Single engine IFR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Rochester
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Single engine IFR
Hi
Just want to gather some views on this subject. Is it only for cargo ops or are pax allowed as well?
What aircraft do you think will/are certified? I have in mind TBM700, PC12, Malibu Meridian and the Caravan. Are there any others?
I would like to believe that this could be a way forward, but being rather inexperienced all I can see is a mountain of bureaucracy and public ignorance.
Any views?
REX
Just want to gather some views on this subject. Is it only for cargo ops or are pax allowed as well?
What aircraft do you think will/are certified? I have in mind TBM700, PC12, Malibu Meridian and the Caravan. Are there any others?
I would like to believe that this could be a way forward, but being rather inexperienced all I can see is a mountain of bureaucracy and public ignorance.
Any views?
REX
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: KDEN
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In North America it's legal with pax, providing some conditions are met. I can't recall what exactly those conditions are, but a turbine powered, autopilot equipped single fits the bill.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Enzed
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Rex,
Try Http://www.caa.govt.nz
then go as follows:
Rules & More
Rules
Pt 125
Amendments
Amendment #1 - 21/10/99
Thats the Kiwi Rule. The original NPRM is also probably on the site somewhere and that will have some background to the SEIFR Rule
Cheers
Try Http://www.caa.govt.nz
then go as follows:
Rules & More
Rules
Pt 125
Amendments
Amendment #1 - 21/10/99
Thats the Kiwi Rule. The original NPRM is also probably on the site somewhere and that will have some background to the SEIFR Rule
Cheers
After considerable deliberation and debate, FAA regulations permitting FAR Part 135 (pax)single engine IFR operations, were approved subject to the following requirements.
FAA FSAW info on SEIFR ops
and your own set of FAR'S to refer to. FAA FAR's
For current information regarding this topic in the UK, you might do well to contact Bob Crowe, who will probably know the current status of this project (and will sell you a nice Caravan as well!)
There have been a variety of attempts to operate SEIFR in the UK for freight hauling, under foreign operating certificates. With calculated deliberation and determination the CAA shut them all down.
Modern single engine turbine equipment has a lot to offer the fare paying public. It enables cost effective airfreight on thin routes (Fed-Ex in the US); as well as allowing safe, reliable and cost effective passenger carriage to areas that may not otherwise have access to viable air transportation.
Anyone got any further insight into the UK interpretation on these regulations and future developments?
FAA FSAW info on SEIFR ops
and your own set of FAR'S to refer to. FAA FAR's
For current information regarding this topic in the UK, you might do well to contact Bob Crowe, who will probably know the current status of this project (and will sell you a nice Caravan as well!)
There have been a variety of attempts to operate SEIFR in the UK for freight hauling, under foreign operating certificates. With calculated deliberation and determination the CAA shut them all down.
Modern single engine turbine equipment has a lot to offer the fare paying public. It enables cost effective airfreight on thin routes (Fed-Ex in the US); as well as allowing safe, reliable and cost effective passenger carriage to areas that may not otherwise have access to viable air transportation.
Anyone got any further insight into the UK interpretation on these regulations and future developments?
Most countries now permit commercial SEIFR, with inevitable restrictions.
Here in Europe, however, it's still firmly prohibited, obviously including the CAA. There's a fairly healthy debate going on about whether it should be permitted in JAA countries with rather inevitably the "yes" camp clustered around Pilatus and the "no" camp clustered around Britten-Norman. Frankly, it'll happen here in Europe within not many years, subject to probably much the same operating rules as currently apply to FAA / CASA / CAANZ operators.
I suspect that this applies only to FW mind you, it will probably be much longer, if ever, before RW SEIFR becomes acceptable.
Is it a good thing? Well, if I gave my view on that, you'd know whether I work for BNG or Pilatus. It seems largely to depend upon how you read the stats.
G
Here in Europe, however, it's still firmly prohibited, obviously including the CAA. There's a fairly healthy debate going on about whether it should be permitted in JAA countries with rather inevitably the "yes" camp clustered around Pilatus and the "no" camp clustered around Britten-Norman. Frankly, it'll happen here in Europe within not many years, subject to probably much the same operating rules as currently apply to FAA / CASA / CAANZ operators.
I suspect that this applies only to FW mind you, it will probably be much longer, if ever, before RW SEIFR becomes acceptable.
Is it a good thing? Well, if I gave my view on that, you'd know whether I work for BNG or Pilatus. It seems largely to depend upon how you read the stats.
G
Martin is absolutely correct, Bob Crowe's web site has some excellent current information regarding this topic <a href="http://www.bobcroweaircraft.com/" target="_blank">here.</a>
I have been involved in operating a large number of single and twin fixed wing equipment (in addition to the obvious helicopters). I have had a Caravan for 5 years now, and frankly, it is the VERY BEST aircraft, of any description, I have ever owned and operated.
It is understandable and absolutely correct that an evolutinary technological advance be carefully examined by all interested parties, to ensure that the progression is made without undue risk to the general public; passengers; or the industry overall. To do otherwise would be disingenuous for all concerned.
The difficulty arises when established, intransigent positions are taken regarding the issues, without the ability to effectively ensure that the issue is being judged upon its merits, rather than politics, prejudices and pedantry.
I have watched at first hand the activities in the UK as the CAA drove these operators out of business. I do not believe that they were given a fair shot at proving (by one means or another) the viability of what they were trying to do - namely cost effectively hauling freight.
At some point I am sure that the position will change and progress will be made. Personally, I believe the potential for 3rd level carriers in the UK is significant, with the ever continuing congestion on roads and railways.
The ability to provide safe, time efficient and cost effect transportation is what the customer wants isn't it?
The customer is what the commercial air transportation business is all about, or has some tax-payer funded beaurocrat somewhere forgotten that???
With the current crisis in the UK (and world) air transportation business, this might be the most appropriate time ever, to approve and initiate this sector of aviation. As the industry slows, the availability of both commercial and regulatory resources can only be benefitted by any opportunity to expand upon its existent capability.
I have been involved in operating a large number of single and twin fixed wing equipment (in addition to the obvious helicopters). I have had a Caravan for 5 years now, and frankly, it is the VERY BEST aircraft, of any description, I have ever owned and operated.
It is understandable and absolutely correct that an evolutinary technological advance be carefully examined by all interested parties, to ensure that the progression is made without undue risk to the general public; passengers; or the industry overall. To do otherwise would be disingenuous for all concerned.
The difficulty arises when established, intransigent positions are taken regarding the issues, without the ability to effectively ensure that the issue is being judged upon its merits, rather than politics, prejudices and pedantry.
I have watched at first hand the activities in the UK as the CAA drove these operators out of business. I do not believe that they were given a fair shot at proving (by one means or another) the viability of what they were trying to do - namely cost effectively hauling freight.
At some point I am sure that the position will change and progress will be made. Personally, I believe the potential for 3rd level carriers in the UK is significant, with the ever continuing congestion on roads and railways.
The ability to provide safe, time efficient and cost effect transportation is what the customer wants isn't it?
The customer is what the commercial air transportation business is all about, or has some tax-payer funded beaurocrat somewhere forgotten that???
With the current crisis in the UK (and world) air transportation business, this might be the most appropriate time ever, to approve and initiate this sector of aviation. As the industry slows, the availability of both commercial and regulatory resources can only be benefitted by any opportunity to expand upon its existent capability.
