Private Operators and Ops1
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyNowPayLater
No I am not involved in illegal charter and never knowingly done so.
I do however feel that there are grey areas and would be interested as you see it as black or white as to how you would interpret legal and illegal charter? It is a Phrase banded around again with a broad brush so as it is clear to you what is it ?
I stress the word LEGAL or how a judge in a court of law would interpret it?
No one in their right mind would want to fly an uninsured aircraft! Unless of course you are pennyless so suing would be a waste of time.
I am involved in N reg jets in Europe.
I have flown for numerous people and have done Jet only ferry work. I can give a load of good references and consider myself to be a good and experienced pilot who has never knowingly harmed or done anyone in my life.
I probably have another 6-7 years flying as an ATP so the vast cost and hassle of getting and running dual licences wont be worth the money or effort so that will be it for me if EASA go through with their ridiculous intentions.
Remember N reg and 3rd country licences have been prolific in Europe for longer than the EC itself.
I do think that known safety holes should be plugged but that is demonstrable safety holes not percieved.
I am against regulating for regulatings sake and dont see that as improving safety yet regulating for regulatings sake is prolific throughout many areas in Europe and is costing us dearly.
I am known in the forums for supporting the view that Aviation is worldwide and that there should be an acceptable standard especially between EASA land and FAA. But like everyone else I probably have my own interests at heart
Pace
No I am not involved in illegal charter and never knowingly done so.
I do however feel that there are grey areas and would be interested as you see it as black or white as to how you would interpret legal and illegal charter? It is a Phrase banded around again with a broad brush so as it is clear to you what is it ?
I stress the word LEGAL or how a judge in a court of law would interpret it?
No one in their right mind would want to fly an uninsured aircraft! Unless of course you are pennyless so suing would be a waste of time.
I am involved in N reg jets in Europe.
I have flown for numerous people and have done Jet only ferry work. I can give a load of good references and consider myself to be a good and experienced pilot who has never knowingly harmed or done anyone in my life.
I probably have another 6-7 years flying as an ATP so the vast cost and hassle of getting and running dual licences wont be worth the money or effort so that will be it for me if EASA go through with their ridiculous intentions.
Remember N reg and 3rd country licences have been prolific in Europe for longer than the EC itself.
I do think that known safety holes should be plugged but that is demonstrable safety holes not percieved.
I am against regulating for regulatings sake and dont see that as improving safety yet regulating for regulatings sake is prolific throughout many areas in Europe and is costing us dearly.
I am known in the forums for supporting the view that Aviation is worldwide and that there should be an acceptable standard especially between EASA land and FAA. But like everyone else I probably have my own interests at heart
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 11th Feb 2012 at 13:04.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Pace, thanks for you honest reply. Trouble is, there are a few, quite a few, rotten apples that spoil barrel.
The crux of the problem...unclear, ambiguous, ineffective legislation that is ultimatley toothless.
Yep, there's plenty of pilots fit that description I'm afraid.
Quote from the New York Times about the banking crisis...
"In short, there was plenty of regulation — yet much of it made the problem worse. These laws and institutions should have reined in bank risk while encouraging financial transparency, but did not."
Some banks where very badly behaved, others were entirely responsible. We all know about RBS / Nat West, Northern Rock and a whole host of US and EU banks, but I'm pretty sure the likes of HSBC and Barclays were pretty blame free. Yet we simply refer to them as a collective of greedy bankers.....(Which is a wunch)
In hindsight, they all now wish they had the discipline to weed out the bad practices, and now wish the FSA had been stronger and more effective at regulating the sharp practices. Unfortunately for their industry, it's too late now. The damage is done.
I stress the word LEGAL or how a judge in a court of law would interpret it?
Unless of course you are pennyless so suing would be a waste of time.
Quote from the New York Times about the banking crisis...
"In short, there was plenty of regulation — yet much of it made the problem worse. These laws and institutions should have reined in bank risk while encouraging financial transparency, but did not."
Some banks where very badly behaved, others were entirely responsible. We all know about RBS / Nat West, Northern Rock and a whole host of US and EU banks, but I'm pretty sure the likes of HSBC and Barclays were pretty blame free. Yet we simply refer to them as a collective of greedy bankers.....(Which is a wunch)
In hindsight, they all now wish they had the discipline to weed out the bad practices, and now wish the FSA had been stronger and more effective at regulating the sharp practices. Unfortunately for their industry, it's too late now. The damage is done.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
About the willingness, I can't say anything, but with SMS they are forced to react (publicly, even if they don't want to), if anyone submits a report. So far it works and some changes are visible already.
But I understand, that it is very difficult - if not impossible - to install such a system in a two or three person operation.
The last three years I went in August, so I suppose this year it will be August again. But nothing has been scheduled yet. Will be left to the last possible moment as usual...
Ciao,
max
Now, the ops you´re involved with is of a considerable size. There might be a case for SMS, but knowing the involved persons I doubt that the will ...
But I understand, that it is very difficult - if not impossible - to install such a system in a two or three person operation.
Are you going to be in FAB in late July/early August? We will...
Ciao,
max
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: europe
Age: 49
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By calling it grey, are we all in denial that our wonderful profession is actually not immune from it? WAKE UP!!!!
In fact, should the CAA just give up on all this AOC stuff, and just let everyone fend for themselves? We could all run Waldo Pepper style operations. It would be great fun.....I know I could make money at it. Plenty of wannabes we could get a type rating on a CJ, or LJ, or KA, pay them £10K a year, no extra training costs, no SMS or Quality to run. Easy money. Let's all lobby the CAA to end this madness of AOC's shall we.......
All sit in your ivory towers, doing nothing about it, and let the M reg King Airs fly illegal flights from Biggin and Elstree, and the Pool Aviations of this world make a mockery of the system. Obviously the AOC operators are too weak to fight it, as are the CAA.
Perhaps the big brokers are getting pissed with it too.....Maybe it's in their financial interests to get these cowboys hunted down, they might even invest some significant money into a legal fund to force it through.....now there's a thought.
Trouble is, posters like Pace will claim their innocence, and I have no reason to think that he's not by the way, but if you won't do your bit to stop these parasites that live amongst you in corporate aviation, the broad brush will affect you too.
In the 40's, not every German was a Nazi, but every Nazi was German. Your "colleagues" have effectively invaded Poland now, and we've all sort of had enough of it. Sort them out.....
In fact, should the CAA just give up on all this AOC stuff, and just let everyone fend for themselves? We could all run Waldo Pepper style operations. It would be great fun.....I know I could make money at it. Plenty of wannabes we could get a type rating on a CJ, or LJ, or KA, pay them £10K a year, no extra training costs, no SMS or Quality to run. Easy money. Let's all lobby the CAA to end this madness of AOC's shall we.......
All sit in your ivory towers, doing nothing about it, and let the M reg King Airs fly illegal flights from Biggin and Elstree, and the Pool Aviations of this world make a mockery of the system. Obviously the AOC operators are too weak to fight it, as are the CAA.
Perhaps the big brokers are getting pissed with it too.....Maybe it's in their financial interests to get these cowboys hunted down, they might even invest some significant money into a legal fund to force it through.....now there's a thought.
Trouble is, posters like Pace will claim their innocence, and I have no reason to think that he's not by the way, but if you won't do your bit to stop these parasites that live amongst you in corporate aviation, the broad brush will affect you too.
In the 40's, not every German was a Nazi, but every Nazi was German. Your "colleagues" have effectively invaded Poland now, and we've all sort of had enough of it. Sort them out.....
Sure there are a few "iffy" operators, but it's up to you to catch them if you feel so wronged by it all. Get the evidence and shop them. If the regulator won't do anything after that, then I agree with your option B as included in your post....
A) Continue to invest in the infrastructure of his AOC and carry on as is?
B) Tear up the AOC, sell a lease of "block hours" to his clients and pay the £500 fine for the ones actually prosecuted as IPT?
C) as A, but in addition work hard to eradicate this illegal, underhand and unregulated competition that lurks in the grey charter game. Grey my arse...it's the black market gentlemen. No less so than the dodgy plumber that isn't qualified, yet fixes boilers for less.
?????????
B) Tear up the AOC, sell a lease of "block hours" to his clients and pay the £500 fine for the ones actually prosecuted as IPT?
C) as A, but in addition work hard to eradicate this illegal, underhand and unregulated competition that lurks in the grey charter game. Grey my arse...it's the black market gentlemen. No less so than the dodgy plumber that isn't qualified, yet fixes boilers for less.
?????????
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a load of tosh. If that was true, and in line with your other logic, jets would be crashing left right and centre all over the UK. They aren't ...
... neither is their an epidemic of dodgy charter work.
As I said before, I know at least three people who admit to having been involved in illegal charters. Someone tried to get me involved in one at one point. I know someone who used to put pilots on charters who didn't even have CPLs! Sorry, knew: he ended up in a smoking hole in the ground on a corporate flight. I worked for people who appeared to be doing illegal charters, calling them lessons but in some cases having no real instructional component.
Some people have suggested that there are AOC operators who are pretty shabby. Of course standards vary, but I suspect that this impression is somewhat out-of-date, at least if we are considering the UK. Over the last few years I have seen standards demanded of GA operators by the CAA hauled very quickly upward, with more than one operator failing to keep up and falling by the wayside. This improvement is supposed to occur all over Europe - and if it doesn't then the new regulations are meaningless in any case.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Southerner
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Phil Brockwell. I don't think that Phil would accept any stats that didn't support his distorted view that AOC is safer than Private. Clearly it is not the case, and blatant snobbery has taken over so you are a lost cause Phil. Not that I (or others on this forum) care anyway. Your CJ's and Kingair crews are welcome to their AOC b*llocks ! Stick it up your a*s :-)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Southerner
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phil Brockwell, are you even a pilot ? If so, what is your experience level ? as you wrongly believe that AOC ops are better. Sounds a bit to me like you got involved in a business and regulations way over your head, let me guess, you started your business with your momma and papas money right ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Detling, you clearly know who Phil Brockwell is, and therefore that he runs a well-respected operation in compliance with regulations. I don't know the origin of his seed funding, but it seems to be irrelevant to the point you are so desperately and unsuccessfully trying to make.
See what I did there - I used the word "clearly" correctly, to describe something that is clear, can be deduced in simple, obvious steps from evidence presented, in this case mention of CJs and KAs.
Contrast with your misuse of the word to describe something that is not only unclear, but would be disputed by most experts in the field. That does not mean it is necessarily untrue of course, lest I be accused of appeal to authority, but it does mean that you have to have a far better argument than to state that it is clear with no evidence.
See what I did there - I used the word "clearly" correctly, to describe something that is clear, can be deduced in simple, obvious steps from evidence presented, in this case mention of CJs and KAs.
Contrast with your misuse of the word to describe something that is not only unclear, but would be disputed by most experts in the field. That does not mean it is necessarily untrue of course, lest I be accused of appeal to authority, but it does mean that you have to have a far better argument than to state that it is clear with no evidence.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...how about all those cr*p ops flying under someone else's AOC ? Loads of incidents there and nobody cares"
That is the responsibility of the AOC holder. I learnt a lot flying under a third-party AOC, their Chief Pilot was a good man and they did things differently from my previous company and the next operator I flew for. Always good to see how others do things, and take on board their best practice. They kept fair oversight of our operation, and I like to think we were as safe as, if not safer than, the parent AOC holder's own operation.
Of course I can't speak for other piggy-back ops. Any more than you can speak for other private operations and say "Private ops are best!".
Oh, and to echo what some have said, if you know of loads of incidents then report them! If they are reported then the AOC holder has to deal with them. That's what their quality system is for. Oh, you wouldn't know about that, would you?
That is the responsibility of the AOC holder. I learnt a lot flying under a third-party AOC, their Chief Pilot was a good man and they did things differently from my previous company and the next operator I flew for. Always good to see how others do things, and take on board their best practice. They kept fair oversight of our operation, and I like to think we were as safe as, if not safer than, the parent AOC holder's own operation.
Of course I can't speak for other piggy-back ops. Any more than you can speak for other private operations and say "Private ops are best!".
Oh, and to echo what some have said, if you know of loads of incidents then report them! If they are reported then the AOC holder has to deal with them. That's what their quality system is for. Oh, you wouldn't know about that, would you?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But this isn't a yah boo we are better than you thing but a question of why the continued attack on private corporate operations?
If statistics are to be believed private corporate jets flown by professional
Crew have almost airline levels of safety whether FAA or JAA !
JAA AOC do not have as good a record for some reason but are substantially more regulated which could indicate that more regulation and interference does not equal more safety!
If it ain't broke don't fix it yet EASA are trying to force further regulation and restrictions on private corporate ops which equals ever more needless expense and for what ?
My guess it's partly regulators regulating for their own
Job benefits and pressure from
Certain quarters who see private corporate as some sort of threat to their own livelihoods.
Phil Brockwell is a very experienced and respected figure in the industry!
My discussion with him would be that its all the needless burdens on AOC ops which load expense and time which need to be trimmed down unless they are regulations which have proven demonstrable safety benefits.
Ie loosen the straight jacket on AOC OPS not put one on the rest of us.
Addendum
There is a large Grey area in the division between legal charter and illegal charter. In our society there are huge areas of law which are exploited by accountants bankers etc etc etc. You cannot blame people who work within the law as it appears until that grey area is tested in court or the laws are change. It is the fault of the laws not the exploiters of grey areas or loopholes or whatever.
If there is a suspect ILLEGAL charter and I am sure most of us are aware of what that is then those people must be reported to see if there is a case to answer and that case tested through our judicial system which whether we like it or not is still one of the best in the world.
Pace
If statistics are to be believed private corporate jets flown by professional
Crew have almost airline levels of safety whether FAA or JAA !
JAA AOC do not have as good a record for some reason but are substantially more regulated which could indicate that more regulation and interference does not equal more safety!
If it ain't broke don't fix it yet EASA are trying to force further regulation and restrictions on private corporate ops which equals ever more needless expense and for what ?
My guess it's partly regulators regulating for their own
Job benefits and pressure from
Certain quarters who see private corporate as some sort of threat to their own livelihoods.
Phil Brockwell is a very experienced and respected figure in the industry!
My discussion with him would be that its all the needless burdens on AOC ops which load expense and time which need to be trimmed down unless they are regulations which have proven demonstrable safety benefits.
Ie loosen the straight jacket on AOC OPS not put one on the rest of us.
Addendum
There is a large Grey area in the division between legal charter and illegal charter. In our society there are huge areas of law which are exploited by accountants bankers etc etc etc. You cannot blame people who work within the law as it appears until that grey area is tested in court or the laws are change. It is the fault of the laws not the exploiters of grey areas or loopholes or whatever.
If there is a suspect ILLEGAL charter and I am sure most of us are aware of what that is then those people must be reported to see if there is a case to answer and that case tested through our judicial system which whether we like it or not is still one of the best in the world.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 12th Feb 2012 at 09:32.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Single best thing we could do for safety is not increase the burden of oversight, everybody conveniently forgets that if everybody needs auditing then we will need three times the auditors we have now which will vastly increase ALL costs to EVERYBODY.
How about this......
ALL aircraft required to be operated MULTI CREW or over 12,500lbs should require Simulator training for OPC/LPC's ALL AOC and private operators need to get in the sim twice per year.... That means around the tower LPCs via an in house TRE should be banned.
@Phil
Can you tell me if Bristol conduct any simulator training for recurrent or initials
Do you see that as a satisfactory state of affairs or is it something that could be improved upon, have your pilots ever been exposed to dual gen failures? engine failures with the aircraft actually still on the runway post V1? Control problems? TCAS RA's? landing gear failed deployments? Single engined landings?
My mate walked out of your place with a CJ rating having done 5 hours plus test....
Now I'm not having a particular go at Bristol it's just that AOC operators have a pop at other operators based on safety and operate to the minimum regulatory standards when it suits. pilot training being a MASSIVE cost saving available to commercial operators where arguably its potentially the single biggest factor to improve the crew technically and in the event of a malfunction increase the chances of a good outcome.
FNPL
Regarding the operator you named and shamed on the previous page, would it surprise you if they had already had a visit and no further action taken?
So let's be a little more transparent with each other.....AOC operators are NOT mainly concerned about unaudited operators sharing the sky's in an unsafe manner......IT'S ABOUT LOST REVENUE BE HONEST.....please Mr AOC holder don't pee in my private/corporate pocket and then try to convince me it's raining....
How about this......
ALL aircraft required to be operated MULTI CREW or over 12,500lbs should require Simulator training for OPC/LPC's ALL AOC and private operators need to get in the sim twice per year.... That means around the tower LPCs via an in house TRE should be banned.
@Phil
Can you tell me if Bristol conduct any simulator training for recurrent or initials
Do you see that as a satisfactory state of affairs or is it something that could be improved upon, have your pilots ever been exposed to dual gen failures? engine failures with the aircraft actually still on the runway post V1? Control problems? TCAS RA's? landing gear failed deployments? Single engined landings?
My mate walked out of your place with a CJ rating having done 5 hours plus test....
Now I'm not having a particular go at Bristol it's just that AOC operators have a pop at other operators based on safety and operate to the minimum regulatory standards when it suits. pilot training being a MASSIVE cost saving available to commercial operators where arguably its potentially the single biggest factor to improve the crew technically and in the event of a malfunction increase the chances of a good outcome.
FNPL
Regarding the operator you named and shamed on the previous page, would it surprise you if they had already had a visit and no further action taken?
So let's be a little more transparent with each other.....AOC operators are NOT mainly concerned about unaudited operators sharing the sky's in an unsafe manner......IT'S ABOUT LOST REVENUE BE HONEST.....please Mr AOC holder don't pee in my private/corporate pocket and then try to convince me it's raining....
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-SPOT
Don't you see that it is the same thing?
The whole point of regulation is to stop a race to the bottom. If money is taken out of the AOC holders' pockets by illegal charters, then there are fewer people willing to pay the costs of AOC, and more willing to operate unregulated. They could well be the same people, so they have no cause for complaint, they're still making money. The logical end to that is an end to regulated charter, and minimising costs taking the place of safety.
People are right to say that hasn't happened in most private and corporate operations. That is because the people who are paying are often those at risk, or at least know them well. In charters that is not the case - there will always be someone who will do it cheaper by cutting training, by not having a quality system or by making pilots run their own ground ops and fly long hours.
You see that people like Detling with many years in private ops have no idea what a quality system is, I doubt he has a clue about SMS. If operators running illegal charters have any management of flight safety and accident prevention it is certain to be many years out of date, very much on traditional lines which are not as good as modern systems.
AOC operators are NOT mainly concerned about unaudited operators sharing the sky's in an unsafe manner......IT'S ABOUT LOST REVENUE BE HONEST
The whole point of regulation is to stop a race to the bottom. If money is taken out of the AOC holders' pockets by illegal charters, then there are fewer people willing to pay the costs of AOC, and more willing to operate unregulated. They could well be the same people, so they have no cause for complaint, they're still making money. The logical end to that is an end to regulated charter, and minimising costs taking the place of safety.
People are right to say that hasn't happened in most private and corporate operations. That is because the people who are paying are often those at risk, or at least know them well. In charters that is not the case - there will always be someone who will do it cheaper by cutting training, by not having a quality system or by making pilots run their own ground ops and fly long hours.
You see that people like Detling with many years in private ops have no idea what a quality system is, I doubt he has a clue about SMS. If operators running illegal charters have any management of flight safety and accident prevention it is certain to be many years out of date, very much on traditional lines which are not as good as modern systems.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You see that people like Detling with many years in private ops have no idea what a quality system is, I doubt he has a clue about SMS. If operators running illegal charters have any management of flight safety and accident prevention it is certain to be many years out of date, very much on traditional lines which are not as good as modern systems.
Look at Samedan: private ops jockey went in, killing himself and the copilot. (The VP-B (IIRC) Falcon) They approached and cycled in wx unsuitable to say the least.
Bad folks, private ones (I do think the VP-B dudes did have a SMS at that time or were just about to be mandated)
Big time bohey, the BAZL saying one needs a special introduction etcetc. (neglecting the high snow banks...)
Next one to kill themselfs was a german AOC operated Premier crew. They killed themselfs in unsuitable wx - to say the least. (does someone see the similarity here?)
No please explain to simple mind as mine is, what exactly is the difference in neglecting BASIC rules (VFR is PPL stuff) in an private environment and in an AOC environment, when the results are the same. The one crew hit the ground with either a small manual or no manual on board and the other with all the 'goodies' the EU-OPS offers.
I found the Premier accident even worse as they most likely (IMO, I know the rep is not out)) stalled the airplane banking close to ground - that is a cardinal sin in my book.
IF I´m right, then I ask the assembled pros here: how on earth can an AOC operator have two guys up front that do such things? (that is the holier than thou approach - others do make mistakes as well)
But we are discussing two different things within this discussion, one is safety and regulations and the other one is about illegal charter - which is not addressed in the new reg AFAIK.
The whole point of regulation is to stop a race to the bottom. If money is taken out of the AOC holders' pockets by illegal charters, then there are fewer people willing to pay the costs of AOC, and more willing to operate unregulated. They could well be the same people, so they have no cause for complaint, they're still making money. The logical end to that is an end to regulated charter, and minimising costs taking the place of safety.
People are right to say that hasn't happened in most private and corporate operations. That is because the people who are paying are often those at risk, or at least know them well. In charters that is not the case - there will always be someone who will do it cheaper by cutting training, by not having a quality system or by making pilots run their own ground ops and fly long hours
People are right to say that hasn't happened in most private and corporate operations. That is because the people who are paying are often those at risk, or at least know them well. In charters that is not the case - there will always be someone who will do it cheaper by cutting training, by not having a quality system or by making pilots run their own ground ops and fly long hours
THESE (poor) pilots and THESE operations are a thread for every decent AOC operator out there. I had them sitting next door to my operation.
There are operations (AOC) that operate close to ten airplanes, that don´t do sim training. There are operations (AOC) that have their own checkers that would fail a hen, despite the fact that a hen just can't fly...
That is the bottom. Right there. Regulation, let alone over-regulation does not change anything.
I do my own ground ops, btw, and I find it not to exhausting.(long trips requiring permits are outsourced...)
Now with new found necessities (EASA-OPS) that might change (the exhausting bit)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think most of you are forgetting that with an AOC comes an Operating License. This is not safety related per se, but is more of a trading license. In the same way that we have 145's, and taxi cabs are licensed, or stock broker is licensed to trade. It says to the public that you have proved competence to the regulator to a satisfactory standard, and if it all goes wrong, various individuals will be held accountable. That counts for safety and financially.
If you want to trade in public air transport, go get yourself a license.
So to all those illegal charterers out there : STOP NICKING OUR BUSINESS!!!
GO GET A LICENSE OR F*&K OFF.
If you want to trade in public air transport, go get yourself a license.
So to all those illegal charterers out there : STOP NICKING OUR BUSINESS!!!
GO GET A LICENSE OR F*&K OFF.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FNPL
What have you done about getting your trade association whipped into shape, I think the time before last......no hang on a minute it was the time before the time before we had this debate we actually managed to agree that they were doing cock all and it was left to brokers and AOC operators to bitch on here and jealously monitor CFMU for perpetrators.
So what exactly have you done to help yourselves since the last time you moaned about it......
You also haven't answered the question that I asked of you the last last last time that if AOC safety standards are that vigorous and oversight is that great then why are 24/7 still trading when everybody calls them fit to burn.
FNPL Should 24/7 have an AOC or Not? Yes or No?
FLAYMY
Very well paraphased, you managed to pickup the safety issue out of my post but managed to avoid answering the main issue within which was the lack of training AOC pilots receive mainly due to commercial financial pressures. Why not pick that up on your next posting
FLAYMY Id be interested in knowing what you thought would be more important for the safety case for a CORPORATE operation Sim trained Crews or an SMS
You also fail to grasp that if twice the number of people need auditing then the authority will need three times the people due to geography and physical limitations so you'll have more competition and heavier oversight charges
HD
Excellent post as ever.
What have you done about getting your trade association whipped into shape, I think the time before last......no hang on a minute it was the time before the time before we had this debate we actually managed to agree that they were doing cock all and it was left to brokers and AOC operators to bitch on here and jealously monitor CFMU for perpetrators.
So what exactly have you done to help yourselves since the last time you moaned about it......
You also haven't answered the question that I asked of you the last last last time that if AOC safety standards are that vigorous and oversight is that great then why are 24/7 still trading when everybody calls them fit to burn.
FNPL Should 24/7 have an AOC or Not? Yes or No?
FLAYMY
Very well paraphased, you managed to pickup the safety issue out of my post but managed to avoid answering the main issue within which was the lack of training AOC pilots receive mainly due to commercial financial pressures. Why not pick that up on your next posting
FLAYMY Id be interested in knowing what you thought would be more important for the safety case for a CORPORATE operation Sim trained Crews or an SMS
You also fail to grasp that if twice the number of people need auditing then the authority will need three times the people due to geography and physical limitations so you'll have more competition and heavier oversight charges
HD
Excellent post as ever.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Est
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-Spot -
24/7 - agree whole heartedly, but this wonderful capitalist society we live in has a way of weeding out the weak. The fact that pretty much no brokers in the UK use them, and their sales are dwindling would indicate that natural selection is taking place. a search on CFMU looking for TWF callsigns often comes up nil.
Countless airlines / operators have failed over the years for a multitude of reasons. Perhaps if they weren't having business stolen from them by unlicensed "operators" they could have invested in a more robust operation, and spent some cash on their aircraft. Whether they would or not is another discussion altogether!
Understand that to AOC operators, this escalating menace of IPT is as big to us as bi lateral agreements are to flag carriers. Eventually something will have to happen. Think of the eventual and long overdue airline blacklist that is now commonly used. Its only a matter of time that GA, now its moved from aviation enthusiasts, and the odd air taxi company with perhaps a King Air, to a multi billion industry with state of the art, ocean crossing, luxury jets.
Perhaps the airlines that have lost a whole generation of 1st class and business class passengers will also be paying an increased interest in IPT. ??
So what exactly have you done to help yourselves since the last time you moaned about it......
Countless airlines / operators have failed over the years for a multitude of reasons. Perhaps if they weren't having business stolen from them by unlicensed "operators" they could have invested in a more robust operation, and spent some cash on their aircraft. Whether they would or not is another discussion altogether!
Understand that to AOC operators, this escalating menace of IPT is as big to us as bi lateral agreements are to flag carriers. Eventually something will have to happen. Think of the eventual and long overdue airline blacklist that is now commonly used. Its only a matter of time that GA, now its moved from aviation enthusiasts, and the odd air taxi company with perhaps a King Air, to a multi billion industry with state of the art, ocean crossing, luxury jets.
Perhaps the airlines that have lost a whole generation of 1st class and business class passengers will also be paying an increased interest in IPT. ??