Unpressurised scheduled passenger transport?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unpressurised scheduled passenger transport?
Maybe this is the wrong forum but I rarely visit the others...
I am curious how does this work out in practice. I am talking about the Islander/Trilander type business. They can't go much above 10k feet, obviously don't have oxygen, yet they fly under IFR which means Eurocontrol routes, most of those are above FL070 and many above FL130, and such an aircraft is bound to spend much of its time in IMC and turbulence.
I am curious how does this work out in practice. I am talking about the Islander/Trilander type business. They can't go much above 10k feet, obviously don't have oxygen, yet they fly under IFR which means Eurocontrol routes, most of those are above FL070 and many above FL130, and such an aircraft is bound to spend much of its time in IMC and turbulence.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I know alot of the Orkney Islander stuff is done "VFR". The Advisory routes are used by the Shorts 360s, Twotters, Jet Streams and SAABs (no oxygen but I am not sure if they are pressurised) in Northern Scotland. Most operations seem to stay below FL150.
As a helicopter pilot, we never go airways (too high) so its class G IFR, very often routing direct (airspace and terrain permitting). But then again, we are not scheduled.
IO540, I am intrigued by your comment that IFR means Eurocontrol. Perhaps I have been lucky in that all my IFR has been in the North Sea system, or in areas where traffic densities are so low, we have always been able to file IFR over the radio (VFR - IFR flights). I have only ever filled out one IFR flight plan!
As a helicopter pilot, we never go airways (too high) so its class G IFR, very often routing direct (airspace and terrain permitting). But then again, we are not scheduled.
IO540, I am intrigued by your comment that IFR means Eurocontrol. Perhaps I have been lucky in that all my IFR has been in the North Sea system, or in areas where traffic densities are so low, we have always been able to file IFR over the radio (VFR - IFR flights). I have only ever filled out one IFR flight plan!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO
If there are airways they fly them - if not they fly IFR in class 'G'. Why do you think N866 between SAM and ORTAC had that ridiculously low base level. They are not restricted to Airways in the UK, and outside the UK nobody's stupid enough to use them for that sort of flying
Droopy
Jetstreams and Saab 340s are pressurised - the others are not.
If there are airways they fly them - if not they fly IFR in class 'G'. Why do you think N866 between SAM and ORTAC had that ridiculously low base level. They are not restricted to Airways in the UK, and outside the UK nobody's stupid enough to use them for that sort of flying
Droopy
Jetstreams and Saab 340s are pressurised - the others are not.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I know the UK is a free for all in Class G (VFR or IFR, nobody cares), and it sounds like the real answer to my Q is that people don't operate those types under IFR in Europe outside the UK.
With a 20k ceiling, my TB20 has a much greater IFR mission capability than a Trilander yet I would scrap many flights into other parts of Europe because I would be in solid IMC, heavy turbulence, and collecting ice for several hours. The Trilander has rubber boots but they would run out of sickbags if they were doing this.
Presumably the Jersey run is scud run below the TCU/CB bases if the weather is bad.
With a 20k ceiling, my TB20 has a much greater IFR mission capability than a Trilander yet I would scrap many flights into other parts of Europe because I would be in solid IMC, heavy turbulence, and collecting ice for several hours. The Trilander has rubber boots but they would run out of sickbags if they were doing this.
Presumably the Jersey run is scud run below the TCU/CB bases if the weather is bad.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO
If there are airways they fly them - if not they fly IFR in class 'G'. Why do you think N866 between SAM and ORTAC had that ridiculously low base level. They are not restricted to Airways in the UK, and outside the UK nobody's stupid enough to use them for that sort of flying
Droopy
Jetstreams and Saab 340s are pressurised - the others are not.
If there are airways they fly them - if not they fly IFR in class 'G'. Why do you think N866 between SAM and ORTAC had that ridiculously low base level. They are not restricted to Airways in the UK, and outside the UK nobody's stupid enough to use them for that sort of flying
Droopy
Jetstreams and Saab 340s are pressurised - the others are not.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a particularly helpful post but something I found quite shocking.
A few weeks ago I was grounded for a couple of days at a certain French airport on the West coast due to very low cloud. A UK based Islander operating on a scheduled pax flight arrives and I promptly start a conversation about the weather over the channel, assuming that he was flying IFR. Turns out he had just crossed the channel at 800'
Must have been a fun flight for the pax onboard!
Does this happen often?
Cheers,
CapCon
A few weeks ago I was grounded for a couple of days at a certain French airport on the West coast due to very low cloud. A UK based Islander operating on a scheduled pax flight arrives and I promptly start a conversation about the weather over the channel, assuming that he was flying IFR. Turns out he had just crossed the channel at 800'
Must have been a fun flight for the pax onboard!Does this happen often?
Cheers,
CapCon
Sounds like a most enjoyable way to fly! Hardly 'shocking' at all!
Don't forget that the Do-X went most of the way across the Atlantic in ground effect years ago with a full passenger load. By definition, at < 0.8 x (wing span)!!
Don't forget that the Do-X went most of the way across the Atlantic in ground effect years ago with a full passenger load. By definition, at < 0.8 x (wing span)!!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Le Touquet
Age: 57
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes they are single pliot AND they have no autopilots (or weather radar or HSI's or RMI's or GPS, only a vac DI and some VOR's) but they have an allowance due to the type of shorthaul flights. In fact even the Jetstreams used by blueislands don't have autopilots. Another fun issue with all this work load is a passenger sitting in the right hand seat with working controls in front of them
A buddy of mine has been flying the Channel Islands for some years and I think has only canceled one flight due weather (and that was crosswind limits). They scud run and come accross the water I think down to 500'. Thing is when loaded in a Tri you are coming down with an engine failure so all you have achieved is a 200% increase in the chances of having one. If I remember you need 1500 hrs to even be considered for them.
A buddy of mine has been flying the Channel Islands for some years and I think has only canceled one flight due weather (and that was crosswind limits). They scud run and come accross the water I think down to 500'. Thing is when loaded in a Tri you are coming down with an engine failure so all you have achieved is a 200% increase in the chances of having one. If I remember you need 1500 hrs to even be considered for them.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A standard clearance between Jersey and Guernsey is 'not above 1000ft SVFR'. Provided you comply with Rule 5, there is no problem. Passengers generally seem to love it.
Single pilot IFR public transport is normally only allowed with a functioning autopilot. The Trislanders and Islanders operated by Blue Islands and another channel islands operation have an exemption from the CAA to fly without one, but they are not allowed into the major TMA airfields of the UK unless a second pilot is carried.
Just to clarify Dunc's post: TheJetstreams of BI have no autopilot, but they are twin-crew. It is the Trislanders which occasionally have pax sitting next to the pilot, but only under certain conditions. The Trislanders do all have HSI and GPS (VFR standard only). They are fully IFR equipped to CAA standards.
Single pilot IFR public transport is normally only allowed with a functioning autopilot. The Trislanders and Islanders operated by Blue Islands and another channel islands operation have an exemption from the CAA to fly without one, but they are not allowed into the major TMA airfields of the UK unless a second pilot is carried.
Just to clarify Dunc's post: TheJetstreams of BI have no autopilot, but they are twin-crew. It is the Trislanders which occasionally have pax sitting next to the pilot, but only under certain conditions. The Trislanders do all have HSI and GPS (VFR standard only). They are fully IFR equipped to CAA standards.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Isn't it just an incredible irony, that the most challenging flying, as described, above is considered the bottom rung of the ladder. When the seemingly apparent reality is that the job gets exponentially easier with a linear improvement in Ts&Cs 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Le Touquet
Age: 57
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I lumped the Islanders with the Trilanders - The Islanders don't have an HSI or a slaved DI or a panel GPS. Does not get any harder. Its not cargo its pax and your landing at night into a coastal windy field with only an NDB IAP (Alderney) no slaved DI, no HSI, no RMI, no GPS, no autopilot and no co-pilot. What is tougher?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen a few Islanders with all the toys such as RMI's and HSI's.
Operating unpressurised is no problem apart from when you go down to the mountainous bits of Europe. We had lots of problems with a route between Marseille and Paris because of the Massif Central. Whichever genius management pilot had put the route together had forgotten that the single engine drift down alt for a shed was usually around 4-5,000' but had planned the flight going over ground where MSA was 8,700'. You didn't really notice at night, but on a daylight trip, it was pretty startling!
Cue lots of swearing when we first started flying it and lot's of poring over charts to find a way around. This was the only time we stuck to the flight planned route rather than just taking a direct routing when offered. French ATC sounded very surprised when we said NON every night! Until we explained why.
Operating unpressurised is no problem apart from when you go down to the mountainous bits of Europe. We had lots of problems with a route between Marseille and Paris because of the Massif Central. Whichever genius management pilot had put the route together had forgotten that the single engine drift down alt for a shed was usually around 4-5,000' but had planned the flight going over ground where MSA was 8,700'. You didn't really notice at night, but on a daylight trip, it was pretty startling!
Cue lots of swearing when we first started flying it and lot's of poring over charts to find a way around. This was the only time we stuck to the flight planned route rather than just taking a direct routing when offered. French ATC sounded very surprised when we said NON every night! Until we explained why.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WR
Are single-pilot IFR public transport operations permitted? (I thought not.)
The only things we have on the piston aircraft that the Islanders/Trislanders don't are autopilot and turbochargers (and I suppose sound proofing!). These do solve a few of the issues. I spend most of my time at FL90 or FL100 rather than FL50 to FL70 typical of a normally-aspirated aircraft, so am above the weather during the cruise on 95% of flights. The autopilot helps an awful lot, especially in busy airspace, and some of them can even fly coupled approaches.
However I will not only do everything Aurigny, Blue Islands and Lydd Air will do with those aircraft, and have been into all the airfields they operate from, but also I have also been all over Europe, from Spain to Norway, Ireland to Poland. I have flown into the busiest 4 airports in Europe as well as small strips with no approach aids. None of this is too hard - as long as you have the experience and the training, with the support of a good operations department (lacking in some light-charter companies).
I tend to fly in controlled airspace. Routing can be more complicated because I am restricted to FL100, but that is an issue for our ops. I just fly where ATC tell me to. Some routes I will fly outside controlled airspace, usually still IFR, just because it is quicker. That's my choice. Other companies make their pilots fly VFR all around Europe, which depite WR's reasonable preference for being flown VFR on a short, familiar trip, is far harder for the pilot and far less safe when they are flying for a couple of hours on an unfamiliar route. IFR flying is always the easiest way once you are used to it.
One advantage to our operations is that there is no-one else there. Except in terminal areas with airliners in climb or decent the only people at FL100 are unpressurised turbo-charged aircraft. There are not that many of those about! I suppose the Is and Tris are generally lower, but it's still pretty quiet at FL60
HWD
Quite right. However this is also the most fun flying, so I am not about to fight to swap with an airline pilot!
Last edited by Life's a Beech; 29th Jun 2007 at 17:30.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the reasons I got my PPL was because I have been flying with Aurigny to Alderney for the last 12 years and know many of the Aurigny pilots. I have been lucky enough to sit up front for many sectors, and have even got 7 trilander hours hours logged (following a private charter).
This is what flying is about ! Single pilot, multiple sectors, up to 6 IFR approaches daily down to minimas is not uncommon, the
Aurigny pilots have to be amongst the most skilled in the world. To clear up a thread misconception the Aurigny Trilanders do have autopilots, and when low visibility procedures are in operation at Alderney they are vectored by Guernsey onto the inbound NDB track rather than doing the full approach. As has been said SVFR clearances between the Islands are "not above 1,000 (or 2,000) feet" which gives amazing views.
Aurigny fly airways, where as Blue Islands tend not to, the local island gossip being so BlueIslands can save money from Eurocontrol costs. There's always been friendly rivalry between Aurigny and Blue Islands, set to increase as Blue Islands have now got the JetStreams.
(Anybody wanting IFR training couldn't do better than Guernsey, the ATC are so helpful and friendly)
Cheers,
LF
This is what flying is about ! Single pilot, multiple sectors, up to 6 IFR approaches daily down to minimas is not uncommon, the
Aurigny pilots have to be amongst the most skilled in the world. To clear up a thread misconception the Aurigny Trilanders do have autopilots, and when low visibility procedures are in operation at Alderney they are vectored by Guernsey onto the inbound NDB track rather than doing the full approach. As has been said SVFR clearances between the Islands are "not above 1,000 (or 2,000) feet" which gives amazing views.
Aurigny fly airways, where as Blue Islands tend not to, the local island gossip being so BlueIslands can save money from Eurocontrol costs. There's always been friendly rivalry between Aurigny and Blue Islands, set to increase as Blue Islands have now got the JetStreams.
(Anybody wanting IFR training couldn't do better than Guernsey, the ATC are so helpful and friendly)
Cheers,
LF
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QUOTE
the local island gossip being so BlueIslands can save money from Eurocontrol costs
UNQUOTE
The only regular routes which go outside airways are Alderney-Bournemouth and Alderney-Shoreham. A quick glance at a chart will show that there is a lack of suitable airways for the whole of these routes, unlike Alderney-Southampton, which has its own airway with a specially low base level to accommodate the BN2 performance issues. Cost is only a very small part of the equation and would never be allowed to compromise safety.
As for the Trislander autopilot issue, I have never been in an Aurigny one, but 700hrs in Trislanders leads me to believe that there is no CAA approved autopilot made for them. That of course may only be the case for fitting a new one. If it's always been there that may be different.
the local island gossip being so BlueIslands can save money from Eurocontrol costs
UNQUOTE
The only regular routes which go outside airways are Alderney-Bournemouth and Alderney-Shoreham. A quick glance at a chart will show that there is a lack of suitable airways for the whole of these routes, unlike Alderney-Southampton, which has its own airway with a specially low base level to accommodate the BN2 performance issues. Cost is only a very small part of the equation and would never be allowed to compromise safety.
As for the Trislander autopilot issue, I have never been in an Aurigny one, but 700hrs in Trislanders leads me to believe that there is no CAA approved autopilot made for them. That of course may only be the case for fitting a new one. If it's always been there that may be different.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it suprising that 1500hrs TT is regarded by some as some kind of compensation for not having an autopilot.
Having seen these people do engine tests while taxiing (i.e. against the brakes) I reckon not a few rules get bent on these operations.
The CAA bans SE turbine PT ops (regardless of how modern the aircraft might be) while allowing this sort of thing - they clearly have no idea where risk resides.
Having seen these people do engine tests while taxiing (i.e. against the brakes) I reckon not a few rules get bent on these operations.
The CAA bans SE turbine PT ops (regardless of how modern the aircraft might be) while allowing this sort of thing - they clearly have no idea where risk resides.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
What rules are being bent? Were they even doing full engine checks, or just checking out a suspected problem? I would think they only do full checks once a day.
Why would 1500 hours TT not go a great way to compensate for lack of autopilot? I find it surprising, even astonishing, that you don't think it does. The experience transforms a pilot who has the right attitude to flying. It helps me when my autopilot fails, as inevitably it has done. Workload increases, but I can cope without problem where I would have struggled a lot more at 300 hours when I had a shiny new CPL/IR.
Why would an autopilot be necessary on a short, familiar route anyway? In practice the main reason I need it is so I can find information in Jeppesens or my flight briefing papers that they will have memorised or have close to hand, and to relieve the fatigue of flying the long sectors under IFR that they don't experience. I suspect that is the reason for the CAA's concession, but I have no problem flying entire legs to position the aircraft after autopilot failure.
Where exactly are those extra-high risks in this operation? If operations are correctly overseen by the national aviation authorities, with experienced, current crews with semiannual flight checks, working restricted hours with good training and sound maintenance then very high standards of safety are now being achieved.
Risk statistics for single turbines as compared to light twins are not always presented honestly. However the main reason that the former will not be allowed to fly until engines are infallible is the matter of responsibility. If a single-engined aircraft has an engine failure in IMC and then fails to make a safe forced landing the responibility immediately falls to one man: the man that signed the piece of paper saying that single-engined public-transport operations would be allowed in IMC. Rightly or wrongly no-one in their right mind would sign that piece of paper in today's culture.
I am sorry, but until you have flown regularly under these or similar conditions you cannot really understand the job. It is different from anything else in aviation, but is still a skill that only needs to be learnt, consolidated and kept in currrent practice. What exactly is your aviation experience? How do you know about commerial IFR operations?
What rules are being bent? Were they even doing full engine checks, or just checking out a suspected problem? I would think they only do full checks once a day.
Why would 1500 hours TT not go a great way to compensate for lack of autopilot? I find it surprising, even astonishing, that you don't think it does. The experience transforms a pilot who has the right attitude to flying. It helps me when my autopilot fails, as inevitably it has done. Workload increases, but I can cope without problem where I would have struggled a lot more at 300 hours when I had a shiny new CPL/IR.
Why would an autopilot be necessary on a short, familiar route anyway? In practice the main reason I need it is so I can find information in Jeppesens or my flight briefing papers that they will have memorised or have close to hand, and to relieve the fatigue of flying the long sectors under IFR that they don't experience. I suspect that is the reason for the CAA's concession, but I have no problem flying entire legs to position the aircraft after autopilot failure.
Where exactly are those extra-high risks in this operation? If operations are correctly overseen by the national aviation authorities, with experienced, current crews with semiannual flight checks, working restricted hours with good training and sound maintenance then very high standards of safety are now being achieved.
Risk statistics for single turbines as compared to light twins are not always presented honestly. However the main reason that the former will not be allowed to fly until engines are infallible is the matter of responsibility. If a single-engined aircraft has an engine failure in IMC and then fails to make a safe forced landing the responibility immediately falls to one man: the man that signed the piece of paper saying that single-engined public-transport operations would be allowed in IMC. Rightly or wrongly no-one in their right mind would sign that piece of paper in today's culture.
I am sorry, but until you have flown regularly under these or similar conditions you cannot really understand the job. It is different from anything else in aviation, but is still a skill that only needs to be learnt, consolidated and kept in currrent practice. What exactly is your aviation experience? How do you know about commerial IFR operations?