TAWS Exemption

[HiFlyChick]

Have any of you small part 703 operators applied for an exemption from the TAWS rules? My POI told me that it costs $500 just to ask the question and most people I've talked to think that Ottawa is not apt to grant the exemption. I'd accept the fee if it actually got me anything but....

I would be asking for a very tightly controlled exemption, only 6 or 7 people instead of the current 5, and only between my home (international) airport and 1 remote location. If someone else has already managed to get an exemption, that means that at least the precedent has been set

[goingnowherefast]

Seems like you are really restricting the use of the aircraft. Probably would be better to buy a Garmin 430 with terrain and make the aircraft useful more. If you currently have a non-terrain 430/530, call up Garmin directly, I'm sure they would be willing to do a swap.

$500 to ask for an exemption with ridiculous restrictions that still might get denied.
$2000-$7500 for a plane that you can fly all across Canada. Variable depending on current avionics.

Plus, you are asking to fly without a safety feature that has saved many lives. Seems a bit backwards.

[valleyboy]

It is my understanding all aircraft with 6 passengers or less do not need TAWS - We operated a PA-31 with no TAWS and were restricted to 6 passengers and I saw no exemption forms. It's been my experience that most small operators in the less civilized parts of Canada TAWS is a useless piece of equipment because most of the time the crews inhibit the system because of false and annoying warnings. Great concept and a wonderful safety feature but totally useless because of design and the ability to disable it when off the beaten path. Ironically that is where it should be doing its thing for you. I have seen one loose its mind so badly when going into an airport not in the data base we had to pull circuit breaks to stop all the noise and flashing of screens. -- Damn -- flight engineers rock

[goingnowherefast]

TAWS offers little help in VMC and is mostly an annoyance. That's why they're typically designed to be easily disabled.

If crews are inhibiting TAWS in IMC, then there's a real problem. Either the system is broken, or the pilots need re-training.

[bobcaygeon]

It is my understanding all aircraft with 6 passengers or less do not need TAWS - We operated a PA-31 with no TAWS and were restricted to 6 passengers and I saw no exemption forms. It's been my experience that most small operators in the less civilized parts of Canada TAWS is a useless piece of equipment because most of the time the crews inhibit the system because of false and annoying warnings. Great concept and a wonderful safety feature but totally useless because of design and the ability to disable it when off the beaten path. Ironically that is where it should be doing its thing for you. I have seen one loose its mind so badly when going into an airport not in the data base we had to pull circuit breaks to stop all the noise and flashing of screens. -- Damn -- flight engineers rock

CAR 605.42 states no operator shall operate a turbine powered aeroplane that has a seating configuration , excluding pilot seats, of six or more...

[valleyboy]

f crews are inhibiting TAWS in IMC, then there's a real problem. Either the system is broken, or the pilots need re-training.

- Like most things in aviation, while there is a "black and white" group shades of grey are usually more correct. It's the way of the world now. Everyone wants a crutch, like lane sensors in cars, believing long extended traffic advisories and not looking out the window. Lack situational awareness, there is no excuse for that. That is where training should be concentrated on. Not flipping on a f'kup switch. I guess it's all part of dumbing down aviation.

Safety is paramount but the growing dependence on technology which is morphing from tools to commanding the aircraft is taking pilot skills out of aviation. The one thing keeping us in the flight deck is being eroded away and the irony it's not from the technology. It's from diminishing hands and feet skills.

[HiFlyChick]

Seems like you are really restricting the use of the aircraft. Probably would be better to buy a Garmin 430 with terrain and make the aircraft useful more. If you currently have a non-terrain 430/530, call up Garmin directly, I'm sure they would be willing to do a swap.

$500 to ask for an exemption with ridiculous restrictions that still might get denied.
$2000-$7500 for a plane that you can fly all across Canada. Variable depending on current avionics.

Plus, you are asking to fly without a safety feature that has saved many lives. Seems a bit backwards.

The Garmin 430 (which I have but don't bother to subscribe to terrain db) does not meet the requirements of TAWS (needs to tie in with a voice I think is the problem). Local shop has quoted approx $20,000 for a TAWS.

The safety feature, while good in theory, doesn't work so well when you are landing off-airport. The reason I'm asking for this tight exemption is it is the only route I fly, and if I spent the $20,000, I would then have to disable the TAWS at my destination, because I've flown an aircraft with a TAWS to a non-registered aerodrome before, and it's really hard to communicate or concentrate when the machine is yelling at you non-stop.

Unfortunately, a 703 operator is not only governed by Part 6 but by CAR 703.71, which says in part:
"703.71 (1) Subject to subsection (2), no air operator shall operate an aeroplane that has a seating configuration, excluding pilot seats, of six or more, unless the aeroplane is equipped with an operative TAWS ...."
There is an exemption for day VFR, but out east, VFR over a large area can't be counted on from May through July....

Mostly just wondering if anyone has applied for an exemption, or, to broaden the picture, has anyone ever successfully applied for any exemption from a CAR?

[bobcaygeon]

I've gotten an exemption before but the last time I spoke with them they said they are out of the "exemption" business. I wasn't really expecting to get my exemption so I didn't push any harder.

[Meatservo]

f crews are inhibiting TAWS in IMC, then there's a real problem. Either the system is broken, or the pilots need re-training.

- Like most things in aviation, while there is a "black and white" group shades of grey are usually more correct. It's the way of the world now. Everyone wants a crutch, like lane sensors in cars, believing long extended traffic advisories and not looking out the window. Lack situational awareness, there is no excuse for that. That is where training should be concentrated on. Not flipping on a f'kup switch. I guess it's all part of dumbing down aviation.

Safety is paramount but the growing dependence on technology which is morphing from tools to commanding the aircraft is taking pilot skills out of aviation. The one thing keeping us in the flight deck is being eroded away and the irony it's not from the technology. It's from diminishing hands and feet skills.

Fuckin testify, brother. The newest crop of pilots are paving the way by being more of liability to themselves than no pilots at all.

[valleyboy]

Fuckin testify, brother. The newest crop of pilots are paving the way by being more of liability to themselves than no pilots at all.

Well it is a high level of frustration because I know they can do better and the do when you ride them but it's the lack of caring with the idea that they are just putting in time and moving on to automation where very little stick and rudder skills are needed most of the time. This is an old discussion but it is there and while there are exceptions for a good percentage they fail to see the importance. The sense of entitlement is mind blowing.

[StandingBy]

So much anger this morning:) While I do agree with the over-reliance on technology and automation, I do wonder how many times TAWS has prevented CFIT accidents after take-off into 'black hole' environments, that we've never heard about. This has killed many a pilot since I've been around.

[bobcaygeon]

Like it or not it does save lives and probably would have helped in a couple of recent accidents where caravans ran into the ground. At the very least it's annoying enough to maybe convince you not to .. run at 300ft in shit weather.

The Garmin 530 meets the requirements and it is old and is generally the cheaper option for TAWS B. If nothing else it makes operators update their equipment to moving maps, etc.

Sorry but seeing AC crash an airbus that doesn't have a GPS input is ridiculous.