What's going to happen W/ 604

[x-wind]

Anybody have any credible info on what'll become of the interm order? Specifically I'm concerned about the requirements for the op. certificate changing again. I fly a small King Air so no op. certificate needed. Will that change?

[ahramin]

I would really be surprised if TC took turboprops out of 604 only to put them back in. I wouldn't worry about it.

[bamboo]

...But if you want to operate under any ops spec's (eg. lower than standard takeoff limits, RVR 1200, RVSM, etc.) you will need a POC no matter the type.

[x-wind]

I'd heard unreliable rumours that turboprops would soon require a O.C again. Hoping the flip flop doesn't happen.

I do not need the Op Spec to do GPS approaches. However, a commercial operator would. So although you've made a important point (which is mostly right) it's not entirely accurate.

Arguing semantics but if you read closely it is plausible you could successfully defend that you could depart without an ops spec. on a runway that is certified for RVR1200 in the CFS but indicates standard 1/2SM on the aerodrome chart in the CAP. I wouldn't condone it & don't do it but the wording isn't solid enough to withstand a legal argument I'd say- read the CAP GEN closely, it is the use of "or" & "and" that leaves it open to exploitation. To foreshadow your reply that the CARs state that the CAP is the final desiring factor I would suggest the CAP GEN is indeed a CAP & it's instructions, therfore, let you get away with using the CFS runway certification in liue of the CAP when the weather is below the standard 1/2.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/s ... 0-3354.htm

[ScudRunner]

The problem is much like police officers are not trained in law, TC inspectors are not trained in the "Air" law. In the meantime before your day in court they can make your life hell and cost you allot of money. Tribunals are completely a different matter from a day in court with a judge who is actually trained in the law.