are changing very slowely but surely in a better direction. The simple fact that the F/O's start to speak up and ventilate their frustrations is already a very good beginning. We have some very talented young F/O's here who are still suffering from the "restrictive style of management, and after a few years also suffer from the Stockholm Syndrom and start to beleive that management is not soo bad after all. They start to wake up and realize that it is bad!
We need a change and we need to move foreward. I believe that the 3man crew as we do it now is out of the window, but not for sure. I will keep you informed and I will have a beer when I am in town, but first I am off on a good vacation with no radio, paper TV and last but not least PPRUNE ( I just realized that that must be F...... boring!!!better take my laptop along )
Cheers
F