PNG AIR fuel policy or lack of?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PNG AIR fuel policy or lack of?
I hear via the jungle drums that png air have changed their fuel policy to one where should an alternate be required, they only have to arrive at the alternate with 30 mins fixed reserve.
No allowance for variable reserve or approach fuel on the atln sector. Apparently casa png have allowed this.
I am talking about a turbo prop operation here, For as long as I can remember Turboprop ops in PNG were required to carry 45 FR and 15% contingency fuel(jet ops are 30 FR and 10%) The reason for the difference being the much slower flight times by prop aircraft.
There have been numerous cases where the idiot at PNG Air responsible for the policy change has landed with low fuel lights on at remote locations, an accident waiting to happen.
I also hear that a flt was dispatched out of Lihir with only 1 flight attendant on board for 71 passengers, totally illegal.
Casa PNG needs to get on the case.
I am pretty sure that the PNG CAR and CAO have been breached in both cases, there will be an accident before long.
No allowance for variable reserve or approach fuel on the atln sector. Apparently casa png have allowed this.
I am talking about a turbo prop operation here, For as long as I can remember Turboprop ops in PNG were required to carry 45 FR and 15% contingency fuel(jet ops are 30 FR and 10%) The reason for the difference being the much slower flight times by prop aircraft.
There have been numerous cases where the idiot at PNG Air responsible for the policy change has landed with low fuel lights on at remote locations, an accident waiting to happen.
I also hear that a flt was dispatched out of Lihir with only 1 flight attendant on board for 71 passengers, totally illegal.
Casa PNG needs to get on the case.
I am pretty sure that the PNG CAR and CAO have been breached in both cases, there will be an accident before long.
Faheel,
You felt compelled enough to write to PPrune, but not CASA?
.... or PX.
You felt compelled enough to write to PPrune, but not CASA?
But PNG Air haven’t killed anyone.... pity the same cannot be said for APNG or MBA.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"You felt compelled enough to write to PPrune, but not CASA?"
Correct, its not my place to write to CASA ,this is a rumour network and I am reporting what has been said to me in confidence.
The guys that told me this work up there and have first hand knowledge of these incidents,not I, as such I suggested they take their concerns to CASA.
What is interesting is the person driving these changes was deemed not a fit and proper person by CASA years ago due to his gun running episode.
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2004-.../564734?pfm=sm
Correct, its not my place to write to CASA ,this is a rumour network and I am reporting what has been said to me in confidence.
The guys that told me this work up there and have first hand knowledge of these incidents,not I, as such I suggested they take their concerns to CASA.
What is interesting is the person driving these changes was deemed not a fit and proper person by CASA years ago due to his gun running episode.
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2004-.../564734?pfm=sm
Correct, its not my place to write to CASA ,this is a rumour network and I am reporting what has been said to me in confidence.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't really get excited about this, but I am intrigued that someone allegedly shared this with you 'in confidence', a confidence which you broke by posting it on a rumour network, or they shared it wanting you to take some action, and you thought it was so serious that a rumour network was the appropriate place, rather than the regulator?
Enuff said from me.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the problem with rumour networks......the facts might explain what is going on as opposed to just some of the facts.
While the flight from A to B will show a variable reserve as a % on the CFP, the alternate fuel consists of; - Missed approach manoeuvre, Flight to alternate, Arrival manoeuvre, Approach, Landing, % variable. You will need to check their Fuel Policy for this. It will just show on the CFP as just one single figure. I'm quoting here from my current operator, maybe PNG is different but I doubt it. For as long as I can remember the variable % for the alternate has never been tabulated separately so maybe they are just catching up with standard ICAO practise.
While the flight from A to B will show a variable reserve as a % on the CFP, the alternate fuel consists of; - Missed approach manoeuvre, Flight to alternate, Arrival manoeuvre, Approach, Landing, % variable. You will need to check their Fuel Policy for this. It will just show on the CFP as just one single figure. I'm quoting here from my current operator, maybe PNG is different but I doubt it. For as long as I can remember the variable % for the alternate has never been tabulated separately so maybe they are just catching up with standard ICAO practise.
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Port Moresby - The beer is cold at the Aviat and Car Clubs
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
10 Posts
Faheel,
State does NOT trump ICAO.
PNG is a signatory to ICAO Annex and is required to conduct itself accordingly. For example age 65 on International Ops.
Read Balus Kaptan's post, he's right!
State does NOT trump ICAO.
PNG is a signatory to ICAO Annex and is required to conduct itself accordingly. For example age 65 on International Ops.
Read Balus Kaptan's post, he's right!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read again the convention: https://www.icao.int/publications/Do.../7300_cons.pdf
It's permitted to depart from the ICAO rules and standards provided that it's notified to the ICAO
Article 38 Any State which finds it impracticable to comply in all respects with any such international standard or procedure, or to bring its own regulations or practices into full accord with any international standard or procedure after amendment of the latter, or which deems it necessary to adopt regulations or practices differing in any particular respect from those established by an international standard, shall give immediate notification to the International Civil Aviation Organization of the differences between its own practice and that established by the international standard.(...)
and published in the AIP (cf.Annex 15)
Back in my days Highlands ops used to require a costal alternate plus 30 mins. Tabubil ops full tanks or up MLW.
Only a moron would fly to Hagen and carry Mendi or Chimbu as his alternate.
Don’t care what ICAO or TCAS (or his subordinates) mandate.
https://casapng.gov.pg/wp-content/up...ight-Rules.pdf
Para 91.403 and 405 are very specific
Only a moron would fly to Hagen and carry Mendi or Chimbu as his alternate.
Don’t care what ICAO or TCAS (or his subordinates) mandate.
https://casapng.gov.pg/wp-content/up...ight-Rules.pdf
Para 91.403 and 405 are very specific
Last edited by AQIS Boigu; 22nd Dec 2019 at 14:25.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5.3.2 Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP)
5.3.2.2 Aeronautical Information Publications shall include:
c) a list of significant differences between the national regulations and practices of the State and the related ICAO Standards, Recommended Practices and Procedures, given in a form that would enable a user to differentiate readily between the requirements of the State and the related ICAO provisions;
5.3.2.2 Aeronautical Information Publications shall include:
c) a list of significant differences between the national regulations and practices of the State and the related ICAO Standards, Recommended Practices and Procedures, given in a form that would enable a user to differentiate readily between the requirements of the State and the related ICAO provisions;
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who, from what I am led to believe is running the show in an unofficial capacity,,dunno who the ops director is either.
Afraid he still has his snout in the trough that is PNG Air,I believe he spends all his time doing endorsements and sim renewals on the atr and dash8,don't think he sets foot in the country anymore, having relinquished his position to that f*$@#wit gun runner.
Who, from what I am led to believe is running the show in an unofficial capacity,,dunno who the ops director is either.
Who, from what I am led to believe is running the show in an unofficial capacity,,dunno who the ops director is either.
So the only way TCAS can work in Aus is on a PNG licence.
Bloody hilarious although I'm not laughing.
Good luck Wantoks
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing has changed. Same antics as when he was at Skytrans - flying pax around with not enough cabin crew onboard, busting rules aplenty, with pretty much the same outcome - CASA Australia and CASA PNG have turned a blind eye, while TCAS and his posse of Skytans/PNG Air acolytes hide mostly on Australian shores. It’s a joke. An old joke. And it’s the joke that keeps on giving because he is still heavily remunerated and very well cared for. TCAS will bust any rule over safety if it means his Masters turn a fat profit. And he has gotten away with it for a long, long time.
Surely a fuel policy defines minimum fuel not maximum fuel. The Captain decides on the day what his fuel load will be. No?