New Zealand seems to swing backwards and forwards on this. They'll be good to deal with for a few years, but then for some reason start employing ex-military types and it all turns to crap. Currently we have things disappearing into the black hole that is their legal department...
Terrible FAA Rule
- Thread starter MIflyer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
Last I dealt with Canada Transport was in the late 60s when they were very laid back. Probably too laid back really in some ways but realistic in many ways that other countries were not.
One good thing about that was returning from supplying a bush fire camp VFR we knew the destination was clear of smoke and cloud so were up at 7000ft well above the heavy smoke when one of the Canada Transport pilots called and asked what the visibility was where we were. I said absolute shit, floats just above the water and wings just below the crud because VFR on top was strictly forbidden at that time. His answer was I have you in sight and will pass you in a few minutes. I walked over to the main airport to meet him to see how deep in the shit we were and he said he would rather we were up high so he would not have to do a search for us. That was the good side of laid back. The not so good side was that bush pilots in the north had virtually no flight time limitations. The sun was up 24x7 and there were bush fires around and you flew when you felt safe. Surprisingly there were very few accidents and most of those were because the pilot was an idiot, not tired. For example using 40" for takeoff on the Otter which is limited to 36", or trying to take off from a non approved area because taxiing to the approved area took time and he was paid by the mile, not by the hour, or he thought the manual was wrong when it gave the Otter a maximum crosswind of 5kts on floats. The first two only did damage in hard to access locations. The third wrote the aircraft off and was lucky he did it with lots of witnesses who got boats and got to the wreck site within minutes, saving his life.
One good thing about that was returning from supplying a bush fire camp VFR we knew the destination was clear of smoke and cloud so were up at 7000ft well above the heavy smoke when one of the Canada Transport pilots called and asked what the visibility was where we were. I said absolute shit, floats just above the water and wings just below the crud because VFR on top was strictly forbidden at that time. His answer was I have you in sight and will pass you in a few minutes. I walked over to the main airport to meet him to see how deep in the shit we were and he said he would rather we were up high so he would not have to do a search for us. That was the good side of laid back. The not so good side was that bush pilots in the north had virtually no flight time limitations. The sun was up 24x7 and there were bush fires around and you flew when you felt safe. Surprisingly there were very few accidents and most of those were because the pilot was an idiot, not tired. For example using 40" for takeoff on the Otter which is limited to 36", or trying to take off from a non approved area because taxiing to the approved area took time and he was paid by the mile, not by the hour, or he thought the manual was wrong when it gave the Otter a maximum crosswind of 5kts on floats. The first two only did damage in hard to access locations. The third wrote the aircraft off and was lucky he did it with lots of witnesses who got boats and got to the wreck site within minutes, saving his life.
Admiral Beez
Major
I keep thinking this thread's title is about the Fleet Air Arm. Well, now I see. Carry on…
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I made a similar mistake a while back. Why would the Federal Aviation Administration be involved with RN aircraft?
