FAA is coming to the sand
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dubai
Age: 54
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA is coming to the sand
Have you heard the latest? The FAA is coming next month to investigate the GCAA and their practices. What this means for Emirates is that the factoring is over and they will have to hire 1100 pilots and not 750. Anyone out there once you apply you are almost guaranteed to be hired.
But hold the phone. Recruitment department says that they can only get 350 pilots for the fiscal year. What to do?
Emirates is trying to rush the double dailes to IAH and LAX before the FAA comes and stops the new flights. Can the airline that does not honour contracts and treats its employees like a commodity pull this one off?
AAR is to blame for not hiring pilots the last year but that is assuming that the pilots would have come anyway. Only pilots I know that are coming are the ones out of jobs.
The company has already cancelled leave in October. It is just begining.
But hold the phone. Recruitment department says that they can only get 350 pilots for the fiscal year. What to do?
Emirates is trying to rush the double dailes to IAH and LAX before the FAA comes and stops the new flights. Can the airline that does not honour contracts and treats its employees like a commodity pull this one off?
AAR is to blame for not hiring pilots the last year but that is assuming that the pilots would have come anyway. Only pilots I know that are coming are the ones out of jobs.
The company has already cancelled leave in October. It is just begining.
cerbus,
Why would an authority that allows 1200hrs a year and 120 hours in 28 days come down on one that allows 900 (which could be maybe 1000+ with factoring) a year and 100 in 28 days?
We are working unsustainably hard and it must be addressed, but we could be legally working much harder under FAA regs.
I am under no illusion as to how bad GCAA regs are. The illusory part is thinking there aren't major free world countries in which the regs are even worse.
Why would an authority that allows 1200hrs a year and 120 hours in 28 days come down on one that allows 900 (which could be maybe 1000+ with factoring) a year and 100 in 28 days?
We are working unsustainably hard and it must be addressed, but we could be legally working much harder under FAA regs.
I am under no illusion as to how bad GCAA regs are. The illusory part is thinking there aren't major free world countries in which the regs are even worse.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The lion city
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wizofoz
1200 hours/year and 120/30 is for Part 135 carrier. All of the Part 121 Carrier is 1000/year and 100/30 and no factoring allowed.
Korean actually had the factoring back around in the 90s but that was corrected by the FAA.
Korean actually had the factoring back around in the 90s but that was corrected by the FAA.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: .
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It could be other way around, money works in mysterious ways!!!!
FAA praises GCAA in maintaining high level of safety
A high-level delegation from the Federal Aviation Administration of U.S. (FAA) visited the General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) in Dubai to discuss the latest developments of civil aviation sector. [FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']
The FAA delegation was represented by David Grizzle, the chief counsel and deputy administrator for the FAA, accompanied by Roy Barnett, senior representative of the Middle East office. The GCAA was presented by Dr. Ahmed Sheikh, Director of Legal Affairs, Ismail Al Balooshi, Director of Safety of Civil Aviation, and Captain David John Chapman, Senior Advisor for Aviation Safety in GCAA.
Both delegations discussed the cooperation in the field of aviation safety and legal affairs related to aviation safety in the country. Ismail Al Balooshi briefed the U.S. delegation on the expansion of the UAE aviation sector and the growth plans of the national carriers and aircraft maintenance and manufacturing companies.
The U.S. delegation valued the role of GCAA in maintaining the high level of safety the UAE praised the Middle East Safety Aviation Roadmap chaired by UAE to identify weaknesses and recommend enhancements in air safety in Middle East. - Emirates News Agency, WAM[/FONT]
FAA praises GCAA in maintaining high level of safety
A high-level delegation from the Federal Aviation Administration of U.S. (FAA) visited the General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) in Dubai to discuss the latest developments of civil aviation sector. [FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']
The FAA delegation was represented by David Grizzle, the chief counsel and deputy administrator for the FAA, accompanied by Roy Barnett, senior representative of the Middle East office. The GCAA was presented by Dr. Ahmed Sheikh, Director of Legal Affairs, Ismail Al Balooshi, Director of Safety of Civil Aviation, and Captain David John Chapman, Senior Advisor for Aviation Safety in GCAA.
Both delegations discussed the cooperation in the field of aviation safety and legal affairs related to aviation safety in the country. Ismail Al Balooshi briefed the U.S. delegation on the expansion of the UAE aviation sector and the growth plans of the national carriers and aircraft maintenance and manufacturing companies.
The U.S. delegation valued the role of GCAA in maintaining the high level of safety the UAE praised the Middle East Safety Aviation Roadmap chaired by UAE to identify weaknesses and recommend enhancements in air safety in Middle East. - Emirates News Agency, WAM[/FONT]
1200 hours/year and 120/30 is for Part 135 carrier. All of the Part 121 Carrier is 1000/year and 100/30 and no factoring allowed.
Fact remains that FAA regs are generally less restrictive than GCAA.
It would be great if they boned factoring, but I'm not holding my breath.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cerbus . . .
. . . What sort of jurisdiction do you think that American FAA has over "A6" registered airplanes? What sort of jurisdiction do you think that American FAA has over UAE flight duty regulations...? Is the UAE the 51ST state of the United States....?
For example: FAA 121 [air carrier ops] has a provision for 1000 hours annually. But JAA regs have a maximum of only 900 hours annually.
Do you think that JAA/EU ops regulators would have jurisdiction over "N" registered airplanes, and could or would ban FAA 121 air carrier pilots from operating into EU if they were to exceed 900 hours annually according to EU ops rules...?
Do you think that the American FAA is the international aerial police...?
For example: FAA 121 [air carrier ops] has a provision for 1000 hours annually. But JAA regs have a maximum of only 900 hours annually.
Do you think that JAA/EU ops regulators would have jurisdiction over "N" registered airplanes, and could or would ban FAA 121 air carrier pilots from operating into EU if they were to exceed 900 hours annually according to EU ops rules...?
Do you think that the American FAA is the international aerial police...?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: I can't remember
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA Authority
The hosting country has to give approval for an aircraft's arrival. Some countries aren't allowed to fly aircraft into the U.S.A. because they have poor standards and poor safety records.
Approvals can be granted and taken away from countries if their standards improve or worsen. So it is possible that the FAA could pressure a country to tighten their standards or risk losing their ability to fly into the U.S. market.
Approvals can be granted and taken away from countries if their standards improve or worsen. So it is possible that the FAA could pressure a country to tighten their standards or risk losing their ability to fly into the U.S. market.
Not true my down under friend.
Regionals in the U.S also under Part 121. So 1000 hours/year and 100/30 applies also to them.
Cheers
Regionals in the U.S also under Part 121. So 1000 hours/year and 100/30 applies also to them.
Cheers
So who does part 135 apply to?
Also, the 1000/ yr, 100/30 applies to US DOMESTIC operations. What part applies to international operations?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kuwait City currently
Age: 42
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part 135 is for air taxi, a.k.a. charter flights. Example: A charter company with a couple of lears and a G-550 that seek customers on a per-hour basis to charter the whole aircraft. This isn't the only example, but is the most common type of 135 carrier.
Part 121 is for airlines. Example: American Airlines, Delta, Comair, ExpressJet, etc.
Part 91 is for general aviation flying, i.e. non-commercial.
There are others, but those are the 3 main chapters regulating flight operations.
Tim
Part 121 is for airlines. Example: American Airlines, Delta, Comair, ExpressJet, etc.
Part 91 is for general aviation flying, i.e. non-commercial.
There are others, but those are the 3 main chapters regulating flight operations.
Tim
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a lighter note:
Sounds like a Stunt Double for one of the Blues Brothers!
"How much for your children?"
Director of Legal Affairs, Ismail Al Balooshi
"How much for your children?"
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In Fresh Air
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA does not have any authority to limit a foreign carriers (re. regulating authority) access to the US. It can only deem the regulatory authority (GCAA) a CAT 1, CAT 2 or worse. So, when a foreign carrier (EK, EY or any other) operating under a regulatory authority (GCAA) that has been downgraded to CAT 2 wants to increase their service, enter a new US market or whatever, the FAA can only recommend to the DOT (Department of Transportation) not to approve the increase in service. It is the DOT that is the final decision maker in foreign carrier access to the US. Does the DOT always follow the FAA's recommendations? Don't know. Would there be any politics involved such as the UAE allowing US military access to their waters, airspace etc? Now it goes a lot deeper than whether or not the FAA approves factoring or such. OTOH, the conflict of interest in the Sheik's involvement in EK AND the GCAA might have some interest.
Just some further info of flt time duty time regs. Any flight time over 8 hours 50+ per cent is required to always have a 3 crew augmentation. No relief until an audit has been accomplished. 12 hours? Always 4 crew. Jet Blue tried to do a transcon from east coast to west coast and back in one day with only two crew. They thought they had relief....bad ju ju. Cease the operation immediately. Only relates to aircraft with only 2 pilots.
Just some further info of flt time duty time regs. Any flight time over 8 hours 50+ per cent is required to always have a 3 crew augmentation. No relief until an audit has been accomplished. 12 hours? Always 4 crew. Jet Blue tried to do a transcon from east coast to west coast and back in one day with only two crew. They thought they had relief....bad ju ju. Cease the operation immediately. Only relates to aircraft with only 2 pilots.
Last edited by Panther 88; 8th Sep 2010 at 20:21.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foreign airlines operating into the USA operate under FAR129.....
The FAA is also on the lookout for one specific small air carrier that is operating US flagged aircraft, with no legit lease arrangements, nor maintenance programs, on file.
Big time trouble awaits these folks...for sure.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unlike the EU, who focuses more on individual airlines - its "black list" - the FAA focuses on the country's regulatory authority's ability to oversee their airlines. They inspect the GCAA/DGCA/ENAC etc. Basically the FAA looks at how well they are enforcing the local rules. They will not, except in extreme cases, look at individual regs, so the feds don't care, for example, how many hours are being flown per year unless the GCAA is looking the other way while the regs are being broken. The feds are not there to impose their rules on the locals, just as a US pilot is not hammered upon landing in the EU with over 900 hours this year in his logbook.
If this were all there was to it, life would be good. Unfortunately politics has to have its say. For an agency who in theory has a mandate to be above politics to promote safety, the FAA is probably one of the worst offenders of allowing politics and economics to triumph over safety and common sense. A country's category rating will have more to do with its importance to the US govt. than its airline safety stats.
I was in Venezuela in 2006 when the country was upgraded from Cat. 2 to Cat. 1. This had nothing to do with safety, security, and oversight. It seems that a large US airline wanted more frequency into CCS and had been getting the finger by the Venezuelan govt. Politics wins out and voila, now they are magically a Cat. 1 country. I can attest personally that absolutely nothing improved there to warrant the upgrade. The real fallout was borne by Miami ATC who has had to deal with the lion's share of increased flights by Ven. carriers' flights. We used to shake our heads after listening on freq. to some of the exchanges.
Similarly, Nigeria has recently been upgraded to Cat. 1. Does anyone know first hand if the Nigerians have materially improved their aviation system and oversight, or perhaps politics and money has trumped common sense once again?
If this were all there was to it, life would be good. Unfortunately politics has to have its say. For an agency who in theory has a mandate to be above politics to promote safety, the FAA is probably one of the worst offenders of allowing politics and economics to triumph over safety and common sense. A country's category rating will have more to do with its importance to the US govt. than its airline safety stats.
I was in Venezuela in 2006 when the country was upgraded from Cat. 2 to Cat. 1. This had nothing to do with safety, security, and oversight. It seems that a large US airline wanted more frequency into CCS and had been getting the finger by the Venezuelan govt. Politics wins out and voila, now they are magically a Cat. 1 country. I can attest personally that absolutely nothing improved there to warrant the upgrade. The real fallout was borne by Miami ATC who has had to deal with the lion's share of increased flights by Ven. carriers' flights. We used to shake our heads after listening on freq. to some of the exchanges.
Similarly, Nigeria has recently been upgraded to Cat. 1. Does anyone know first hand if the Nigerians have materially improved their aviation system and oversight, or perhaps politics and money has trumped common sense once again?