Private Operators and Ops1

[NuName]

flyingfemme

I was thinking more for pooling resources to produce the manuals at little expense, personaly I think IAOPA is a wast of space.

Manx is definately more user friendly for private op's.

[185 Lbs of Ballast!!]

Ibac & Is-bao

It already exists guys.......

IBAC is a non-profit, non-governmental association which represents, promotes and protects the interests of business aviation in international policy and regulatory forums. IBAC was founded on 15 June 1981


And IS-BAO.....
The International Standard for Business Aircraft Operations (IS-BAO) was formally introduced and made available to the business aviation community at the European Business Aviation Conference and Exhibit (EBACE) in Geneva, May 2002.IS-BAO was developed by the industry for the benefit of the industry. It is a code of best practices designed to help flight departments worldwide achieve a high level of safety and professionalism..This Site provides information on the benefits of IS-BAO and how to obtain a copy.In addition, the site describes the process used to keep the standard dynamic and current with new equipment and procedures.

Flight departments interested in obtaining a Certificate of Registration will find information in the audit page regarding the process for choosing a Registrar and how to apply for a Certificate. The IS-BAO audit program commenced in the fourth quarter of 2002. Since that time a number of auditors from all corners of the world have received accreditation. IBAC has awarded Certificates of Registration to many flight departments that have successfully met the IS-BAO standard as verified by an accredited auditor.

http://www.ibac.org/Files/is-bao/Home/steve.mov

Introducing IS-BAO International Business Aviation Council

I think this is excellent and am very happy that ExecuJet are fully signed up.

Cheers

Ballast.

[HS125]

Frankly, I'm with NuName on all this.

I stand singularly unimpressed with the current representation for genuine private ops, especially in Europe.

We have things like EBAA, IBAC, IS-BAO in force but isn't it time to wake up and smell the coffee?

What on earth to the private operator is IS-BAO than a bunch of hoops to jump through? at the end of the day it is a means of compliance with the new legislation, which in essence is a bunch of costly and unnecessary hoops to jump through.

We proved in the debate about third country licensing and registration that there was no safety disparity between EU reg commercial and non-EU reg private operations, but nobody will fight this. Why? EBAA is in bed with IBAC that created IS-BAO, the end. There are still costs associated with IS-BAO, and whenever a new piece of legislation comes out, as far as I can see the 'representative' bodies do little to fight our corner at the consultation stage and then pedal their compliance solution at the implementation stage.... Don't believe me? why the backpedal by EBAA advising it's members to boycott the ETS when the EU wouldn't approve its ETS solution? A boycott was what was needed from the outset by Airlines, Charter and Private alike.

There is a parallel here with other industries, remember when BS 5750 and ISO 9000 series were 'trendy' routes to go down, These all involve quality systems and audits etc, but at the end of the day it's in the interest of the auditor to accept or pass the applicant as the receiving organisation get membership and service fees from the applicant on an ongoing basis!

This whole thing smells, it does nothing but impose cost an an industry in a precarious economic condition with quite the opposite of tangible benefit for it's efforts. ICAO has acted ridiculously here and, what a surprise, the US of E as someone quite eloquently put it [as long as it meant United S***hole of Europe] was at the front of the queue arm-in-arm with IBAC to jump on the bandwagon.

[His dudeness]

I agree.

And the ISBAO stuff does not come for free. Auditing will cost a fortune.

Major point for me however is, that for the time being nobody can give me the reassurance that if we comply to ISBAO that we are also complying with the new regulations by EASA.

I donīt want to reinvent the wheel again. (As I did with national AOC to JAROPS1 and then EU Ops)

Has any 2 man flight department adopted/introduced ISBAO yet?

[mattman]

I am trying to implement a ISBAO ops Man at this present moment amongst my trusty band of pilots........... Meaning me and co-jo.

Now having worked in a big many pilot company, SOP and the like works really well but a SOP and ops Manuel for me, and the other guy is more like trying to plug a leak with 358 pages of crap. And cost enough to build a new dam.

By the way the auditing of this thing is not so simple especially when you get a out of work seriously pissed with the industry, did this to make some extra cash auditor coming to check how well the Manuel balances on the shelve.

I am with Nuname on this, what is there to have a generic ops Manuel, SMS, ETS and all these other thousand of EU created acronyms from Big brother on one website for just private operators. We can all contribute to having one system being audited and cover everyone. Can't see how this is illegal as we are all under the one banner of private ops and, wait for it, NON REVENUE flights. Seeing that it does not have to be company specific but operation specific I see no problems.

Thoughts will be welcome, criticism well that's another issue.......

[Coolmore M.]

Has any company been ISBAO audited, which doesn't have a VP-B/C aircraft in its ops?

[His dudeness]

Iīd join in, mattman. I think that we might have a prob concerning different authorities, just like JAROPS was all the same and different for every country, and in my Country at least, different from Authority Guy in charge for your AOC to Authority guy... but we could at least create a database on the stuff and tease the authorities a bit if they play differently!

Just when I thought Iīd be rid of that crap (out of AOC into the coorperate), it gets me again...

Would you mind droppin me a line or two about the ISBAO stuff? Iīm highly interested...

[ALFRED]

Back to Oops 1...

Evening LaydznGents,

We have given mandat to a company to provide us with books

So far it's a great copy n past of Ops 1
Of course, we can not match the rest period without hiring extra crews (Boss will be happy !)
We have not covered the Safety management yet nor question of loadsheet or other short rwy considerations...
Next step is a meeting with those "bookwriters" and check how flexible our Authorities are ?

I meet you here Your Dudeness, was so happy jumping out lowco comm to a private.

[3pins]

I have difficulties to see this happening to private operations in Europe, because it is so far away from what the US would ever dream of doing.

It would end up in another battle between EU and US again (just like the idea of banning N-reg in Europe)

They will try there hardest to make things complicated, but when meeting resistance with facts they will back down.
All they will accomplish is more N-reg aircrafts.

[Pittspilot]

Hi Coolmore,

we have passed ISBAO stage 2 being on the Swiss reg. Looking to pass S3 this year.

Regards Pittspilot

[G-SPOTs Lost]

Now having worked in a big many pilot company, SOP and the like works really well but a SOP and ops Manuel for me, and the other guy is more like trying to plug a leak with 358 pages of crap. And cost enough to build a new dam.

Quote of the year right there....

I'm looking at it the other way, if I'm 80% there then I might as well go the other 20% spend 40k on the CAA fees and a couple of audits at 15k each, cherrypick some choice charterwork and heres the rub.....be able to operate at a loss without worry and give the established charter operators a run for their money..

My boss will see it as being compelled to take the train to Liverpool at vast cost and then deciding to get off at Edge Hill.....(sorry for non UK, Non NW based crew!)

Oversimplistic yes, but imagine a company setup simply to provide AOC cover on common types such as an Excel. You operate under their approval and pay your monthly money, once they get to a 10 aircraft "Fleet" it all starts to make sense.

Imagine an influx of approved AOC operators who dont need to make money...it would be chaos!

[Fanjet]

And because it's on an AOC no stupid ETS.

That's a bonus right there.

[BestAviation]

I'm looking at it the other way, if I'm 80% there then I might as well go the other 20% spend 40k on the CAA fees and a couple of audits at 15k each, cherrypick some choice charterwork and heres the rub.....be able to operate at a loss without worry and give the established charter operators a run for their money..

Isn't that what a lot of the current AOC operators are doing? Many of them don't own their own aircraft - they're just trying to make a buck off someone else's machine...and I'm sure some operate with a loss.

The idea is nice and I did a cost study for my principals not long ago to check if there was a cost advantage of going AOC. Turned out we needed to sell about 140 charter hours to break even on the added cost of an AOC (when factored against cost-per-hour operating). Which isn't a lot - but then the principals would also like to use the aircraft on their discression, so in the end the view was taken that the financial gain was minimal compared to the convenience of ownership.

[ALFRED]

Ooops 2

So the overall idea is to implement, at last, the famous Ops 2, which should be... more stringent than the 1 as "we don't want Privates being more efficient or more free than Commercials or AOCed !"

Writing down the books what and how we realy operate, identifying who will go to jail if not complying and so one
And of course, this Ops 2 is not finalized yet

That was the sarcastic thought, apologize for that.

Of course, it goes toward flight safety but it's a complete different business to run then. Welcome back to red tape, flight envelope, flight log, loads of paper to endorse... and so much for the Rain Forest...

[asdf1234]

Link to EASA proposal

Does anyone have the link to the EASA webpage where the proposals are discussed? I've searched their website but can't seem to get to the info we need. Thanks.

[ALFRED]

Concretely, the idea is to match ICAO annex 6 part II before implementation of Ops2.

Although it's a step toward safety, it has a cost that many Privates will have to afford on their own. Furthermore, VLJs and manufacturers could also suffer from this implementation...
I am pretty confident that as $ are involved, Lobbyists have tough job to face and we'd better seat back, relax and enjoy






Hope m right

[asdf1234]

So if EASA-OPS for corporate/private operators will follow ICAO Annex 6 part II and IS-BAO follows Annex 6 part II, is it prudent to go down the IS-BAO route to comply with EASA-OPS now?. Or wait for the EASA-OPS regulations to be published in a few months time?

Can anyone expand on how long does it take to reach IS-BAO certification and what the cost is (ballpark)?

[asdf1234]

It seems everything EASA will be asking of both commercial and non-commercial operator is here:

http://easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/g/doc/...16-2008-en.pdf

So for us here in the UK we have to work out 2 things. When will the CAA advise us of the regulations and means of compliance (i.e. will IS-BAO suffice for non commercial operators), and how long will we get to implement the required systems?

His Dudeness is correct about implementation latest 8th April 2012 so we don't have much time to either achieve IS-BAO standards or devise an in-house solution. Of course a non-commercial operator can decide on the AOC route - it is well documented and has the added benefit of allowing for revenue flights.

[falconbis]

with complex long haul privatjets and the burgoning of the low cost single pilot jet EASA and Operators have been scared to fly around with low train privat pilots in fastjet flying in high density complex areas. they thought that the gap between OPS1 regulation and Gen ruling was too large OPS2 have already been delayed 2 years and there is some good stuff in for Pilots regarding duty time and training. the Boss won t be happy ?? well if you can pay millions to fly a jet you shld then be able to afford the extra cost, or move into an AOC and get all the tax rebate benefits.

[His dudeness]

well if you can pay millions to fly a jet you shld then be able to afford the extra cost, or move into an AOC and get all the tax rebate benefits.

falconbis... *edited*

Rich people and coorperations donīt get rich by spending money for useless things. Some canīt move to an AOC because of circumstances such as runway lenght at homebase (like in our case), some simply prefer not to.
I wonder what YOU would say, if the auhorities would mandat that your personal driving is not only regulated by the normal road regulation, but also total useless regulations on top, that costs the planet several forrest a year; costs you as an owner on top of already existing irregularities (e.g.ETS - WTF does an AOC holder not pay when we do ????) and donīt do any good.

(nothing wrong in the part of harmonizing the regs, but...)

As accident statistics show, AOC ops have more accidents. There are surely a lot of reasons for that and Iīm not saying I can tell exactly why this is, but I can tell you that much: my employer spends more on my training and the fact that the crew they employ are experienced that any previous AOC employer of mine ever has (that was 3 of em in a fixed).

Also I personally do know AOC operators that employ 500 guys in the left seat, that spent 250 hrs next to a guy going from 500 to 750 hours in the process. THAT does not build experience in a way it should.

IF the EU commision, the EASA and the local authorities would clean that stable of Augias before they touch something that works, then Iīm convienced their reach has something to do with safety. For the time being its a powertrip and nothing else.

They should stop things like SSTR schemes by law, they should prevent that lowtimers get to fly with lowtimers in fast moving things such as jets. There is PLENTY of things they should do before they touch something that generallly speaking works (there a black sheep, but they will not go away by their proposed regulation)

I donīt know about your country, but in my country if you fly as a employed pilot, you got to obey FDR. And we do. Its part of a small manual that the boss has signed. And which is my reassurance that I will not be pressed to do anything unlawful in my role as a coorperate pilot for them.