Violation of CAD 371 by Air Hong Kong
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2016
Location: City
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Violation of CAD 371 by Air Hong Kong
Hello colleagues, I wish to share my communication with CAD regarding one subject we know is very important to all of us and need very serious approach to find a solution.
My e-mail to CAD (only important part):
I will appreciate very much your answer to my following question:
Why AHK is allowed by CAD to roster pilots to fly more than 8 hours during
night, in violation of CAD 371?
Thank you very much,
Andy M.
................................
CAD reply:
Dear Mr Andy,
Thank you for your email.
The CAD371 (2nd Edition) provides the standard provisions to be included in an airline's Flight Time Limitation Scheme (FTLS) for CAD's consideration and approval. Provision has been included in Section 6 for airlines to apply for variations to these standard provisions to allow their FTLS best suit their type of operations.
AHK applied for the variation and approval of their FTLS in 2010. One of the variations included the omission of the provision 15.6.2 in the CAD371 2nd Edition). CAD reviewed and accepted the justifications provided by AHK. In addition, AHK reported that their pilots had been individually consulted concerning the then proposed AHK FTLS. The aforementioned variation was therefore approved in 2011.
My e-mail to CAD (only important part):
“15.6 Crew members employed on regular “overnight” duties may, subject to the following conditions, operate a block of 5 FDP’s on up to 5 consecutive LNP’s which encroach upon the LNP:
15.6.2 The FDP must not exceed 8 hours, irrespective of the sectors flown.”
15.6.2 The FDP must not exceed 8 hours, irrespective of the sectors flown.”
Why AHK is allowed by CAD to roster pilots to fly more than 8 hours during
night, in violation of CAD 371?
Thank you very much,
Andy M.
................................
CAD reply:
Dear Mr Andy,
Thank you for your email.
The CAD371 (2nd Edition) provides the standard provisions to be included in an airline's Flight Time Limitation Scheme (FTLS) for CAD's consideration and approval. Provision has been included in Section 6 for airlines to apply for variations to these standard provisions to allow their FTLS best suit their type of operations.
AHK applied for the variation and approval of their FTLS in 2010. One of the variations included the omission of the provision 15.6.2 in the CAD371 2nd Edition). CAD reviewed and accepted the justifications provided by AHK. In addition, AHK reported that their pilots had been individually consulted concerning the then proposed AHK FTLS. The aforementioned variation was therefore approved in 2011.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are you surprised, Andy?... AHK is 60% owned by CX... Expedition of requested variations by the HK authority is their main business here. Doubt any aircrew were consulted. Perhaps you could request said papers (consultation documentation) from your DFO and go from there?
ICAC may be an interested party if the government are not up for any involvement.
ICAC may be an interested party if the government are not up for any involvement.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: I don't really hate them...I just miss flight attendants.
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Andy. Why don't you post the entire letter to CAD and response to offer some perspective? It's rather pointless to cut and paste snippets for something that appears to be important. Then again, you could just be fabricating the whole thing. Enjoy those long nights mate.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2016
Location: City
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR8R H8R: I am not so naïve, I will release content of my e-mails only to AHK pilots once they need them for court or ICAC.
Regarding "fabricating the whole thing" your assumption is foolish, anybody can ask CAD the same question, it is so simple, go ahead.
For info, CAD's reply was sent from [email protected] on May 5 at 9:10 AM
Sqwak7700: excellent point, Thank you.
PS. Andy is not my real name, it is my dog's name.(hehe)
Regarding "fabricating the whole thing" your assumption is foolish, anybody can ask CAD the same question, it is so simple, go ahead.
For info, CAD's reply was sent from [email protected] on May 5 at 9:10 AM
Sqwak7700: excellent point, Thank you.
PS. Andy is not my real name, it is my dog's name.(hehe)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's wrong with five nights of 8 hours? Better than mixing it with early / late duties. In Europe now no limits on nights only if over 10 hours FRM needs due consideration and plenty of science to say its OK.
Grass is Cathy green case again?
Grass is Cathy green case again?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Location Location
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In addition, AHK reported that their pilots had been individually consulted concerning the then proposed AHK FTLS.
CAD and CX.... glove, meet hand.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2016
Location: City
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy is husky and we need M@ri@ at the earliest opportunity, our maid is so tired of us (hehe).Shutterbug: You are spot on, pilots never agreed to any variation regarding FDP.
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since you mentioned this andy, i thought you had this gig going on with the maid? Ooops sorry i meant your dog had this gig with the maid.
Truly a man of words, i meant a canine of words. At least she under your niece now, before it all falls apart soon
Truly a man of words, i meant a canine of words. At least she under your niece now, before it all falls apart soon
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2016
Location: City
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked CAD, but no reply!! It is simple, no intelligent person can explain that 12 hours FDP (all night) is same as 8 hrs FDP.
Still waiting....or I should ask new CAD DG?
