Rumour confirmed Duck.

Excerpt from a recent FSO:

SUBJECT: Dash8-300/-Q400Positions

Applications are invited for Captain and First Officer Dash 8-300 / -Q400 common crew positions.

The Link PNG Board has recently approved the acquisition of two Dash 8-Q400 aircraft. These aircraft will be operated by Link PNG on scheduled and charter services.

"Applications are invited for Captain and First Officer Dash 8-300 / -Q400 common crew positions."

Isn't it a bit outdated to think that the -300 and -400 aircraft can be operated as a common fleet with common crew positions??

PX didn't when they operated the -400 last time (separate fleet even?)...and QF haven't, despite many continual years of operating the -400 alongside the "classic" versions.

Airbus A220-300 demo today ?
 

Air Baltic A220-300 in POM today

Demo for Air Niugini? Like the Embraer 195, I think in same league . Can't beat the Fokker airframe.

Here's a great opportunity:

IAC Global have teamed up with LinkPNG to offer DHC-8-Q402 Line Training Captain positions in Papua New Guinea.

LinkPNG, a subsidiary of Air Niugini, offer excellent terms and conditions on a 3-month contract with the possibility to extend.

For more information, please respond to this email as soon as possible with your CV, or call us at IAC Global

3 month contract, that sounds very attractive...................

Link to the job https://www.iacglobal.com/jobs/dhc-8...ining-captains

No maximum age is listed so it might suit someone who's retired and wants a bit of pocket money. Commuting contract from Cairns with excellent (subjective) terms and conditions but $$$ not stated.

Allow another 6 months to get through all the immigration aspects and the CASA PNG licencing and approval processes.

Thought PX would already have a couple of ex Q400 check and trainers within their existing pilot group.

How many airframes are they looking at?

Am I missing something?

Latest FSO

SUBJECT: Carriage of Life Raft POM-HIR-POM sectors

In accordance with rule part 91.525 (c.) Carriage of life raft(s) is not required


91.525 Flights over water to more than 200 nm

(a) An aircraft that is operated on a flight over water must be equipped with one life jacket or equivalent floatation device for each person on board and stowed in a position easily accessible from the seat or berth of the person for whose use it is provided if-

(1) the aircraft is a single-engine aircraft, and the flight distance to shore is more than gliding distance for the aircraft; or

(2) the aircraft is a multi-engine aircraft that is unable to maintain a height of at least 1000 feet AMSL with one engine inoperative, and the flight distance to shore is more than gliding distance for the aircraft; or

(3) the aircraft is a multi-engine aircraft that is capable of maintaining a height of at least 1000 feet AMSL with one engine inoperative and the flight distance to shore is more than 50 nm.

(b) A single engine aircraft, or multi-engine aircraft that is unable to maintain a height of at least 1000 feet AMSL with one engine inoperative, that is operated on a flight over water that extends to more than 100 nm from shore must be equipped with-

(1) enough life-rafts with buoyancy and rated capacity to accommodate all the occupants of the aircraft;and

(2) a survival locater light on each life-raft; and

(3) a survival kit, appropriately equipped for the route to be flown, attached to each required life-raft; and

(4) at least one pyrotechnic signalling device on each life-raft; and

(5) one ELT(S) or one EPIRB.

(c) A multi-engine aircraft that is capable of continuing flight with one or more engines inoperative, that is operated on a flight over water that extends to more than 200 nm from shore must be equipped with the equipment specified in paragraph (b).

Just this bit......

121.361 Flights over-water

A holder of an air operator certificate must ensure that each of the certificate holder’s aeroplanes configured for more than 30 passenger seats and operated over-water on flights where life rafts are required by rule 91.525 to be carried, is equipped with sufficient life rafts with buoyancy and overload capacity to accommodate every occupant of the aeroplane in the event of a loss of one raft of the largest rated capacity.

Interesting.
Needs clarification but I was under the impression no life rafts on Dash 8-400 between Cairns - Port Moresby - Cairns?
I'll admit I am way out of my depth but I was under the impression a certain operator does not carry life rafts between SYD and Lord Howe Island and possibly BNE to Norfolk in a Dash 8 ?

Correct. No life rafts on QLink Dash 8's.

GURNEY (AYGN) to HENDERSON (AGGH) is 580 nm, GURNEY to BUKA (AYBK) is 390 nm, and HENDERSON to BUKA is 400nm. Would have thought that if tracking DCT GURNEY HENDERSON on route B598 that the closest point to an airfield (BUKA - for the Fokker at least) would be at the halfway point, and then it would still be outside of 200 nm, - about 250 nm or so. Old guy, think we both missing something here.

POM to CNS no issue, quite a few airports between.

RE no life rafts on the QLink Dash 8 flight to Lord Howe, this link will take you to a pretty good Ben Sandilands 2011 Crickey.com article. https://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetal...in-a-ditching/

NCD,
I think at the time the Dash8-400 came under Dickie Smith affordable safety/statistics ramblings
A concession was granted ?? on the basis that the Dash was capable of flying BNE to Norfolk, missed approach followed by engine failure and depress and then carry on to the approved alternate aerodrome
Airframe was a proven quantity, engine ticked all the boxes so to speak
Regardless of the comfort factor of flight crew, the bean counters love it when more paying pax sit on bums!

No, don't think so.
Methinks lawyers would have fun with this if there was a ditching.

Also hearing of a new rostering policy of office duty instead of being on reserve. Clever... ....... Not.

Note that the regs specify more than 200 nautical miles from shore (i.e. land), not 200 nm from a suitable airport.

Did note that...guess there would be some attols on the route.

As posted just before, Ben Sandilands covers it well in his article regarding a different airline, AND he explains it much better than I could.

PX engine failure at Mt. Hagen 20th Nov
 

PX Dash 8-200 P2-ANK suffered an engine failure at Mt. Hagen on departure yesterday 20th Nov, apparently …
Returned to land. Aircraft already back in POM according to Flight Aware

They done did Duck. :8

Reference the life rafts, it's only 160nm (roughly) from Woodlark Island to Vella La Vella Island. So the flight wouldn't be more than 100nm from some land mass at any stage of the flight.

A perfect example of "World's best practice."

And they have never put one in the water yet..................oh wait...........

Maybe a certain 4th floorer could explain this comment re security screening to a fellow crew member... You'll have to stop wearing your explosive vest...

Very professional. :=

Word is money is tight so when pilot contracts are up for renewal they are not being offered another contract. Reason given is budget cuts.

Same if you turn 65, selective termination.

Seem to have heard all this before when the last cull started.

History repeating itself?

No took them in the correct order. Have the info first hand re not renewing the contract. He was called into a meeting on the 4th floor pre Christmas to front 3 who said gone due cost cutting.

A 76er was not offered a Fokker when he turned 65 as others have.

Maybe your sources will catch up when word gets around up there. Or they could read it here first. 😂👍👍👍

Happy New Year! 🥂

You're not suggesting 4th floor tell porky pies are you? Never! 😱

Now hearing up to 5 more in the firing line.

AGGM is also suitable - Solair operate an A320 in there every week, so it will take the Pixie 73's and F100's.

However, it is still a bit out of the 200nm, so reverting back to 200nm from land, it can easily be done, using POM, GUR, MIS, MUA, HIR. Plenty of other islands along the route, but that one covers it.
Great Circle Mapper

Foam,

Think we all came to the conclusion back in NOV/DEC when the subject was the topic that the PNG regs allow a flight not to have life rafts if it is within 200nm from a SHORE. Seems one doesn't need to have a runway to land on, just a shore to put the wing on for the punters to walk from the water landing to the "SHORE".

Misama Island as a landing strip.. didn't a Citation II crash, burn with the very very sad loss of 4 lives back in 2010, with one major factor being that it couldn't stop in the available landing distance? Try that in a B738/7 / F100.

However, I see your point..being regulatory compliant is the requirement, albiet the very minimum requirement.

But realty is that we are just talking about putting a couple of life rafts in the overhead bins of a Fokker, ..sure a little bit of weight, a few disgruntled PAX that cant put their suitcase there, and a couple of gingerbeer signatures for the on and off, but in a 30 yr old Fokker, just the feel good factor of a couple of liferafts would be well worth it.

Anyway, kudos for bringing up an old subject, it is still a worthwhile one to discuss.

The latest addition to the Link PNG fleet has just arrived in POM

Dash 8-400 P2-PXQ, another in 2 weeks.