Is this legal without AOC?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Socialist Republic of Europe
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a big difference. Anyone who sets up a private operation decides, sets and pays for his own standards of safety. If they are unsuspecting then that is because they have not taken good advice, which is their decision. That is the nature of freedom, everyone is free to make unwise decisions as well as wise decisions.
Chartering from an AOC operation is a completely different proposition. They have no control over standards of safety and training, or the qualities of the crew. They might well not even know who the operator is until they arrive at the airport. If they do know, then the operator might change at the last minute if an aircraft goes tech, and another one subbed in.
That is the problem with rich's flights. They look more like charter operations than private flights. This is why I suggested that he was unwise.
I'm really not sure what you are saying about private charter of cars. If you mean private hire then it is regulated, they cannot ply for hire, and are still licensed.
Chartering from an AOC operation is a completely different proposition. They have no control over standards of safety and training, or the qualities of the crew. They might well not even know who the operator is until they arrive at the airport. If they do know, then the operator might change at the last minute if an aircraft goes tech, and another one subbed in.
That is the problem with rich's flights. They look more like charter operations than private flights. This is why I suggested that he was unwise.
I'm really not sure what you are saying about private charter of cars. If you mean private hire then it is regulated, they cannot ply for hire, and are still licensed.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"G-Spots
I think you have missed the point. One of those is a private aircraft. The owner can increase the safety standards of the operation. There is no rule saying a private operation cannot exceed public-transport standards, so an example of where they do is meaningless."
Read before posting this is why I said that you can not generalise between flights. My point that you missed is exactly the one you are trying to make.
I was simply asking FNPL to pick a flight that he would put his kids on!
To say that AOC is always safer than corporate is just tosh, people go on about OPC/LPC last OPC I saw was just over 25 mins
Individual with great personal wealth can afford to pay their individual corporate pilots good salaries, AOC holders due to commercial pressures on occasion need to hire who they can get. Just look at the last 18 months
I think you have missed the point. One of those is a private aircraft. The owner can increase the safety standards of the operation. There is no rule saying a private operation cannot exceed public-transport standards, so an example of where they do is meaningless."
Read before posting this is why I said that you can not generalise between flights. My point that you missed is exactly the one you are trying to make.
I was simply asking FNPL to pick a flight that he would put his kids on!
To say that AOC is always safer than corporate is just tosh, people go on about OPC/LPC last OPC I saw was just over 25 mins
Individual with great personal wealth can afford to pay their individual corporate pilots good salaries, AOC holders due to commercial pressures on occasion need to hire who they can get. Just look at the last 18 months
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Socialist Republic of Europe
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But FNPL's posts are about the rules under which flights are carried out, and therefore minimum safety standards. Also as far as I have understood from his posts he sees corporate operations as legitimate, safe operations which they generally are. He seems to put them alongside AOCs, in contrast to dodgy charters.
Can't really speak for other AOC operators, but I get paid as much as I would in corporate aviation, and I have not been aware of any real recruitment problems in the last 18 months. Retention, yes, but that is where AOC operations commercial pressure is not allowed to dominate, as we have minimum line training requirements for new crews. Our line training is thorough, although of course I cannot speak for our competitors.
I also met a pilot for a corporate operation, recruited with a shiny new CPL/IR to fly a Cessna 421, single crew. That would not be legal on an AOC, and I know no AOC operator who would do it even on minimum legal hours. Many wealthy people got that way because they are tight, and so are far from immune to the monetary pressures. However that is their free choice. The CAA is not watching until something goes wrong.
Can't really speak for other AOC operators, but I get paid as much as I would in corporate aviation, and I have not been aware of any real recruitment problems in the last 18 months. Retention, yes, but that is where AOC operations commercial pressure is not allowed to dominate, as we have minimum line training requirements for new crews. Our line training is thorough, although of course I cannot speak for our competitors.
I also met a pilot for a corporate operation, recruited with a shiny new CPL/IR to fly a Cessna 421, single crew. That would not be legal on an AOC, and I know no AOC operator who would do it even on minimum legal hours. Many wealthy people got that way because they are tight, and so are far from immune to the monetary pressures. However that is their free choice. The CAA is not watching until something goes wrong.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-Spot lost - What are you waffling on about......of course you know the answer....As I am not the owner, or lessee of either aircraft, I would pick the AOC operation, not some dodgy pilot, who thinks he can fly a citation as well as the charter pilot, but doesn't do the regular recurrence training required. Furthermore, the aircraft may well not be maintained as well as the aircraft on the AOC operation. The age of the aircraft is totally irrelevant, and only a fool would make such a basic and moronic assumption.
There are many good jobs out there, flying all sorts of aircraft, both AOC and corporate. If you have to resort to doing dodgy "separate invoices" flights, then It's highly likely that you are simply not good enough to get a proper job.
There are many good jobs out there, flying all sorts of aircraft, both AOC and corporate. If you have to resort to doing dodgy "separate invoices" flights, then It's highly likely that you are simply not good enough to get a proper job.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>of course you know the answer....As I am not the owner, or lessee of either aircraft, I would pick the AOC operation, not some dodgy pilot, who thinks he can fly a citation as well as the charter pilot, but doesn't do the regular recurrence training required. Furthermore, the aircraft may well not be maintained as well as the aircraft on the AOC operation. The age of the aircraft is totally irrelevant, and only a fool would make such a basic and moronic assumption.<
Cannot let you get away with this Lot. Firstly there are plenty of Non AOC Pilots of Citations many who do not hold JAA licences who I rate far higher than some AOC JAA Pilots I also know.
Some are very highly experienced and very professional in what they do.
Secondly I also know of a few AOC citations which have very high time airframes are literally flown into the ground and have repetative problems.
I was down in Nice while one such aircraft which was there at the same time was stranded, as often happens to be the case with that particular AOC aircraft, but this time with a battery overheat problem.
The same aircraft has continuous pressurisation problems which never seem to get fixed and a host of other squawks which keep rearing their heads.
Some of the earlier citations do not have sytems which are up to the job. Anyone who knows citations will tell you that the earlier temp/ invironmental systems struggle in the winter maintaining adequate temp and in the summer from the cabin getting too hot and the list goes on. As with anything they are improved and refined over different models/ and we are not even touching on the navigation systems.
Jump into a more modern Bravo and while they can and do go wrong they have far more reliable systems and I know which one I would pick.
Pace
Cannot let you get away with this Lot. Firstly there are plenty of Non AOC Pilots of Citations many who do not hold JAA licences who I rate far higher than some AOC JAA Pilots I also know.
Some are very highly experienced and very professional in what they do.
Secondly I also know of a few AOC citations which have very high time airframes are literally flown into the ground and have repetative problems.
I was down in Nice while one such aircraft which was there at the same time was stranded, as often happens to be the case with that particular AOC aircraft, but this time with a battery overheat problem.
The same aircraft has continuous pressurisation problems which never seem to get fixed and a host of other squawks which keep rearing their heads.
Some of the earlier citations do not have sytems which are up to the job. Anyone who knows citations will tell you that the earlier temp/ invironmental systems struggle in the winter maintaining adequate temp and in the summer from the cabin getting too hot and the list goes on. As with anything they are improved and refined over different models/ and we are not even touching on the navigation systems.
Jump into a more modern Bravo and while they can and do go wrong they have far more reliable systems and I know which one I would pick.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 14th Apr 2008 at 13:58.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In that scenario though, I am Joe public, and have no clue about the pilot, or his experience / ability, apart from what he tells me. At least with an AOC operation I know that minimum standards are met and enforced.
Maybe the Bravo, and the crew are better, but maybe there not...Joe public has no way of gauging that.
Anyway, I'm bored of this now. We all know that dodgy dangerous illegal flights happen, and they hide behind the corporate banner. If some of you think this is acceptable, fine. I happen to think it is far from OK.
Maybe the Bravo, and the crew are better, but maybe there not...Joe public has no way of gauging that.
Anyway, I'm bored of this now. We all know that dodgy dangerous illegal flights happen, and they hide behind the corporate banner. If some of you think this is acceptable, fine. I happen to think it is far from OK.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyNowPayLater
There are without doubt dodgey charters and I fully take your point. All that I would say is that there are many grey areas between the two and with any business aviation or otherwise it is human nature to explore those grey areas.
When there are grey areas maybe the regulators need to make them less grey and more black and white?
What I do take exception too is the assumption that private jets are flown by cowboys, operated in a dangerous manner and poorly maintained.
To me the use of the word dangerous applies to a poorly maintained aircraft which is knowingly flown as such , a pilot who is not qualified or capable of flying in particular conditions or who makes descisions which are incorrect and as such endangers the aircraft and its passengers.
Each accident has to be viewed in its own light AOC or private (sadly both have accidents) instead of inflamatory language used to point score one above the other.
As a Captain on private jets I know that most of us do our best to operate as professionally as possible and take a pride in what we do.
Take care and no offence
pace
There are without doubt dodgey charters and I fully take your point. All that I would say is that there are many grey areas between the two and with any business aviation or otherwise it is human nature to explore those grey areas.
When there are grey areas maybe the regulators need to make them less grey and more black and white?
What I do take exception too is the assumption that private jets are flown by cowboys, operated in a dangerous manner and poorly maintained.
To me the use of the word dangerous applies to a poorly maintained aircraft which is knowingly flown as such , a pilot who is not qualified or capable of flying in particular conditions or who makes descisions which are incorrect and as such endangers the aircraft and its passengers.
Each accident has to be viewed in its own light AOC or private (sadly both have accidents) instead of inflamatory language used to point score one above the other.
As a Captain on private jets I know that most of us do our best to operate as professionally as possible and take a pride in what we do.
Take care and no offence
pace
Last edited by Pace; 14th Apr 2008 at 17:31.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-Spot lost - What are you waffling on about......of course you know the answer....As I am not the owner, or lessee of either aircraft, I would pick the AOC operation, not some dodgy pilot, who thinks he can fly a citation as well as the charter pilot, but doesn't do the regular recurrence training required. Furthermore, the aircraft may well not be maintained as well as the aircraft on the AOC operation. The age of the aircraft is totally irrelevant, and only a fool would make such a basic and moronic assumption.
Sorry mate - rather be a fool and a moron. The simple point I make is that you are blinkered with AOC safety, each flight should be judged on that day with that captain and that aircraft, because its AOC does not make it better - legal yes but not better.
Age of aircraft makes a big difference modern cockpits make a huge difference in awareness and are therefore safer - period
If you knew anything about actual flying instead of putting your clients in demic a/c you would agree.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: all over the place
Age: 63
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The simple point I make is that you are blinkered with AOC safety, each flight should be judged on that day with that captain and that aircraft, because its AOC does not make it better - legal yes but not better."
I have to agree with this. I have flown private ops most of the time and the benefit is same aircraft same crews operating in the same way.
Not two people who have never met before, flying an aircraft they might never have even sat in.
Maintaining an AOC is expensive and corners are cut whether you like to think so or not.
I take great exception to the presumption that private ops are any less safe, there is a lot of pride with private crews in their aircraft for their owner.
Just think how you treat a hire/company car compared to your own?
I have to agree with this. I have flown private ops most of the time and the benefit is same aircraft same crews operating in the same way.
Not two people who have never met before, flying an aircraft they might never have even sat in.
Maintaining an AOC is expensive and corners are cut whether you like to think so or not.
I take great exception to the presumption that private ops are any less safe, there is a lot of pride with private crews in their aircraft for their owner.
Just think how you treat a hire/company car compared to your own?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace - Thanks for that - take care yourself.
G-Spot lost - grow up and go rattle someone else's cage
G-Spot lost - grow up and go rattle someone else's cage
If a number of people on here refute your opinion or your logic then instead of throwing a litlle paddy just consider that your opinion/logic may be slightly flawed.
I'l say it again you have a financial interest in making sure that only AOC holders do charterwork this is clouding your judgement regarding safety.
Just to spell it out for you...........
AOC holders are NOT by definition safer simply because they are AOC holders. On occasion yes they are, on occasion no they are not, it depends on the crew and the aircraft.
A large AOC holder for bizjets in the UK based in the midlands does not do ANY sim training at all, just a 40 minute OPC and a 1 hour LPC each year. In contrast my training consists of having to fly to the USA and spending a week in the classroom and a level D sim at a cost of nearly 30k dollars plus expenses.
Explain to me which one again is safer......
(This time without the personal jibes)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i just wish you would read my post, an digest all of it, and not just the bits that you disagree with. So in simple terms, I do not think for one moment that corporate operations are dodgy, or dangerous. What I do think dodgy or dangerous is the few out there who believe it is OK to operate public transport flights, without either an AOC or being a bona-fide corporate operation.
Typically they will have access to a light twin, and meet someone down the pub (or wherever...) and offer to fly them to somewhere for a meeting etc... It is this kind of thing that needs to be stamped out. And as these people hide behind the "corporate" operation banner, it is the corporate side of things that need tightening up. Not to penalise the genuine corporate operators, but to smoke out the dodgy ones.
So, sorry if my post's have been misleading. I do not wish for a broad brush approach, just something in place to clean up the bottom feeders.
Typically they will have access to a light twin, and meet someone down the pub (or wherever...) and offer to fly them to somewhere for a meeting etc... It is this kind of thing that needs to be stamped out. And as these people hide behind the "corporate" operation banner, it is the corporate side of things that need tightening up. Not to penalise the genuine corporate operators, but to smoke out the dodgy ones.
So, sorry if my post's have been misleading. I do not wish for a broad brush approach, just something in place to clean up the bottom feeders.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 54
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No-one would give their pay packet to someone with a certificate in banking, therefore why would you allow yourselves to be flown by someone with a certificate in flying?
Safe operations involve a structure of various job descriptions in an agreed format stipulated by a governing body. If any pilot is unwilling to expose himself to the governing body it is unregulated and therefore by definition unsafe. Keeping things safe is a consensus of thousands of peoples opinion, not just some YTS pilot who wants to build some hours.
Safe operations involve a structure of various job descriptions in an agreed format stipulated by a governing body. If any pilot is unwilling to expose himself to the governing body it is unregulated and therefore by definition unsafe. Keeping things safe is a consensus of thousands of peoples opinion, not just some YTS pilot who wants to build some hours.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Socialist Republic of Europe
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-SPOT Lost
You are now really obviously missing the point, as you are making exactly the case for FNPL.
"each flight should be judged on that day with that captain and that aircraft" - well how do you do that for a non-AOC charter? That is exactly the reason for an AOC. The only way to have any means of judging is to know how the operation is run, and how that is monitored by an independent body, such as the CAA. That is what an AOC is - a guarantee about the operation and the relevant aviation authority's oversight.
You are now really obviously missing the point, as you are making exactly the case for FNPL.
"each flight should be judged on that day with that captain and that aircraft" - well how do you do that for a non-AOC charter? That is exactly the reason for an AOC. The only way to have any means of judging is to know how the operation is run, and how that is monitored by an independent body, such as the CAA. That is what an AOC is - a guarantee about the operation and the relevant aviation authority's oversight.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Safe operations involve a structure of various job descriptions in an agreed format stipulated by a governing body. If any pilot is unwilling to expose himself to the governing body it is unregulated and therefore by definition unsafe. Keeping things safe is a consensus of thousands of peoples opinion, not just some YTS pilot who wants to build some hours<
Phil we are all regulated by a governing body private or AOC operations.
When I take 7 passengers in a private citation am I unsafe as you put it?
Yes an AOC operation runs to stricter rules so by definintion has to be safer but you cannot say a private operation is unsafe. If so why do the regulators allow me to fly 7-8 people in an unsafe situation? But the same 7 to 8 people flying in the same citation under an AOC are safer. Both a regulated.
Lets go to a stupid level. As a regulator I could pass a law that states that before you fly a trip you have to fly the trip fully in a simulator. Totally unpractical! I could then point a finger at an AOC operation and state that because they do not fly the trip first in a simulator they are an unsafe operation.
I Legally fly that citation in controlled airspace in the high flight levels in RVSM airspace with the EasyJets and BA airliners of this world. Would I be allowed to do that if I was considered "unsafe"?
The stupid thing here is if I then with an FAA ATP and C500/550/560 type rating jump into a JAA registered and identical aircraft I am considered illegal.
That would be because I do not hold JAA licences. Apart from maybe the aircraft not meeting the insurance requirements no court would deem that offence as unsafe.
In the same way if I flew Illegal charter in a N reg private plane (which I would not do ) I may be charged with illegal charter but I could not be charged with endangering the lives and safety of the aircraft.
This would be a technical legality infringement not a unsafe infringement.
I would love an aviation Lawyer in these forums to give his considered opinion.
Be careful how you use the word unsafe. Safer maybe but there is a big difference between the two.
pace
Phil we are all regulated by a governing body private or AOC operations.
When I take 7 passengers in a private citation am I unsafe as you put it?
Yes an AOC operation runs to stricter rules so by definintion has to be safer but you cannot say a private operation is unsafe. If so why do the regulators allow me to fly 7-8 people in an unsafe situation? But the same 7 to 8 people flying in the same citation under an AOC are safer. Both a regulated.
Lets go to a stupid level. As a regulator I could pass a law that states that before you fly a trip you have to fly the trip fully in a simulator. Totally unpractical! I could then point a finger at an AOC operation and state that because they do not fly the trip first in a simulator they are an unsafe operation.
I Legally fly that citation in controlled airspace in the high flight levels in RVSM airspace with the EasyJets and BA airliners of this world. Would I be allowed to do that if I was considered "unsafe"?
The stupid thing here is if I then with an FAA ATP and C500/550/560 type rating jump into a JAA registered and identical aircraft I am considered illegal.
That would be because I do not hold JAA licences. Apart from maybe the aircraft not meeting the insurance requirements no court would deem that offence as unsafe.
In the same way if I flew Illegal charter in a N reg private plane (which I would not do ) I may be charged with illegal charter but I could not be charged with endangering the lives and safety of the aircraft.
This would be a technical legality infringement not a unsafe infringement.
I would love an aviation Lawyer in these forums to give his considered opinion.
Be careful how you use the word unsafe. Safer maybe but there is a big difference between the two.
pace
Last edited by Pace; 17th Apr 2008 at 07:21.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Socialist Republic of Europe
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace
It is not just about being safe. It is about being seen to be safe, with a paperwork trail to prove it and accountability. If an AOC operation is not safe then the CAA is likely to notice and the Chief Pilot, Chief Training Captain, Ops Manager, CAME Manager and ultimately the Accountable Manager are responsible for that, answerable in a court of law. They have been interviewed to establish their suitability and sign a piece of paper to accept liability.
In an illegal charter there is no such accountability. I believe in a corporate charter there is a certain level of accountability, under an employer's duty of care, although the structure is not defined. Many corporate operations are modelled on AOCs, and of course they will be as safe as long as they follow the same rules (such as FTLs, and crew training). This is not alays the case though, and there is no way of knowing from the outside if it is. That is why they can't charter the aircraft.
It is not just about being safe. It is about being seen to be safe, with a paperwork trail to prove it and accountability. If an AOC operation is not safe then the CAA is likely to notice and the Chief Pilot, Chief Training Captain, Ops Manager, CAME Manager and ultimately the Accountable Manager are responsible for that, answerable in a court of law. They have been interviewed to establish their suitability and sign a piece of paper to accept liability.
In an illegal charter there is no such accountability. I believe in a corporate charter there is a certain level of accountability, under an employer's duty of care, although the structure is not defined. Many corporate operations are modelled on AOCs, and of course they will be as safe as long as they follow the same rules (such as FTLs, and crew training). This is not alays the case though, and there is no way of knowing from the outside if it is. That is why they can't charter the aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lost man standing.
I really feel that its you that is missing the point.
When I flew public transport, the CAA were not on every flight, daft things happened, mistakes got made by ATC, Crew, Engineers, Ops.
Once again JUST COS ITS AOC DOES NOT MAKE IT SAFE
When things dont go according to plan the CAA find out (if they look hard enough) next time you get audited, by which time its too late.
name me one AOC holder that has not fudged, edited, tippexed, not disclosed, spoke to crew on a split duty and I will gladly show my arse in the department store of your choice.
Let he who has not throw the first stone
Indeed when I feel tired I can say to the boss "enough" I'll come back tomorrow, AOC chaps can do this but oddly enough not when there is 15k's worh of charter the following day ..........
Lets talk about commercial pressure........ I dont have any
You can go on about accountability but that wont count for anything when your chartered aircraft is sticking out of a school roof.........its still sticking out of the roof when it shouldn't be.
I dont need to do dodgy charters, we have a very rangey mid size that we get requests on every day - we say no, I'm not saying we should be allowed to I'm just taking you to task about your perceived safety standards.
Dont think hire or reward, dont think AOC/Corporate/Bottom feeder, its much more low level and uncomplicated than that.
Forgive me for repeating myself
I really feel that its you that is missing the point.
When I flew public transport, the CAA were not on every flight, daft things happened, mistakes got made by ATC, Crew, Engineers, Ops.
Once again JUST COS ITS AOC DOES NOT MAKE IT SAFE
When things dont go according to plan the CAA find out (if they look hard enough) next time you get audited, by which time its too late.
name me one AOC holder that has not fudged, edited, tippexed, not disclosed, spoke to crew on a split duty and I will gladly show my arse in the department store of your choice.
Let he who has not throw the first stone
Indeed when I feel tired I can say to the boss "enough" I'll come back tomorrow, AOC chaps can do this but oddly enough not when there is 15k's worh of charter the following day ..........
Lets talk about commercial pressure........ I dont have any
You can go on about accountability but that wont count for anything when your chartered aircraft is sticking out of a school roof.........its still sticking out of the roof when it shouldn't be.
I dont need to do dodgy charters, we have a very rangey mid size that we get requests on every day - we say no, I'm not saying we should be allowed to I'm just taking you to task about your perceived safety standards.
Dont think hire or reward, dont think AOC/Corporate/Bottom feeder, its much more low level and uncomplicated than that.
Forgive me for repeating myself
each flight should be judged on that day with that captain and that aircraft, because its AOC does not make it better - legal yes but not better
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-SPOT - on the basis that you don't seem to be able to read things correctly, and seem to stick your fingers in your ears and go "la la la" I can only assume that you have the same approach to flying.
Please please please tell me you are not a pilot. That would be very scary indeed.
Please please please tell me you are not a pilot. That would be very scary indeed.