I thought it was illegal for anybody to be in a flight deck during flight unless they had the pass?
It looks like they are at flight level by looking at the display and the immense UV Light
There's a pic that comes up in the slide show i think it's the 6th one with the pilots and everything. I am just wondering if there's exceptions ? Thought there was this part where no body is above the law
Doesn't look like it is in-flight to me, just at the gate on a sunny day.
But don't show this to rebel. He thinks no one should ever be in the flight deck, that it is a security breech and only the eeevil WJ does that and the high and mighty AC would never allow!
So, CARS don't apply to charters. I did not know that.
Charter flights are not operated under CAR 705 like regular passenger flights. I believe the applicable regulation here is 704.21 which does not prohibit flight deck visits.
So, CARS don't apply to charters. I did not know that.
Charter flights are not operated under CAR 705 like regular passenger flights. I believe the applicable regulation here is 704.21 which does not prohibit flight deck visits.
I may be wrong, but I have never seen a CARS reference to this or anything that states that Subpart 705 charter flights can be operated under 704.
You won't find a reference that states CAR 705 charter flights can be operated under 704 because there isn't one. But as I'm sure you're aware a corporate jet can be operated under 604 or 704 depending on the nature of the flight. Same thing with airline charters.
All an airline has to do is get a 704 operating certificate, and if they hire the airplane out to a single client it can be operated under 704 instead of 705. Airlines do it all the time with political charters, sports, bands etc.
Not exactly the same thing with airline charters ... the application section of the subpart still applies. For 704, your aircraft would have to be one of the following:
(a) a multi-engined aeroplane that has a MCTOW of 8 618 kg (19,000 pounds) or less and a seating configuration, excluding pilot seats, of 10 to 19 inclusive;
(b) a turbo-jet-powered aeroplane that has a maximum zero fuel weight of 22 680 kg (50,000 pounds) or less and for which a Canadian type certificate has been issued authorizing the transport of not more than 19 passengers;
(b.1) a multi-engined helicopter with a seating configuration, excluding pilot seats, of 10 to 19 inclusive, unless it is certified for operation with one pilot and operated under VFR; and
(c) any aircraft that is authorized by the Minister to be operated under this Subpart.
Why wouldn't (c) apply? In my mind it allows Transport Canada to permit 704 operations that don't fit (a) or (b). So if an airline like Air Canada says for instance "we have a dispatch and flight operations set up for these kinds of aircraft and can provide 705 support, but we want to operate it under 704", why wouldn't Transport Canada approve it under (c)?
Para (c) basically gives Transport the means to authorize 704 on a case by case basis.
I thought it was illegal for anybody to be in a flight deck during flight unless they had the pass?
It looks like they are at flight level by looking at the display and the immense UV Light
There's a pic that comes up in the slide show i think it's the 6th one with the pilots and everything. I am just wondering if there's exceptions ? Thought there was this part where no body is above the law
Just wondering?
OK, so I've watched this about 10 times, and don't see a flight deck shot. Has the offending pic been removed???? Conspiracy mounts......
stopsquawk wrote: OK, so I've watched this about 10 times, and don't see a flight deck shot. Has the offending pic been removed???? Conspiracy mounts......
Maybe watch it a few more times. The picture just might show up...
Rockie wrote:Why wouldn't (c) apply? In my mind it allows Transport Canada to permit 704 operations that don't fit (a) or (b). So if an airline like Air Canada says for instance "we have a dispatch and flight operations set up for these kinds of aircraft and can provide 705 support, but we want to operate it under 704", why wouldn't Transport Canada approve it under (c)?
Para (c) basically gives Transport the means to authorize 704 on a case by case basis.
Yeah, I dont know what Air Canada is allowed. The Canucks use AC for their flying. Maybe someone from AC can say whether or not they can operate under 704 for charters. I know that my airline has no such provision.
But, wouldn't allowing access to the flightdeck go against common sense as to why this regulation was created? It was created so no Mohammed Atta wannabe's could get into the flightdeck.
Do you know the background of every passenger on a charter?? Why should it be any different than a sked flight?
Does your paranoia run so deep that you think there might be al qaeda members in a hockey team just to take over your airplane?
---------- ADS -----------
The most difficult thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
Typical responses from the know-it-alls. Rather than discuss the regulations in a civilized manner, the 2 of you have chosen to go way off the deep end.
Kinda sad really that that's the level of professionalism in the industry these days.
Cheers
