Private Operating Certificate. When is one needed?

[Hornblower]

For example, king air is certified for " no of seats" non specific as to pax but does refer to " incl 2 crew" but can be flown single pilot. The Cheyenne is certified simply for "6-8" seats ... Is it 4 pax, 6 pax or 7 pax; good luck figuring out if you will need a poc for that.

[Colonel Sanders]

I was reading this article, and I thought they were
talking about CAR 604:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/201 ... d-dumbest/

"Anything operated by the government exists primarily for the benefit of those employed in it. Accountability is meaningless"

That sums up CAR 604 better than anything else
I've ever heard. It doesn't address the problem
that it was created to solve. It's just bureaucratic
makework and pointless overhead.

I have to ask: in the USA, these aircraft operate
with the "benefit" (snort) of CAR 604 overhead.

Is aluminum raining from the skies down there?

[Canadian Skyhawk]

I agree with all of the Colonel's comments.

Schooner, you are also 100% correct. Clearly things have changed since "back in the day" - mostly for the better. However, there will always be pilots who get in over their heads with no plan B or plan C with tragic consequences. Is this a reason to make the other 99% pay through the nose? Over time, adding more and more safety regulations bear diminishing returns, while still legally permitting many things that are actually dangerous - like a PPL with 150 hours buying a turboprop Piper Meridian (hey, it's only got six seats!) and fllying it single pilot in IMC at near minima (also 100% legal with a freshly-minted IFR endorsement). And yet, someone with a CPL or ATPL and say over 1,000 hours of commercial operations in year-round conditions would be considered unsafe flying a corporate or private C90 - without the oversight of a POC.

I would much rather see a certain category of aircraft (for instance "turboprops" or "pressurized" or "more than six seats" or any combination thereof) requiring a PIC having a minimum amount of experience, either measured in TT hours or in licenses (PPL, CPL, ATPL) or both. That would ensure that the higher the performance of an aircraft, the higher the experience - and hopefully wisdom - of the pilot.

Regardless, no amount of mandatory bureaucratic paperwork such as a POC can ensuure the knowledge, skill and care of a PIC or crew. Just look at some of the shoddy 703 operations in Canada - I've worked for several in La Belle Province. I'd much rather step into any doctor's privately-operated and privately-maintained King Air (often with a zero snag policy) rather than one of those 703's King Airs, despite the "oversight" of their OC. But that, of course, is an entirely different topic.

Happy Flying!

[Colonel Sanders]

I am a HUGE fan of pilot proficiency, knowledge, and
skill. I spend an awful lot of my time trying to improve
pilot's abilities so that they don't have accidents.

But isn't that that point? Isn't that what CAR 604
was trying to address? How does a massive, expensive
bureaucratic nightmare increase pilot skill?

[skymarc]

The type certificate will have final autority.

A TBM or Meridian is certified for 5 passengers and 1 crew.

As per POH.

Has anyone asked how a determination of what "certified for six passengers" means? Pretty well all the aircraft in this class are certified for number of occupants, which includes crew. Only large aircraft are certified for number of pax I believe.

[Hornblower]

I can't think of another turboprop that is limited to 6 occupants ... Maybe the meridian? Basically no twins that I know would meet that criteria. It will be the same as the old rules with an exemption for two single turboprops. That's a 180 degree about face from what was originally proposed to user groups.

[photofly]

Tucano (pressurized ones)
Cessna P210 turbine conversion
Probably some others

[Hornblower]

Any in Canada?? Still seems like a stupid plan. I guess if you can afford the plane you can afford a flight exec or exec air management fee. In my opinion tho, seems like a bit of collusion between CBAA and TC ... Merlin still driving I guess.

Strikes me as a little bit of regulated blackmail. You would think the business aviation advocate in this country would be fighting this hard, yet they seem to be in bed with TC on this ... Glad I'll never be rich enough to afford one .... Would really piss me off to be sort of forced to stay in the piston world or pay some huge management fee to exec air.

[Colonel Sanders]

I guess if you can afford the plane you can afford a flight exec or exec air management fee

Now we're getting to the heart of CAR 604 - class anger.
Runs deep in Canada, but not in the USA.

Hence the USA not having any equivalent to CAR 604.

I wish everyone would drop the ridiculous pretence that
CAR 604 has any contribution to aviation safety. It's
just another "tax the rich" ploy, and funds bureaucratic
welfare.

[skymarc]

I agree CS. Nothing to do with safety.

I have read the proposed new regulations.
If they apply to TBM's I will be filling in forms most of the day and will have no time to fly. They are worse than the requirements under the POC regimen.

[Prodriver]

It is a disaster, I don't know why they find it so hard to go with the original mandate to exempt all AC under 12500#. They don't have the will or the man power to do any diffrent. As stated earlier this has nothing to do with aviation safety. It is a sad waste of resources.