1/2 mile taxi vis... nobody knows what is going on!

[Duster]

I fail to understand why this has become so complex...would it not be safer and so much easier to make standard approach, taxi, and airport ground manuevering limits 1/2 mile/2600 RVR with any lower limits or exceptions via Ops Spec only?? Any airline or company with the appropriate training and equipment could use lower limits of 1/4 mile/1200 RVR for approach ban and taxi limits Cat 1.

I do know that it is not safe having two pilots puzzling over several governing documents below 20.000' to determine not whether it is safe to land - but whether it is legal to land. One of the guys in ground school last week had an excellent suggestion - send the weather and runway conditions via ACARS directly to our legal department, who can vet it then send on to dispatch who can vet it, than tell what used to be pilots in command to land or not. And then do it all over again when there is a late runway change.


Why are the safe operators being penalized for the sins of the unsafe ... oh, wait, that's how we operate in Canada. Knee jerk reaction and CYA. Why are the airports allowed to operate as little fiefdoms with no regulatory or financial oversight? Why does TC not enforce their own regulations until someone screws up so badly it requires the whole business being punished? Why didn't I retire 5 years ago before all this bullshit started??

[Pratt]

[quote="Duster"]

I do know that it is not safe having two pilots puzzling over several governing documents below 20.000' to determine not whether it is safe to land - but whether it is legal to land. One of the guys in ground school last week had an excellent suggestion - send the weather and runway conditions via ACARS directly to our legal department, who can vet it then send on to dispatch who can vet it, than tell what used to be pilots in command to land or not. And then do it all over again when there is a late runway change.


quote]

Sounds like a great plan, just hope that none of those people make a mistake in how they interpret the rules, because in the end it is still the PIC that will be written up.

Thanks but I think I'll continue to do my own interpreting of whether to land or not.

[Go Guns]

The idea here is good. I like the fact that some (many) of the airports in Canada have been forced by this to spend some of their AIF income on infrastructure around their airports, rather then building a bigger shopping mall. That being said, the implementation sucks. With each passing year it seems flying in Canada is getting harder. I can't imagine that it's getting any safer.