Donating Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Vsplat last won the day on May 22

Vsplat had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

340 Excellent

1 Follower

About Vsplat

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

3,095 profile views
  1. Vsplat

    Degrees True vs Magnetic

    If the baseline assumption behind moving away from magnetic navigation is that GNSS is omnipresent and funded forever, then consider what happens if the constellation is degraded. There are a lot of scenarios where that can happen, some less likely than others, but some based on promises from the US not to dither the signal. A lot of US promises seem to be getting cancelled lately..... Vs
  2. I agree, in their current state, TC has nothing close to the resources or mandate needed to deal with 'the Georgian's of the world'. But it was not always so. SMS has meant cuts to funding, training, staff levels and a confusing, shifting, largely shrinking mandate at Transport Canada. The Minister would rather spend his time shilling for private new entrants and taking credit for their business strategies than fulfilling his mandate of protecting public interest, i.e. our passengers and employees in the sector. IMO we need another Moshansky-level look at the drift, aka the federal level of normalization of deviance, and get Transport's collective head out of the dark damp hole it is in and looking at real issues with the ability to address them. Given the missed opportunities following several significant accidents and incidents, I quake to think what it is going to take for that wakeup call. All just my opinion Vs
  3. Vsplat

    A380 Wake Turbulance

    I agree, the change has to be made at the policy level. Clearly, you guys have to follow your rules like we do ours, and I can see how keeping chatter down when you're working multiple flights and frequencies has a safety impact. These 380 wake encounters seem to be far worse than predicted, so it would make sense to revisit the separation criteria, both vertical and lateral. I imagine an increase in separation will affect capacity, so it will be a complex discussion. That said, things also get pretty complicated when you experience a jet upset at 350 or hit severe turb level wake with carts in the aisles, so choosing from difficult menu items seems inevitable. Vs
  4. I believe ATAC's request to align with the FAA to be insincere. It would be far more restrictive, but the effort required to study such a complete revamp would stall change for another decade. That time would simply be used to conjure up further delay tactics such that we would never see that recommendation implemented, either. IMO Vs
  5. Vsplat

    A380 Wake Turbulance

    My pet peeve is how inconsistent ATC (thinking Edmonton Centre for this story) can be about reporting crossing heavy and super traffic, while pointing out distant, non-crossing stuff. We were coming east and got about three of '2 o'clock, 1000' below you, no conflict' kind of things. We then noticed converging traffic, asked about it, ; oh that's a XXX 380, he's 1000 feet above you, you'll pass 10 miles behind, no conflict' We climbed..... the controller seemed nonplussed by it all, sort of the equivalent of 'whatever'. Vs
  6. I wonder if there will be a cargo mod market for this airplane. Vs
  7. Hmmmm. Not sure who United uses for in-flight medical consultation, but I would be willing to bet it's one of the companies listed above. This is a damned if you do or don't article. Diversion is no picnic, especially if you aren't in familiar terrain and have no ground handling agreement with any nearby airport. You might land and have no way to get the patient seen or transported. Then, like Transat, you get pasted for the inevitable ground circus that ensues. I've had a medical diversion where, as soon as we landed, other passengers started to spool up, they wanted off the aircraft because it was actually closer to their final destination, but customs would have none of it. I won't bore you with the details, but 'not pretty' would be apt. Most of these advisory services, like STATMD, have real time updates on where the flight is, and, depending on how accurate the information is, will recommend options the crew can actually execute effectively for the good of the passenger, without creating a crisis for someone else on board. While slightly off topic, I've also had a non-diversion where we went to destination per STAT MD, rather than take the on board paramedic's advice to 'get this bird on the ground now' where 'now' was overhead Atlanta dodging CB's. When we got there, the patient was taken off on a stretcher, with their daughter saying 'mom, the next time the doctor tells you not to travel, I hope you listen to them....' Turns out they decided to travel without their oxygen because they thought it would cost them extra. I found out later that they started asking for oxygen just after the seatbelt sign went off, because they figured it would be free and we 'must have plenty'. Used up everything we had on board and so the return flight was cancelled, no O2 resupply available that time of night. Always at least 3 sides to every story, sorry for the thread drift. Vs
  8. Vsplat

    Cdn Duty Day Regs

    Well. it's been my view that political correctness and the inability to speak truth unto power has killed its fair share of aviators and their passengers. The Challenger accident is one of the more vivid examples that comes to mind. Is it politically incorrect to comment that the older one gets, the more easily one tires? I haven't seen too many 80 year old marathon winners lately. Must be just the channels I watch. To be clear, yes, if we are serious about applying science to this topic, then we have to apply all of it, not just those elements that pass the squirm test. Age is one criterion, mild sleep apnea might be another, a whole host of things would likely factor in. As for being 'too old to fly', that's its own political campaign. This particular discussion isn't about competence or cognition, but alertness and endurance. Vs
  9. Vsplat

    Cdn Duty Day Regs

    I think 'fitness to fly' has relevance, but due to the long context with the medical side and the lengthy suspension procedures, it would be a tough stretch. Fitness for a specific duty period might be more adpatable. I was fit yesterday, not today, but will be tomorrow. As for a specific test, that would be the holy grail. Having an objective test would, I think, be embraced by both sides as it would be much easier and would rule out opportunities for abuse on both sides. Trouble is, I could be flying with an individual less than half my age. Fatigue would present and progress very differently between us. I might know that, although I feel pretty good right now, that reassignment from the 5 hour duty day I was expecting to a 13 hour run into my planned rest time isn't going to work. But for the younger, more fit pilot, it might not pose any issue at all. Vs
  10. Vsplat

    Cdn Duty Day Regs

    I agree that a one size fits all approach is bound to fail. It's to easy to create a gridlock of reasons for and against based on corner cases on each pole. I can't argue with your comment on the difference in the type of fatigue an airline operation attracts. I think we've all experienced hanging in the straps at the end of a transcon redeye or a long, rough crossing. The automation is both threat and mitigation, but to me, there has been a long, insidious creep toward more risk, based on the assumption that high tech aircraft are easier to fly, so you should be able to do more with them. The promise was more safety for the same operation, but in fact the operations have been extended based on about the same (or subjectively similar) appetite for risk. So crews run into more than one limiting condition, tired, carrying multiple MEL, optimized fuel and a complex approach, maybe in heavy weather or limiting terrain, running complex equipment where dispatch or automation hide problems until they can't be hidden further. The continuous loop can only be ended with a referee's whistle. Instead, crickets from Tower C. Hmmmmm Vs
  11. Vsplat

    Cdn Duty Day Regs

    Well, a few things. The consultation process has been nearly continuous since these rules were first conceived in the early 1990's. I have lost count of the number of working groups, meetings, lobby efforts. If this person thinks there hasn't been consultation, it's because they haven't engaged. As for the north. Been there. It is the way it is because of choice. The long days, antiquated equipment and, frankly, lower level of safety are tolerated now in the north as they once were in the south. Yes it is a different part of the world. But flying in an exhausted state doesn't make a northern operation safe. There is this circular justification cycle that NATA and ATAC use and it has to be called out for what it is. Don't pay for infrastructure improvement because the cost will kill aviation. Then use that crumbling infrastructure to justify special duty regs, because better duty regs don't fit with the infrastructure. BS. In the mean time, we have these northern operator/owners driving their pilots until fatigue causes a failure, then blaming/firing the pilots involved for screwing up. It's a coal mining mentality that lost relevance in the last century. Transport has to get off their duff and show some leadership. This passed embarassing a decade ago. Now it is just sad. All just my opinion. Vs
  12. Vsplat

    Westjet pilots strike vote

    As we are now into the long weekend, (probably not a weekend off for the negotiators), any one's crystal ball lighting up with a strike notice announcement? If I read correctly, it's 72 hours in advance, so in absence of any press announcements, I think that puts us into Wednesday at the earliest. Is this a good sign that progress is being made? Keeping a good thought for the WJ pilots' team. It doesn't matter where along the river the erosion happens. In the end, we all lose the ground. Thanks for standing up. Vs
  13. Vsplat

    WestJet's new look and 787 preview

    My own opinion, the addition of the 'The' to "spirit of Canada" is likely what is trying to be trademarked here. No issue if someone wants to name their vessel 'sprit of x'. As has been noted, it's been done many times and is often a nod to a scenic destination or significant heritage. But the addition of that one little word (the) changes it from honoring a place to an arrogant statement - i.e the spirit of Canada resides nowhere else. I don't think anyone, or any institution, can claim this or should try to simply to sell tickets. BTW I would hold this view regardless of whose aircraft it was. I still have PTSD from the Celine experiment. But, as I said, just an opinion. Vs
  14. Vsplat

    NTSB report on Air Canada at SFO

    Thanks blues. I was just looking that up myself. Does anyone know if a similar level of disclosure is inflicted on US crews, or is this special treatment for foreign operators? Vs
  15. Vsplat

    NTSB report on Air Canada at SFO

    I don't know what purpose the NTSB is trying to serve by putting the names out in public view. With that information in play, please try to keep in mind that speculation and comments here can now be picked up by a 'guest' with minimal understanding and any sort of agenda - the impacts will be felt by real people. Another day, another airport, under a wide range of circumstances, any number of us could end up in their shoes. Keep a thought for these pilots and their families. Vs