JAR-OPS 1 Subpart Q
Guest
Posts: n/a
JAR-OPS 1 Subpart Q
Have there been any developments on the JAR-OPS 1 Flight Time limitations section at all or has it 'stalled'?
If progress has been made, are there any indications when it will be published and is there information about the figures?
Thanks for ANY info...
If progress has been made, are there any indications when it will be published and is there information about the figures?
Thanks for ANY info...
Guest
Posts: n/a
There's only one country I know where JAR-OPS Subpart Q has been implemanted. And the winner is... Luxembourg !
That was about a year ago, and I don't know if the DACL (Lux. CAA) has changed its mind since, but that would be very surprising.
[This message has been edited by Flying_Steph (edited 17 February 2001).]
That was about a year ago, and I don't know if the DACL (Lux. CAA) has changed its mind since, but that would be very surprising.
[This message has been edited by Flying_Steph (edited 17 February 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Don't know why the moderators are moving this topic to this certainly wrong place.
No country can implement something which does not even exist....the members have not even agreed on the final version....
Sounds more like a busy ATC sector...standby, call you back...by than we are hopefully retired...
No country can implement something which does not even exist....the members have not even agreed on the final version....
Sounds more like a busy ATC sector...standby, call you back...by than we are hopefully retired...
Guest
Posts: n/a
MFALK,
Subpart Q has not beem published but has been available in draft form for some years. The reason it has not been published is the failure of the many JAA countries to agree on a uniform set of flight duty rules.
However Luxembourg in their wisdom decided to adopt the DRAFT form as the applicable rules as previously it was up to the individual operators.
The result of this is that LUX operators are at a disadvantage compared to operators in other JAA states, especially in the ACMI area.
[This message has been edited by Bozzo (edited 18 February 2001).]
Subpart Q has not beem published but has been available in draft form for some years. The reason it has not been published is the failure of the many JAA countries to agree on a uniform set of flight duty rules.
However Luxembourg in their wisdom decided to adopt the DRAFT form as the applicable rules as previously it was up to the individual operators.
The result of this is that LUX operators are at a disadvantage compared to operators in other JAA states, especially in the ACMI area.
[This message has been edited by Bozzo (edited 18 February 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
What is called "a disadvantage" for operators in a recent post is perhaps "a decent crew rest" for pilots...
Actualy there is movement in the part Q area. JAA meetings have started again on the subject. Are we surprised to discover that human performance and limitations are not what is beeing discussed but rather how to allow operators in Greece, for example, to fly to the US east coast with a standard crew of two in order not to be "disadvantaged" compared with the operators in Ireland...
Of course the duty time is "slightly" longer but the EU idea is about profit, not human performance is it ?
[This message has been edited by Argentomagus (edited 22 February 2001).]
Actualy there is movement in the part Q area. JAA meetings have started again on the subject. Are we surprised to discover that human performance and limitations are not what is beeing discussed but rather how to allow operators in Greece, for example, to fly to the US east coast with a standard crew of two in order not to be "disadvantaged" compared with the operators in Ireland...
Of course the duty time is "slightly" longer but the EU idea is about profit, not human performance is it ?
[This message has been edited by Argentomagus (edited 22 February 2001).]
