Airline operating illegally

[AERO DYNAMIK]

If one had knowledge of an airline operating illegally into UK airports, that is an airline in direct contravention of its own operations manuals ( this contravention sanctioned by senior management) what would be the relevant department (email address) to contact within the UK CAA

[Sonic Zepplin]

This topic came up just last night in discussion with fellow pilot in the USA.

I am sure we all know of wrong doings within this colorful industry, and would love to shed some light to the proper authorities about certain issues, but as I understand it, most go unchecked even when exposed and ultimately can destroy ones career.

Happy flying

[phoenix son]

AERO DYNAMIK,

Check PM's...

[TheOddOne]

...or you could go to

CAA Safety Regulation Group e-mail contact list (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=3&pagetype=90&pageid=1455)

If you are at a UK licenced aerodrome and you think that there is an aircraft on the ground that should not fly for safety reasons, then you should see if there is anyone there who can detain it. There usually is at major aerodromes. Start with Air Traffic, they should know how to put you in touch with them.

If you have knowledge that could have prevented an aircraft crashing but did nothing about it, you may be considered as liable as those directly responsible.

On the other hand, if you maliciously make a false statement about a safety (or security) issue then you could also be liable for prosecution, so carefully examine your motives for your actions.

However, no-one will ever criticise someone who makes a mis-statement with good intent. For instance, the person in the car park who is convinced they saw something fall off an aircraft, causing an all-day but fruitless search, will probably be OK but the telephone bomb hoaxer will almost certainly go to jail (in the UK).

Cheers,
TheOddOne

[Kalium Chloride]

Brown envelope to an aviation magazine works wonders... :suspect:

[eal401]

If you have knowledge that could have prevented an aircraft crashing but did nothing about it, you may be considered as liable as those directly responsible.

On the other hand, if you maliciously make a false statement about a safety (or security) issue then you could also be liable for prosecution, so carefully examine your motives for your actions.

Translation: You're f***ed either way.

[TheOddOne]

eal401

Yup, you got it.

Actually, the message was 'put up or shut up'.

TOO

[BOEINGBOY1]

You wouldn't be refering to a LGW based 73/75/76 charter airline, with Islandic conections would you?

[ILS26L]

Illegal operation also relates to working crew over legal hours... this happens a lot within almost all the airlines with staff shortages (i.e. All of them for the time being).

It´s an eye opener to see how newly recruits are exploited and intimidated to work over the legal hours, or to report for flights when either unfit or simply off duty. This activity is to be reported to the CAA authority, because as mentioned above, should there be a problem during the flight, you accepted to go on duty (and "I didn´t know is not a excuse in the eyes of the law)...

[qwertyuiop]

ILS26L,

Name the airlines you believe break the rules. The charter airline I work for at LGW may try to be smart at times but DO NOT bend the rules.

[Boss Raptor]

I believe the appropriate CAA branch is Flight Operations - Quality Assurance at Gatwick who handle inspections of all non UK operators - they in turn pass their findings to DETR and the operators own authority

Safety Regulation Group
Civil Aviation Authority
Aviation House
Gatwick Airport South
West Sussex RH6 0YR
T: 01293 567171

[abra]

You wouldn't be refering to a LTN based 75/76 charter airline,with Jerman connections would you?

[Bealzebub]

ILS26,

I would be interested to know what you are referring to ? You say crews work "over legal hours" what do you mean ? Crews can work longer than the FTL table limits if the Captain excercises discretion. This may allow for anything up to an additional 3 hours on the planning FTL limits. That is not illegal. FTL can be a complex subject and it is worth reading your companies operations manual from time to time, so that you are better aware of what is permissable in various situations. I would be the first to admit that the subject can be difficult, but I doubt that crews are actually working illegally, since it would fall squarely on the captains shoulders in most instances. Few captains are easily intimidated. Of course any extension of a duty period should require a corresponding increase in the subsequent rest period.

Being "fit to go on duty" is normally a decision for the individual. If you feel you are not fit, then you phone in sick. Of course sickness does often put pressure on the crewing department which in turn falls back on the remaining crew. If you fly when unfit to do so, then you are in violation of the rules and of course it is then you that are operating illegally. operating while off duty is of course not possible, since you would be on duty. Working on a planned "day off" is also not illegal provided the overall limits as laid down in the FTL scheme are not violated. Normally it is up to the individual to agree to surrender such a day.

I do appreciate that in the real world there is often considerable pressure applied to work beyond the planned limits often at short notice. In reality there is a good deal of flexibilty in the companies FTL schemes as agreed with the authority, that permits this. Obviously it is not acceptable to undertake any duty that is actually outside the rules and it is incumbent on both the operator and the crewmember to ensure this does not happen. In my experience few crewmembers and particularly cabin crew do take the trouble to properly understand the rules. If you are in any doubt ask. If you are not satisfied ask the operating Captain ( before departure).

Finally, any real violation is not acceptable. If this happens then you can certainly report the matter to the authority, or if you wish to CHIRP, the confidential reporting body at Farnborough. I have to say though that I would be very surprised if an operator was electing to act outside of the law. Usually the real problem is an individuals perception of what the law actually is.

[ILS26L]

Hi Bealzebub,

I agree with the points you mention and on how complex Flying Time Limitations can be. Therefore, I understand that flying extra hours on the chart in order to bring the aircraft back to home base is a reasonable and legal decision. Therefore, the following situations have occured in my airline and I question their legality :

1) Knowing you are going into discretion from home base on a 4 sector day

2) Being called out of stand by when you stand by hours are over.

3) If your stand by duty is from 6am to 12pm, being called out at 11am to operate a flight checking in at 15pm.

4) Being given only 10 hours rest at home base between flying duties

5) Working 5 days on, having only one day off (which doesn't include 2 local nights) and working an addition 4 days on with 2 days off after this shift.

6) Having a roster change with less than 12 hours notification, with no choice given.

7) Going into discretion, flying a total of 15 hours (due to diversion purposes in one of the tricky destinations this airline flies too) and not given 15 hours rest at home base.

I could go on because all these activity takes place, and the sad thing is, crewing exercise this on new recruits who are not aware of FTL and their rights relating to Crew rest. I have tried to put forward to the union to request an additional training day in the initial crew course in order to mention FTL, but the airline doesn't really like the idea.... wonder why ?

[Bealzebub]

It is a complex subject ILS26L and there are slightly different rules for flight deck crew and cabin crew. To answer your questions, you must properly consult your own companies operations manual, since there may be variations. I will try and answer your questions broadly.

1) Popular misconception this one. It is perfectly OK for the captain to excercise discretion from any base even before the first sector has started if he elects to do so. That discretion may be up to 2 hours ( normally) for the first and subsequent sectors, but may be up to 3 hours for a single sector flight or prior to the last sector of a multi sector flight. So yes this perfectly legal.

2) Standby is a duty period and the calculation of hours becomes slightly more complex depending on whether or not you are called out from it. There are maximum limits set on how long a standby duty can be ( 12hours) however if a flying duty commences from a standby duty then the limiting factor is the allowable Flight duty period plus the time spent on sby up to a maximum of 6 hours. In other words beyond 6 hours the meter starts running as if the flying duty had started at actual sby start time plus 6 hours. After your standby duty has terminated your time is yours again. If you elect to fly because you have agreed to and provided the overall limits are not violated then again this would be legal. However as you have completed a duty you are entitled to a rest period and so the choice is yours.

3) Sby 6am - midday and called out at 11 am for a 3 pm check in. Again no problem. Refer to answer 2 above. You dont say how many sectors but lets assume its 2 ( deduct 45 mins per sector if more and add 45 mins if 1). The FDP limit in this example is based on the sby start time so that is 12H 15 mins plus up to 6 hours of the time spent on SBY. Callout was at 11 am so that would be 5 hours plus 12 :15 = 17 hours and 15 mins from 6 am. In other words the duty is allowable until 23:15 on chocks. Also bear in mind the answer to (1) above. So again yes this is perfectly legal.

4) Rest should be as long as the preceeding duty or 12 hours whichever is the greater. Exceptionally at home base individual crewmembers may be asked to use their own discretion to reduce the rest by one hour. Even so for Flight deck there is a 12 hour minimum stipulation and 11 hours for cabin crew. It is the bit about " 10 hours rest at home" that I would question. The operator is only required to ensure the rest period between duties is to these limits. That takes no account of your own travelling or social arrangments. So if they haven't given you this rest period then you must tell them that you cannot undertake the subsequent duty. If however you simply havent had 10 hours rest at home because of your own domestic arrangements then I am afraid that is not their concern and yes it would be legal.

5) You can work up to 7 consecutive days between days off. You should have 2 consecutive days off in any consecutive 14 day period. So yes it is perfectly OK to roster 1 day off after 5 days work provided that they then roster 2 days off within or after the next 7 day period. They have done this, so that is legal. A single day off will include 2 local nights and cover at least 34 hours. You say your duty didn't include 2 local nights ( you need to be clear what 2 local nights actually defines as). In addition local variations may apply if agreement has been reached with aircrew associations. You don't give enough information to be clear on this, but based on the factual information you have supplied this does appear to be legal.

6) Provided you are not infringing FTL rules, so what ? This happens all the time. Companies often need to change the roster to allow for unforseen events ( or not as the case may be). It is not unusual to turn up for a flight and only then be rostered to fly somewhere else. This is the nature of the job, and although it can be a monumental nuisance it is perfectly legal.

7) See (1) above. A 15 hour duty would require 15 hours subsequent rest at home base, again subject to the answer given in (4) above. So if you were given 14 hours and agreed to this, that would be legal. You don't say how long the rest period was or if indeed this was the rest period and not how long you had at home ( see last sentence in 4 above.)

As you can see, it is less than simple. In the 7 examples you have given I would broadly say that your company was operating legally given the information you have supplied in detail. You are slightly vague on a couple of points, so it is not possible to give a fully considered reply on those items.

I have to say that, it really is important to read and try and understand what the rules actually state in your company FTL scheme. Very few people do take the time. Many people see what they want to see and fail to appreciate that there is considerable flexibility built into the schemes. There is an onus on the company and the crewmember to ensure they operate within the rules. Sometimes mistakes are made, but it is no good moaning about the rules unless you have a good working knowledge of what they actually are.

Anyway I hope this is of some help ?

[MaxBlow]

I go with eal401 cause I´ve been there.
26L is addressing some serious issues and I think it´s well worth to question the roster at times.
B. gives the answers and it sounds as though you guys work for the same outfit in somewhat different positions.

I believe that flt. duty and rest regs are very important and it´s important to understand PartA and all its subchapters specially if it´s not your native language.

I´ve been on a contract and refused to fly an airplane for a no-go item which appearently was known to mx for a couple of days.
A local guy replaced me, I called the CAA, safa check at dest., big problems for the airline and I got fired the next day.

And yes - if it happens again I do it again. If my family travels on an airplane I´m expecting the crew to act according to airline politics which at least on paper should never put financial interests before safety. It´s very sad to see that some companies did not yet get their priorities right. It´s even worst that most times something bad happend there´ll be nobody left to ask. And last: It is very sad to see that most of the people in charge are pilots themselfs who somehow probably forgot where they once came from.

:yuk: :yuk:

[ILS26L]

During my experience as crew, I have been able to notice that the captain is not in charge of the aircraft, the airline Operations Department is... and I know a lot of pilots reading this won't agree with this comment, but the reality can often be an eye opener. I've often seen captain's change their minds and come back on their decisions after receiving a certain amount of pressure from their Ops Dept.

Thanks for all the explanations relating to the different situations I had posted. I am currently studying your reply and checking it with the CAA CAP for Crew Fatigue. I think that it is important that all these issues are covered, and maybe even the creation of a website where crew can post situations and enquiries would be a good idea and could make the flying environment a bit better. It is true that you get a lot of moaners who can't even take 5 minutes to go through the books to check what the rules are, but I also think that in some situations, some airline departments would rather have crew not knowing the rules...

[Bealzebub]

No ILS,

I have to disagree with you. Although I appreciate your sentiment, the Captain is most definetaly in charge of the aircraft. I cannot speak for all Captains but I would make the following points.

Sometimes a situation can arise that causes me to challenge another department within the company structure. This might be a crewing matter, it might be an operational matter, possibly engineering, or even a management call. At the end of the day I have the absolute right to decline to accept a situation if in my judgement to do so would be the correct and proper course of action. However, it can often be the case, that a decision is initially made provisionally and based on a limited amount of knowledge. It is quite proper to seek further guidance and clarification on a point, and subject to that further information, either confirm, modify or indeed reverse the initial decision. If I were doing this with my crewmembers it would be applying aspects of Crew Resource Management (CRM). For a Captain many of those same techniques also need to be applied deeper into the companies operational structure. It is true that operations or crewing may well apply pressure, but of course to a degree that is part of their job. Sometimes a forceful presentation of information is necessary for it to be given the proper degree of attention.

Just like you, I often get annoyed and irritated by situations beyond my immediate control and that is often caused by things that I may feel are unfair or incorrect. Upon closer and more in depth inspection it may well be the case that I am misunderstanding or failing to objectively appreciate what is actually being said. We are all human, and it would be unnatural for most of us not to be affected by such annoyances in our day to day lives. I can tell you that as a Captain it is sometimes very hard to take a step back from a decision or a firmly held opinion, and have to reconsider a matter from another viewpoint. Nevertheless, it is a fundamental part of the job. On the other hand there has been many an occaision when the situation has been reversed and my decision has been accepted, when on reflection it may have had less merit than I initially conveyed. This is part and parcel of the job.

I do not doubt what you say about crewing or operations putting people under pressure from time to time. I also appreciate that is significantly less likely that a junior crewmember has the will, experience, knowledge or seniority to necessarily stand firm against such pressure be it actual or perceived. We have all been in that position at one time or other and it is very uncomfortable.
However, it is not in a companies interest to break the rules. Companies are subject to audit in all departments on an annual basis. If crewmembers feel they have been wronged there are a number of procedures open to them to report the matter. Obviously one would hope the company had a system in place for such matters ( as they should!). The crewmember can report the matter to the authority if they really believe a serious violation has occurred or is likely to occur if a fault remains unchecked. There are also confidential channels for reporting matters if the reporter wishes to remain anonymous to their employerl. You say most companies would rather crew did not know the rules, but with respect this is really not the case. In fact as we have discussed throughout this thread, the rules are there to be read and understood. It would actually make things much easier if crews did understand the rules as it would cut down on the number of misunderstanding based complaints. I have said it before, but will say it again, crews must read the relevant portions of the ops manual and arm themselves with a workable understanding. The rules do have a great deal of flexibility built into them. Most Captains and First Officers would be more than happy to explain aspects that may not be readilly understood. Sometimes the rules lend themselves to interpretation and guidance may need to be sought to get an understanding of the application to a specific situation. Again if in doubt ask.

We all work hard and often fly long and tiring days. We all get fed up with the workload and seek to offset it wherever possible. Sometimes ops and crewing get it wrong, or fail to have updated information. It is incumbent on all of us to ensure we operate within the rules and to understand what those rules are. Everyday that I turn up for work, it is in the knowledge that however long a day I think I am going to work, it may well prove to be a good deal longer. It might take me anything up to 3 hours into the discretion allowed on my FDP. It might involve an unscheduled nightstop. It might be a short flight substituted by a long and unpopular one. It might involve having to make difficult judgement calls on a whole host of subjects. Inevitably it will nearly always mean having to impose the same hardships and gross inconveniences on the rest of my crew as well. I am afraid this is what the job often entails.

In these days of cutbacks, rationalisation, maximum efficiency and all the other corporate buzz words, we are all working close to the limit and often right up to it. I doubt there are many of us that do not feel put upon by our companies and its various departments on occaisions. However I have to say that errors aside, I do not operate outside the strict boundaries of the rules and regulations, and therefore I don't allow my company to either. However I have to repeat once again that those absolute boundaries are often not as restrictive or seemingly fair as you might think they are. You must seek to understand the rules as they actually exist and apply commonsense to the application of what is contained within those boundaries.

My apologies to the threads author if this topic has slanted in a slightly different direction from that intended.

[2Bad2Sad]

Have to agree to max blow.
You take the walk off the aircraft operating with a known MEL restriction, you also walk away with no job.
They wait till you request days off then you get the notice to not return, Contract not renewed.
Since said contract is in another country you have no legal recourse for action.
Someone will replace you in your position, company guy etc.
Rules and safety issues mean nothing even with the CAA when you are confirmed to be correct as to you keeping your position.
The CAA will not help you keep you job.
They will say thank you and end the story, company will get the old slap on the wrist and all is forgiven.
Meanwhile your job is gone.
Been there done that, this northern cold country is paying off the world to look the other direction!
Heard one say earlier, they all smarter than Mr. Boeing and his MEL/DDPG.
Not a question, a proven fact.

[FE Hoppy]

Must agree with the above post.
I too know of a case where somone lost their job for refusing to fly outside of the MEL.

Not straight away but at the first opportune moment.

He would do the same again. But he doesn't fly anymore.

:hmm:

[ILS26L]

Bealzebub,

What do you think about the 2 posts above ?

I understand your point of view, but I can guarantee that most captains in the industry would rather follow a order issued by their ops dept (even if it goes against certain rules) than risk to loose their jobs... And this was exactly what I was referring too. Although I highly respect your attitude and your point of view, and only wish their were more Capts. who shared your point of view.

[Bealzebub]

What do I think of the two posts ? Well I think it is bad. I don't doubt there are unscupulous operators in the world, and that people are unfairly subject to the whims of such operators. I haven't responded to those posts because I am not sure I can contribute anything other than interest. I did however respond to your post which specifically dealt with flight time issues, exploitation, and captains authority ( or lack of it). Those where the issues that you specifically raised and I specifically addressed. These are matters affecting CAA regulated UK carriers. I also asked you what you were referring to before replying to the points.

I have tried to reply accurately to your points in the order you have raised them. I have to say that some of what you say has merit, but clearly some of the more sweeping statements are seemingly borne out of a lack of actual appreciation of the regulations as they stand. Obviously it is up to you to accept or refute what I say as you see fit. Nevertheless it is ridiculous to say that Captains would follow "orders"and break rules rather than lose their jobs. This is patent nonsense on a number of levels, and whatever you may think it is not the norm. I can assure you that if I fly knowingly outside the MEL or any part of the operations manual my employer and the CAA would take a very dim view of it. That may not be the case in all parts of the world, nor even in all parts of the industry. However your assertions are frankly not accurate in general. They are your viewpoint, but with respect that doesn't make them "fact".

[Stan Woolley]

Nevertheless it is ridiculous to say that Captains would follow "orders"and break rules rather than lose their jobs. This is patent nonsense on a number of levels, and whatever you may think it is not the norm.

I'm very sorry to say I don't think it's nonsense at all, you probably work for one of the better operators, I used to but unfortunately no longer. It's all relative.

Breaking rules is a strange and complex issue and I agree it is not the norm,but it certainly happens on a regular basis.

[Mobster lover]

Unfortunately there are incidences of UK airlines putting pressure on crews to operate "outside" the the CAP's, MEL's and Ops manuals.

These are however very serious allegations and you must be totally sure of your facts and have plenty of evidence before doing anything about it.

You can be sure that reporting anything like this would get very ugly, very fast, but to be honest it is the right thing to do. However hard and risky.

With regard to FTL's, there is not really any excuse for not knowing them and implementing them correctly. That is our responsibility as crew, yes crewing and ops should understand them, but at the end of the day it is up to us to comply.

Most people are reasonable and will do all they can to "help out" in times of trouble, but I think this thread is more about being expected to push the boundries on a daily basis. For example according to my reading of CAP 371, if you know you will be going into discretion before you start the final sector on STD times, then discretion isn't really open for your use. Therefore to fit within CAP 371 you must NOT operate that sector.

I stress that this is my interpretation, but nobdy has been able to convince me differently, including our Ops dept.

[Bealzebub]

This is CAP 371 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF) . It is the Civil Aviation authority publication that provides the framework for each companys CAA approved FTL scheme. Page 12 section 18 is the reference for Captains Discretion to extend a flying duty period.
I cannot see that there is a great deal to interpret here. It clearly states that :

An aircraft commander may at his discretion and after taking note of the circumstances of other members of the crew, extend an FDP beyond that permitted in section 13.3 provided he is satisfied that the flight can be made safely. The extension shall be calculated according to what actually happens, not on what was planned to happen. An extension of 3 hours is the maximum permitted, except in cases of emergency.

A commander is authorised to excercise his discretion in the following circumstances and to the limits set. In a flying duty period involving 2 or more sectors, up to a maximum of 2 hours may be excercised prior to the first and subsequent sectors, but this may be up to 3 hours prior to the start of a single sector flight, or immediately prior to the last sector of a multi sector flight.

I cannot see the ambiguity myself. The final decision rests with the Captain. The company cannot roster a flight that is clearly going to require discretion at the planning stage, but it is acceptable, albeit not compulsory, for a flight to depart knowing that discretion will be needed prior to the first, last or any sector in between up to the limits specified. Which part of the CAP 371 are you saying would not allow for this ? In any event as the Captain it is always your final decision.

I agree there are indeed many instances of pressure being applied to Captains to operate( not always obviously ) outside of the rules and regulations. If and when this happens it is of course the duty of the Captain to act as final judge and decide accordingly. That is in part why we are appointed to the rank, and a large part of what we are paid for. Staying with the judge analogy for a moment. In a courtroom the advocates also apply pressure to the judge to make a decision which satisfies their ( or their clients) agenda. Not of all of that pressure will have merit or be correct necessarily, but it still requires the Judge or Captain ( if you will) to be the final arbiter.

In this industry as in many others, there are serious commercial pressures, and resulting from those, the pressure applied to individuals is often going to vary in its intensity and accuracy. I totally accept that there may be occaisions when an individual has pressure applied to them to go against their best judgement. Whatever form that takes and however the individual reacts is always going to be a result of the realities and perception of risk at the time. But at the end of the day you are the Captain ( for those that are), and the buck stops with you as far as any individual flight is concerned.

[Mobster lover]

Unfortunately many companies do roster it so tight, that you know that discretion will have to be excercised when you get your roster, let alone on the day. In my case the company knows how long flights will actually take, but often ignore the reality and stick to unrealistic STD's.

We have many flights that are rostered to the minute of the FDP limits. As we all know it is rare for everything to go right and even when there are no problems rarely do you even get close, but why do companies insist on running so close to the wind?

It leaves them open to lots of problems, from captains not wishing to exercise discretion due to real tiredness, or somebody who wants to make a point. The only people who suffer are the customers and the airline itself. It doesn't look good if people constantly refuse discretion, but it is their right.

Personally, I don't normally mind using it as long as everyone else is o.k about it (whilst I'll take the responsibility for the decision, if my F/O is not comfortable or not able, then no matter how I feel it's a no go), it is not a given however that this is the case, but I baulk at agreeing to simply cover poor rostering practises. Which is the crux of the matter here.

Often this means that you have to take a stand for this to be noticed and acted upon, this leaves you open to all sorts of criticism and potential attack depending on your company attitude.

[Bealzebub]

Yes ML I agree with you. I don't know why they do it, but assume it is for commercial expediancy. I also agree with your observations on discretion. I think the difficulty arises though when anyone takes a stand to make a point. Obviously that is their right, but of course it is open to question. As I stated in a previous post, you are the Captain and the decision is yours. Of course if that decision is erroneous then it doesn't indemnify the Captain from having to account for it. I would also suspect that if one is going to make a point, it might well be reciprocated at some later date when an equally rigid response is less than desirable. However that is again a matter for the individual. Only the individual can apply common sense and measure their own level of stance, be it resistance or co-operation.

[2Bad2Sad]

Problem being no one stand behind the crew.
Too many folks from failed airlines, Ansett, Emery some ex Eastern to include many others.
You notify your Crew Leasing agent such as D. P. out of Ireland an are told not to ever operate this way by them ever.
Yet they see the pay records, over duty days, 120 block hours in a 20 day period and they wont help with the problem.
All though they pay you as over duty, even after you complain.
Then when you finally have enough after many repeated letters you talk the walk, this is wrong you cannot do this any longer.
You go home on unpaid days off, 10 days etc after 3 months on base, you get the non contract renewal.
They know you operated illegally as you have complainied in writing many times.
They even agreed with you, then no job.
I think we all know this company that is being discussed here.
This from a long time employee that had enough.

Question is?
Would you work for this Icelandic company?
Would you work for the crew leasing agent that does not honor its contract obligations, such as operating by the JAR regulations.
If you took the walk off the aircraft after many complaints, duty times, MEL non observance etc.
Even the crew leasing agent asking you not to contact the CAA.
Would not want my family on this aircraft.
Any pilot that operates this way is only asking for trouble and is not correct in any way..
Shortaqge of crew and no parts not my problem, this excuse is invalid, heard too many times.

[BOAC]

ML - We have many flights that are rostered to the minute of the FDP limits. - bearing in mind that FDP finishes on chocks, is this true - or are you being rostered 'to the FDP minute' at chocks + 30? There is a difference, and I believe that the CAA expect airlines to allow this buffer? A lot of people in my experience have whined about being rostered 'out-of-FDP' but have not allowed for those 30 minutes. Any CAA 'regulated' (note the apostrophes!) airline that has an excessive 'regular' amount of discretion being exercised (normally more than 30% on a particular trip pattern) will, I'm sure, be looked at if the CAA are told. That is most definitely an abuse of the system.

[Mobster lover]

BOAC, yes it is based solely on FDP and yes we do have the CAA breathing down our necks about the amount of discretion being used, unfortunately some of my colleagues are not filling in the forms as they should and large amounts of discretion are going unreported. Very daft.

[tall and tasty]

Contact the CAA without fail as others on here have said LGW for the below except the licensing but they will contact the London office

Big issue are the hull insurance, the licesensing issues and safety regulations - pax and crew are at risk

If you have any info please pass it on ASAP

But you will need details so the CAA can look into it properly

TnT

[BOAC]

unfortunately some of my colleagues are not filling in the forms as they should and large amounts of discretion are going unreported - in that case, my sympathies! Plus, of course, breach of AOC by not reporting discretion. Needs sorting as TnT has said.

CHIRP will, I'm sure, help you.

BTW All: PLEASE let's not open this into a slanging match on CHIRP.

[You splitter]

unfortunately some of my colleagues are not filling in the forms as they should and large amounts of discretion are going unreported. Very daft.

Yes very daft and shouldn't really be missed by the CAA. I am the person responsible in my company for the FTL scheme and as such I have to monitor all use of discretion. I also handle that aspect of the annual (or even twice yearly) audit by the CAA. They now work to what is called a process audit. Rather than just take a smaple of voyage reports and check them for errors they actually audit our processes and procedures. Therefore I have to show that the these procedures are robust enough to both monitor and control the use of discretion. If they are not then a finding is made against the airline.

Part of my procedures involve running a post flight violation report which highlights any violation of the company FTL scheme. It will show any FDP exceeded and I therefore will ensure that we have the corrosponding Discretion report which then goes through its own procedures.

I fail to see how an operator can prove to the authority they have robust controls and then manage to 'lose' discretion reports.

Maybe my procedures are too good if I cant get away with it. :{

[MaxBlow]

The situation I explained earlier was not with AAI but with another fairly big charter company operating into all European countries. Not to blame AAI - Don´t know much about them.

[The Real Slim Shady]

CAP 371 gives guidance to Operators and crew on the minimum FTL permissible.

Someone at the airline writes the company FTL scheme and submits to the Authority for approval; that is why every airline has a slightly different scheme.

If you contact the CAA about your company's FTL scheme you are more than likely to be told that ' the interpretation of their FTL scheme is left to the operator'