Tube Driver :
Precisely, that is how the system works.
Then why have chief pilots?
However if you examine it closely you will find that the Chief Pilot does have the responsibility to ensure safety....on paper...that is.
Who thought up the idea that an ops manager who may not have a clue about what is safe and what is not has the power to prevent a Chief Pilot from enforcing the regulations?
The whole system is a joke.
Cat
Standard Weights
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
-
The Man from Del Monte
- Rank 1
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 9:19 am
I think we are all missing a big point here;
In any good Operation, the Ops Mgr and CP will always work together to ensure crew/passenger/aircraft safety. If anything goes bad, they are ultimately accountable if things have been improperly done.
If TC has mandated these new weights, all companies will have no choice but to implement them and we can all expect frequent ramp checks after the implementation date to ensure its being done.
My fear is a business case, my aircraft will now be able to handle less passengers, generating less revenue in a world where oil is $53/barrel, the minute any company is no longer making money......
well you all know the story, I'm all for making things safer its just that at the same time I think I might as well take a row or two of seats out, we can't handle the weight any more so we may as well give the tubbies some improved seat pitch, charge them an extra 20% and offset the revenue losses!!!
In any good Operation, the Ops Mgr and CP will always work together to ensure crew/passenger/aircraft safety. If anything goes bad, they are ultimately accountable if things have been improperly done.
If TC has mandated these new weights, all companies will have no choice but to implement them and we can all expect frequent ramp checks after the implementation date to ensure its being done.
My fear is a business case, my aircraft will now be able to handle less passengers, generating less revenue in a world where oil is $53/barrel, the minute any company is no longer making money......
well you all know the story, I'm all for making things safer its just that at the same time I think I might as well take a row or two of seats out, we can't handle the weight any more so we may as well give the tubbies some improved seat pitch, charge them an extra 20% and offset the revenue losses!!!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Genearlly speaking it is not the good operations that are the problem.
It is the outlaw operations that really push the limits.
It is the outlaw operations that really push the limits.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Just an observation:
Notice how the female weight increase was twice the male increase and this is for the population as a whole not just the north. Was the old one actually accurate when it came out? If so there is a major demographic change going on. I understand the FAA is doing something similar, and the last standard weight was from the mid nineties. How we've changed since then.
Notice how the female weight increase was twice the male increase and this is for the population as a whole not just the north. Was the old one actually accurate when it came out? If so there is a major demographic change going on. I understand the FAA is doing something similar, and the last standard weight was from the mid nineties. How we've changed since then.
-
just curious
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 3592
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:29 am
- Location: The Frozen North
- Contact:
cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:isabella...where I fly most of the women are 150 to 250..and thats not a real exageration...thats just the way it is. Some I estimsate are 300..I'm sure in Victoria that this would not be the case. I would love to roll one of our planes on a scale after its paper weight was showing MTOW just to see the difference...and then reduce it so it was actually at mtow.
In a rare and unprecedented AvCanada moment, I find myself in complete agreement with Capt SNJ. Somebody please hand me my heart meds.
-
NiGhTwItCh
- Rank 1
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 12:03 pm
Exactly. Gain, then they have to buy all the fancy things they have to help you lose, which only work short term, then they gain, and then there are new bettter things to help them lose, and it continues. It gets more like Brave New World everyday.planett wrote: Maybe the obsession is focussed on clothing, shoes, equipment, supplements and water bottles, and not on actually doing any exercise.
Do not forget to add the extra couple of pounds for the helmets the pilots are going to have to wear when they ask some lardarse passenger what she weighs. Airlines are going to have to take seats out. People are going to have to pay more to travel. Bottom line. Right!! I know my glasses are rose coloured but what the hell!!
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
-
. ._
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7374
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:50 pm
- Location: Cowering in my little room because the Water Cooler is locked.
- Contact:
Disclaimer: ISTP holds no disrespect nor contempt for the governing body of aviation in Canada. ISTP reserves the right to poke fun at, satirize whomever, and/or joke at will under the guarantees and protections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for Canada (I, 2(b)) as much as he wants, as long as it's cool in a free and democratic society.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
ISTP :
For what it is worth I see nothing wrong with calling my flying business "Outlaw Aviation ".
The name was chosen by TC when they decided to deny me my legal right to be allowed to operate a FTU under the existing requirements.
And if you think that we live in a free and democratic society...dream on my friend.
You live and work under the thumb of a regulatory body that makes decisions based on what they want, protected by the good old boys club, with their head office in Ottawa in Tower C.
If you would like to communicate with the top "good old boy" here is his e-mail address.
preussm@tc.gc.ca
Tell him that . from "Outlaw Aviation" referred you to him.
For what it is worth I see nothing wrong with calling my flying business "Outlaw Aviation ".
The name was chosen by TC when they decided to deny me my legal right to be allowed to operate a FTU under the existing requirements.
And if you think that we live in a free and democratic society...dream on my friend.
You live and work under the thumb of a regulatory body that makes decisions based on what they want, protected by the good old boys club, with their head office in Ottawa in Tower C.
If you would like to communicate with the top "good old boy" here is his e-mail address.
preussm@tc.gc.ca
Tell him that . from "Outlaw Aviation" referred you to him.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Everybody seems to be in agreement that people are getting heavier, and therefore the W&B should reflect this.
But how many people can honestly say that their aircraft operating weight is correct? Do you have the actual weight of ALL your survival gear? Engine tents/wing covers? Box of canadian tire herc straps? The three or four binders that TC makes you carry (AFM, route manual, etc)? When you change configs, the proper seat weight? Or the sheets of plywood put down to protect the floor?
I'm just curious as to how far you go to ensure that you are "not one pound over".
But how many people can honestly say that their aircraft operating weight is correct? Do you have the actual weight of ALL your survival gear? Engine tents/wing covers? Box of canadian tire herc straps? The three or four binders that TC makes you carry (AFM, route manual, etc)? When you change configs, the proper seat weight? Or the sheets of plywood put down to protect the floor?
I'm just curious as to how far you go to ensure that you are "not one pound over".
Donald, I've done all that stuff before, mind you some equipment is best left alone and guessed at, but at least it's better than turning a blind eye to it, when you get used to doing that, the extra weight can really add up. Sometimes after investigation, I found I was suspicious of the W&B data (you know, amendment after amendment etc.) especially the C of G based on flying characteristics.
The fact is, if you think of all the possible sources of error, you can be way off the mark even when you're diligent. Where I work now, I don't second guess anything, it's a much better environment than where I was a few years back.
The fact is, if you think of all the possible sources of error, you can be way off the mark even when you're diligent. Where I work now, I don't second guess anything, it's a much better environment than where I was a few years back.
