The 'self loading cargo' conundrum
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'self loading cargo' conundrum
Recently came across an operation where they are allowed to fly to lower visual flight minima for cargo flights compared with passenger flights.
Anybody know of any other operation that descriminates in this way?
Where do we stand with our North Sea 'Self Loading Cargo', (joke!!!)
Seriously though, what an unusual way to run a 'safe' operation?
Your thoughts?
G
Anybody know of any other operation that descriminates in this way?
Where do we stand with our North Sea 'Self Loading Cargo', (joke!!!)
Seriously though, what an unusual way to run a 'safe' operation?
Your thoughts?
G
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lower minima for Cargo only flights
Seen it done in Africa, albeit a fixed wing operator. However, what "rules" they were applying was somewhat difficult to prove!! Maybe it was Australian rules, or is that some kind of football game? Must be getting old.......
BT
BT
Lower minima for freight flights
I can understand cargo having a lower safety priority than passengers but what about protecting the crew, the aircraft and third parties on the ground.
This is a dumb policy if it is the case.
This is a dumb policy if it is the case.
The Veloceraptor of Lounge Lizards
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: From here the view is lovely
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the Cormorant accident in '92 or 3 Shell had a policy of no passenger flights with more than 50kt over the deck. In the far north this did build up some delays. A couple of years later I was called in off standby for a freighter and found the wind passed by the platform was 62kt. OPs, at my request queried the safety position with Shell and were told that the 50kt restriction was so that human life wasn't endangered. Ops asked the obvious before I spat my coffe all over the paperwork and were told that crew didn't count!
VH
VH
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen this appalling dichotomy in the plank world, where everything from crew ability assessed on a check, FTL's and maintenance are accepted at a lower level just because you have boxes in the back. (Or horses at a mill a pop?)
It was summed up some years ago by a union rep when questioned by a local politician as to why he was insisting on the same FTL's for freight as for passengers. His priceless answer was, "So when a 747 crashes into your apartment building, it doesn't matter to you whether it is a passenger or freight aircraft?"
The silly bitch backed down, and we got similar rules for both.
It was summed up some years ago by a union rep when questioned by a local politician as to why he was insisting on the same FTL's for freight as for passengers. His priceless answer was, "So when a 747 crashes into your apartment building, it doesn't matter to you whether it is a passenger or freight aircraft?"
The silly bitch backed down, and we got similar rules for both.
