Fire Fighting Category
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fire Fighting Category
Is anybody around who could provide expert opinion on required fire fighting categories? I heard it through the grapewine...operators applying exemptions going into airports even when the required category for their aircrafts is one category lower. What is the legal back-up for that? What has to be considered?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: canberra
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check CASR's
It has been a while but I remember something in CASR that permits an AOC holder to operate into a destination with one category less ARFF. The ARFF category normally required is decreed by the aircraft size (pax, length etc) and those requirements are specified in CASR 139h. Cannot remember if the one category less exemption is in that CASR or the AOC licencing CASR. I will leave it to you to check.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Vancouver, BC.
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Highflyer2007
I think in the first instance your Ops Manual, which forms the basis of your AOC (and you might argue a legal platform of sorts) and should provide the minimum categories required for your aircraft types and appropriate guidance on using aerodromes with reduced RFF capability. It is, in my expereince, not unusual to have a provision in your ops manual for the continued operation to a destination aerodrome with 'one' RFF category lower-provided the aerodrome will accept your aircraft and the commander is informed. Reduced RFF capability may only be due to, for example- reduced manpower in the fire station, or a tender out of service- which may or may not significantly affect the overall RFF capability. CAP168 outlines the aerodrome responsibilites and equipment and manpower requirements as Eric T usefully points out.
I have on more than one occasioned negotiated with an aerodrome to up their category by the use of local fire services, at a cost of course- but it meant they/we could meet our minimum RFF requirements.
Also, it is worth consulting with your insurers on the topic if you are working to establish your company's policy on this matter.
I think in the first instance your Ops Manual, which forms the basis of your AOC (and you might argue a legal platform of sorts) and should provide the minimum categories required for your aircraft types and appropriate guidance on using aerodromes with reduced RFF capability. It is, in my expereince, not unusual to have a provision in your ops manual for the continued operation to a destination aerodrome with 'one' RFF category lower-provided the aerodrome will accept your aircraft and the commander is informed. Reduced RFF capability may only be due to, for example- reduced manpower in the fire station, or a tender out of service- which may or may not significantly affect the overall RFF capability. CAP168 outlines the aerodrome responsibilites and equipment and manpower requirements as Eric T usefully points out.
I have on more than one occasioned negotiated with an aerodrome to up their category by the use of local fire services, at a cost of course- but it meant they/we could meet our minimum RFF requirements.
Also, it is worth consulting with your insurers on the topic if you are working to establish your company's policy on this matter.
Fire Cat
I believe that there is no legal requirement to have any fire cover at all, even for public transport.
The ICAO annex specifically uses the word "recomended" and the MATS part 1 states that "to comply with the ICAO recomendations".
Although I have not read them recently, so I could crash and burn.
The authority to land at an aerodrome rests with the aerodrome operating authority.
Once you write the requirement into your ops manual it becomes law as your approval is to operate in accordance with your operations manual.
It is entirely possible to land legally under an AOC with no authorised fire cat, I have done the trials.
But my advice if asked, would be to comply with the ICAO recomendations.
Stay safe,
MM
The ICAO annex specifically uses the word "recomended" and the MATS part 1 states that "to comply with the ICAO recomendations".
Although I have not read them recently, so I could crash and burn.
The authority to land at an aerodrome rests with the aerodrome operating authority.
Once you write the requirement into your ops manual it becomes law as your approval is to operate in accordance with your operations manual.
It is entirely possible to land legally under an AOC with no authorised fire cat, I have done the trials.
But my advice if asked, would be to comply with the ICAO recomendations.
Stay safe,
MM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EU
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The authority to land at an aerodrome rests with the aerodrome operating authority.
COF&COE
Not quite correct, at least in the UK. if a pilot elects to land or depart without the correct Fire Cat., ATC will not prevent them but a report will be submitted on form SRG1602 ( the Mandatory Occurence report form ), There is some appropriate phraseology in CAA doc CAP493 (MATS Pt.1)
Not quite correct, at least in the UK. if a pilot elects to land or depart without the correct Fire Cat., ATC will not prevent them but a report will be submitted on form SRG1602 ( the Mandatory Occurence report form ), There is some appropriate phraseology in CAA doc CAP493 (MATS Pt.1)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EU
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eric T Cartman
Thank you for clarifying that.
Would I be correct in saying that if that if the fire cover was not in place then ATC would have to advise you accordingly prior to giving you a landing clearance?
Haven't got time just now to look up CAP493.
Tks
Thank you for clarifying that.
Would I be correct in saying that if that if the fire cover was not in place then ATC would have to advise you accordingly prior to giving you a landing clearance?
Haven't got time just now to look up CAP493.
Tks
Guest
Posts: n/a
What is so difficult about all this????
To answer the original question, in part anyway, the basis for the 'one below normal category' is probably Annex 14 paragraph 9.2.3.
In response to some of the other comments......
The following are UK-orientated but ICAO SARPs contain much the same.
A licensed/certified aerodrome is responsible for providing a certain level of RFFS appropriate to the aircraft that use the place. They are also responsible for NOTAMing/notifying any temporary changes to the availability of the published category.
ATC is responsible for passing aerodrome information to aircraft using the place. A change in RFFS category would count as aerodrome information.
A pilot is responsible for ensuring that he/she complies with the relevant legislation and rules that apply in any set of circumstances. For public transport operations the Ops Manual will be the primary rule set. ANO Article 42 (c) (ii) probably sets the objective that results in entries in the Ops Manual regarding RFFS availability. Non public transport operations are covered by other arrangements. Insurance cover requirements may well set the minimum standard required.
There are lots of misconceptions and misunderstandings about RFFS cover - some of which seem to have emerged here. One I particularly like is that a reduction in fire cover that will last less than 2 hours doesn't have to be mentioned to anyone by the aerodrome. Another is that a reduction of one category doesn't need to be mentioned if the normal level is required by less than 700 movements over a three month period.
P.S. Where are all the pilots that usually come out of the woodwork to say that they're ultimately responsible for anything and everything?
To answer the original question, in part anyway, the basis for the 'one below normal category' is probably Annex 14 paragraph 9.2.3.
In response to some of the other comments......
The following are UK-orientated but ICAO SARPs contain much the same.
A licensed/certified aerodrome is responsible for providing a certain level of RFFS appropriate to the aircraft that use the place. They are also responsible for NOTAMing/notifying any temporary changes to the availability of the published category.
ATC is responsible for passing aerodrome information to aircraft using the place. A change in RFFS category would count as aerodrome information.
A pilot is responsible for ensuring that he/she complies with the relevant legislation and rules that apply in any set of circumstances. For public transport operations the Ops Manual will be the primary rule set. ANO Article 42 (c) (ii) probably sets the objective that results in entries in the Ops Manual regarding RFFS availability. Non public transport operations are covered by other arrangements. Insurance cover requirements may well set the minimum standard required.
There are lots of misconceptions and misunderstandings about RFFS cover - some of which seem to have emerged here. One I particularly like is that a reduction in fire cover that will last less than 2 hours doesn't have to be mentioned to anyone by the aerodrome. Another is that a reduction of one category doesn't need to be mentioned if the normal level is required by less than 700 movements over a three month period.
P.S. Where are all the pilots that usually come out of the woodwork to say that they're ultimately responsible for anything and everything?
The ANO Art 126 defines which aircraft require to use a licensed aerodrome in the UK. Art 128 and CAP168 detail how the licensing requirements are met in practice.
Airports provide a published fire category; aircraft are allocated a fire category. Aircraft fire category must not exceed available fire category.
The ability to accept aircraft of a higher category [providing there were no more than 700 in the busiest three months] was removed in 2005. Additionally, the facility to 'deplete' the fire category temporarily has now also been removed. According to 'the book' in the UK, the rule is as in paragraph 2 above.
Airport Licence Holders are required to inform operators and pilots whenever any of the 'notified' facilities/services are not avaialble.
Whether or not a public transport can actually land is probably a grey area with the answer depending on the views of EASA/CAA/JAA/Lawyers/Flight Ops Manual!
Helen
Airports provide a published fire category; aircraft are allocated a fire category. Aircraft fire category must not exceed available fire category.
The ability to accept aircraft of a higher category [providing there were no more than 700 in the busiest three months] was removed in 2005. Additionally, the facility to 'deplete' the fire category temporarily has now also been removed. According to 'the book' in the UK, the rule is as in paragraph 2 above.
Airport Licence Holders are required to inform operators and pilots whenever any of the 'notified' facilities/services are not avaialble.
Whether or not a public transport can actually land is probably a grey area with the answer depending on the views of EASA/CAA/JAA/Lawyers/Flight Ops Manual!
Helen
