Considering that the main purpose of FTL requirements is to manage crew fatigue and insure flight safety, when an extra sector is added to the daily flights, it essentially creates more fatigue in the crew.
Therefor , it is necessary to reduce the maximum allowable FDP.
So in my opinion, in case of an unplanned extra sector, the maximum daily FDP should be calculated based on the number of new sectors( according to the table).
Essentially, this issue may be one of the example of extension of FDP due to unforeseen circumstances.
with regards.
-
Mohamed Bilel AMIRA posted in Air Operations
4 months ago PublicHi all,
Perhaps that someone can assist me on this.
Is there an EASA publication which explains Mandates and recommendations on Avionics Systems.
-
John FRANKLIN posted in Air Operations
4 months ago PublicAre you a pilot from Europe? Then we want to hear from you!
Take part in our survey on pilot incapacitation, sleep inertia, fatigue and breaks due to physiological needs https://survey.nlr.nl/eMCO-SiPO/index.php/451259?lang=en
Your contribution is anonymous.
The survey is part of a #research study on eMCO-SiPO - Extended Minimum Crew Operations – Single Pilot Operations – Safety Risk Assessment Framework (https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/research-projects/emco-sipo-extended-mini… ), contracted out to a consortium led by the Royal Netherlands Aerospace Centre (NLR) (tag NLR(11) NLR - Netherlands Aerospace Centre: Overview | LinkedIn). The study considers several aspects regarding the safety (risks) and regulatory impacts of eMCO-SiPO.
Your input is important to #EASA and will directly impact the outcomes of the study.
-
Majid Akhlaghi commented on Toine Delnoij's topic in Air Operations
-
Toine Delnoij created a topic in Air Operations
-
Kieran Byrne posted in Air Operations
5 months ago PublicHi all
Perhaps someone can assist on this.
Does AMC3 ORO.MLR.100 mandate the operations manuals to explicitly follow this table of contents?
My understanding of the AMC requirement is for the items to be included in the OM but the actual manual structure (aside from OM-A, -B, etc) can be as per the operator requirements.
Appreciate additional clarity.
Kieran
-
Robert Gottwald commented on Larry Bateson's topic in Air Operations
Robert Gottwald • 5 months agoHi Larry,
in practice I would argue that meeting the regulatory intent of Articles 139 and 140 of 2018/1139 should be prioritized over legally reflecting the (inadvertent?) delayed adoption of Article 140 (2) by the regulator beyond the deadline it set itself.
Maybe a way to address this and prevent confusion is to clearly state "in accordance with Reg (EC) 216/2008 until adaption of Reg (EC) 2018/1139" or something to that effect? Article 139 (4) also states "References to the repealed Regulations referred to in paragraphs 1 (Regulation (EC) No 216/2008), 2 (Regulation (EC) No 552/2004) and 3 (Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91) shall be construed as references to this Regulation and, where appropriate, read in accordance with the correlation table in Annex X.", so references to the old regulation I guess technically would remain valid indefinitely, until this article gets repealed by a future regulation. -
Michel MASSON posted in Air Operations
5 months ago PublicEASA monitoring situation regarding possible eruption of Icelandic volcano Fagradalsfjall, Nov.14 2023
https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/newsroom-and-events/news/easa-monitoring-…
EASA is monitoring the situation in Iceland regarding potential eruption of the Fagradalsfjall volcano. In the event of an eruption and development of an ash cloud, the Agency will work with other aviation actors to assess the impact for aviation and make recommendations accordingly.
The EASA webpage Volcanic Ash (https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/domains/safety-management/volcanic-ash) gives information on the 2010 eruption and actions subsequently taken. EASA will be updating this page as appropriate in the context of the current situation. Please see also SIB 2010-17R7 (https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2010-17R7), last updated in 2015, containing relevant general information on this topic.
Photo: Steam rises from a fissure in a road near the town of Grindavík, Iceland. Photograph: Brynjar Gunnarsson/AP:
-
Michel MASSON created a topic in Air Operations
-
Mathieu VANDENAVENNE commented on John Franklin's topic in Air Operations
Mathieu VANDENAVENNE • 5 months agoHello, additional information is provided below to further clarify:
We have to check the complexity of the helicopters and the type of maintenance realised: does the operator perform the maintenance for himself or for another one...
To be simple, for all type of operators (NCO, NCC, CAT, SPO...) which are doing the maintenance for their own helicopters :
- Non-complex helicopters: NCO.SPEC.MCF
- Complex helicopters: SPO.SPEC.MCF
For maintenance operators that are doing maintenance for other operators helicopter (commercial maintenance operations...): SPO.SPEC.MCF. -
Benjamin Hari posted in Air Operations
5 months ago PublicGood afternoon,
Recently I had a chat with a flight crew training specialist from Volocopter. He said that most competencies for pilots will stay the same. Only Flight Path Management - Automation (FPM-A) and Flight Path Management - Manual (FPM-M) will experience a change in their performance marker.
Generally there will be more focus on FPM-A due to the novel flight control system of VTOLs.
Neither EASA SC-VTOL nor Opinion No 03/2023 does not specify this topic but confirms a new training approach for future VTOL-pilots due to the aforementioned challenges in flight control systems. EASA EPAS 2023-2025 mentions Aircraft Upset as the most pressing issue of VTOLs.
1) Are there any EASA GM, Opinion Papers or Regulations on that topic?
2) Will there be an update of the IATA EBT Manual in the future?
Thank you in advance.
Kind regards,
Benjamin