cyflyer,

I quite agree, it would be an honour and I would be very happy to have him (as said above, this one not the last) visit the flight deck or use the jump seat IF it had been pre-authorised by the relevant manager. If it had not the answer, unfortunately and ridiculously, would have to be no.

Again, ridiculous, but yes they are.

The law?
 

Where does the UK law say it is illegal to carry passengers on a jump seat in the cockpit of a UK registered aircraft? All that we have seen on this thread is a letter from the Civil Service directing that it shall not be done.
However it is possible that as a result of the letter the CAA directed Public Transport Operators with AOCs to include an appropriate instruction in the company's Operations Manual.
Breach of the requirements of the OM is not, in itself, a breach of the law. but the operator may discipline, ie sack, the pilot.

There is one more rule even more insane than no access to the cockpit. It is the padding down of cockpit crew, to relieve them of weapons that could be used should they wish to take over control of the aircraft.

Well I damned well hope the cockpit crew will have control of the aircraft. When they get to the flight deck, they have an axe, first aid kit, O2 and any number of potential weapons they are able to get their hands on.

Sanity will never prevail and the terrorists must be p:mad:g in their pants with laughter over the whole shambles.

Well, you can argue about the value of rules, laws and legal binding direction until the cows come home. It doesn't change the point in fact. In the USA and the UK and various other countries, the rules have been made clear as they apply to aircraft commanders through the companies operating certificate. Specifically through the operations manual, which makes it clear who may and who may not enter the flight deck "in flight" and at other specific times.

There is no exemption for footballers, Bank executives, or ministers of the crown, unless they also happen to be a qualified and authorized member of the crew.

The captain and everyone under his/her command is charged with ensuring that the rules and the regulations that they operate within, are complied with to the best of their ability. There are inevitably times when compliance is not desirable or possible for reasons of overriding necessity, however entertaining the "rich and famous," or indeed anybody else, isn't one of them.

Whatever my opinion of some of these rules, I am paid and expected to ensure full compliance. If I need to deviate from that compliance, then the company and the regulator have a right to an explanation for that action. Common sense would dictate that situations do arise to reasonably justify such deviance. However you would need to come up with something good to defend this type of deviance outside of an emergency.

There are lots of rules we all love and hate. I cannot understand why I am restricted to 70 MPH on a deserted motorway at 3am in the morning. If I chose to deviate from that regulation because I feel it is absurd, that is my choice. I doubt my opinion would provide much defence to a subsequent prosecution. However if I am being paid by an employer to drive his car, I not only run the risk of prosecution, but also of breaching the likely terms and conditions of my employment.

All talk of "the captain is king" and "nazi war trials" and "maverick personality types" is all very interesting, but the rules are not optional. The truth is, most people know that.

Really ? So if Richard Brason was on that flight and you were captain, you would refuse him entry ? Yeah, I'd like to see that !

It seems security standards in Cyprus are pretty low. :rolleyes:

Errr, yes that has happened....

And what makes you so sure to come out with absolute crap like that ?
Hardly a week goes by without an Australian airliner scaring people out of their minds, so when comparing standards, look closer to home.

The Law?
 

See my Post 45
I will say it again .
Breach of the requirements in an Operations Manual is not breach of UK Law.

Did you read this?

Also happened at my company shortly after the Lufthansa take over, new CEO asked to visit the flight deck and was told it was not possible. After the flight he apparently complimented the Captain on playing it by the book.

Bealzebub Post 54
Yes I have read what you have said.
To break the law you have to be in breach of a specific Section of an Act of Parliament , such as The Civil Aviation Act; or you have to be in breach of an Order made under the Act ,such as an Article of the Air Navigation Order. Rules and Regulations may also be breached such as The Rules of the Air , The Dangerous Goods Regulations or The Air Navigation( General ) Regulations. There are several other sets of applicable Regulations.
One person on this thread mentioned driving at over 70 MPH on a motorway , that is a breach of The Road Traffic Act.
So Bealzebub how did the 2002 Direction legally instruct the UK aviation industry regarding access to the Flight Deck. Under which section of what Act was the Direction made.
It is not a breach of the Law to disregard a letter from a Civil Servant.
I know of no direct legislation saying that non operating persons may not be allowed on to the Flight Deck of a public Transport Aircraft.
It is possible, even likely, that the Department / UKCAA have required AOC holders to insert a requirement in to their Operations Manuals that no passengers are to be allowed on to the Flight Deck during flight. Failure to observe a requirement in an OM is not always a breach of the law but it can lead to a 'Proposal To Suspend the AOC'. It can also lead to the sacking of the operating crew.
A Government Direction will quote the Legislation under which it is made. You can prove me wrong by quoting the Legislation.

I am afraid you will have to do your own homework on this one, unless somebody else can offer the statute under which HMG can enact legal instructions to an airline or any other body. I have provided the information letter that I have (stored), which should provide the clues to anybody in the know.

The letter states that HMG directed (legally instructed) UK airlines in November 2003. It wasn't the civil servant who wrote the letter, or me. All UK airlines are aware of the directive, and as far as I know have incorporated the legal instruction into their respective operations manuals. As such all relevent crew members should also be aware of the directive.

If you want to test the defence that such an instruction is non-existent, unlawful, or ineffective in it's construction, let us know how you get on. I would be interested in knowing the result.

I wonder if this was taken to the European Court (after all the last time I checked UK was a member) whether the UK government have the right to issue such an edict which might infringe the Human Rights of aircraft commanders in going about their duties?

It strikes me that a number of people don't know the difference between rules and laws!

Anyone remember that polish/russian flight that crashed. VIP in cockpit then and it has raised many questions and accusations. A while back there was that russian flight where the pilots kid turned off the A/P when no one was driving. Clearly in some situations it increases risk. Easier to make a simple rule that denies access to all than write down all the exceptions.

Gee, I wonder how I managed to have visitors to the flight deck for the first 25 years of my career without any mishaps - in fact, on many occasions they helped keep me awake on night flights - maybe a benefit rather than a hazard?

in the polish incident, flight deck acccess was irrelevant. the pm insisted that the aircraft land. he could do that from his seat. and the captain could refuse the pm's order to land even if the pm was in the flight deck.

i think we have learned a lot about how good training is and how good it is not. many accidents have occured due to poorly trained crews but that does not mean that in certain circumstances visitors cannot be permitted to the flight deck. blind adherance to rules has not proved to be an effective preventer of accidents.

i am all for situational awareness and common sense in the wider sense of the meanings and for smart skips to decide. those folks who adhere t the rules for the sake of the rules will be undone more often than those who know when the rules do not apply in a certain situation.

i would rather know that the person in the front left hand seat is situationally aware and blessed with common sense than with an intimate knowledge of the rules minutae.

i still think flying is more an art than a science althogh of course a high degree of scientific awareness is essential!

I guess the story shows how careful you gotta be. Always a risk of small minded troublemakers around.

You risk getting fired for not complying with the company's Ops Manual,
but is it an offense?
If it is, what's the offense? :confused:


pressuremanAh, the old slippery slope. :rolleyes:
That's a favorite of the guy in command of the parking lot. 'If I let you park there ...............' :8

It's not just an Ops Manual requirement: