FAA & CAA disagree over B747 continued 3 engine flight

[L337]

bermondseya:

Following your argument to its logical conclusion.

Say I fly from London to Bombay. I fly over probably 10 - 15 different countries. I would need to be au-fait with every countries minutia of there equivalent of the FAA, and comply with each and every countries individual needs.

Well this clearly does not happen. Nor does it happen for US aircraft flying into Europe, or European aircraft flying into the USA.

So if you think when I lose an engine over Kazakhstan, that my first concern is to delve into some mythical library that my Jumbo has, and consider my next action is, according to Kazakhstan regs, you must be living in cloud barking land.

I have regulations that are approved by the CAA. That is whom I am answerable to. If the FAA don't like what the CAA have agreed, then let them talk about it.

To say that "foreign airmen operating in US airspace should be 'au fait' with FAR 129" Is just stupid. If it was correct I would have to be au fait with the regulations of every country in the world that I fly over. And as a BA longhaul pilot that is virtually every country in the world.

L337