Guest James Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 Didn't realize the implications to companies who are dealing with these issues day to day. Great link M. McRae. http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/regserv/Enforcement/offenders/menu.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 thx (Y)Malcolm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fester Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 I'm surprised to see TC levying noise abatement fines. Always thought that went straight into the airport authority's coffers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 Read the Act. Then read the Regs 602.105. Then go to Section 101 of the regs and look through the section after Definitions aka designated provisions. All the fines are there. And they're all under review. Many of them are to go up by more than 1000%. (That revision has been more than 3 years coming) Most of the answsers are there. Then ask yourself what have the airport authorities (for the most part, private entities) got to do with not only prosecution but collection of fines? Good question and a highlight to the discussion below! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 Quite the variety in terms of dollar figures there though! Check the May, 2003 differences between SkyService and the rest, including WJ and NW? Whats up with that I wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 Read the Act. Then read the Regs 602.105. Then go to Section 101 of the regs and look through the section after Definitions aka designated provisions. All the fines are there. And they're all under review. Many of them are to go up by more than 1000%. (That revision has been more than 3 years coming) Most of the answers are there. Then ask yourself what the airport authorities (for the most part, private entities) have got to do with not only prosecution but collection of fines? Good question and a highlight to the discussion below! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 You commented below re the lack of noise monitoring equip. You might find the following site / page interesting. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/noise/toronto.html#nap Rgds Malcolm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted July 19, 2003 Share Posted July 19, 2003 Thanks Malcolm. I believe I sadly stand corrected. TC must have seen the cash cow created by the JAA in this regard. What a scam, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 Not sure about it being a cash cow but it is def. a sad day when folks can build around an airport, complain about the noise, get the rules changed and then the airline is subject to fines. It also bothers me when I hear that fully grossed aircraft are required to make sharp turns during their initial climb to cruise because of noise restrictions or is that not a valid concern? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbusguy Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 What is a real load of manure is the fact that a noise violation gets you a $20,000 fine while busting minumums (Dec. 2002) only gets a $1250 and $2500 or that flying an aircraft in a reckless manner (Dec.2002) gets a $5000 fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 Good point, but if you limit yourself to 15 degrees of bank you should be OK. That works out to less than rate one at 200 knots but all you can do is the best you can do. There's a DPout of Gatwick where you have to do a 180 degree turn after departure to intercept an inbound radial. If your speed is greater than 185, the increased turning radius causes you to overshoot the radial and, guess what: Busted! Amsterdam has a DP where you need to make about 3 separate radial intercepts before you get 10 miles from the airport. If you're not properly RNAV equipped, the workload is horrendous. And it's not really possible to make the tolerances. So you need to have RNAV. In Europe, they call it B-RNAV to give you RNP4 performance. I think I got that right - I'm still learning the finer points of The Ropes over here! Side note - the last time I was in Toronto, around new subdivisions I saw signs about the housing being built in the vicinity of an airport. Wonder if they're working... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 Do we have another item to Write Your Minister about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 I’ve never understood the rational behind violating a pilot for busting minimums at an “ATC Controlled” airport. Why does the gov. continue with this fly trap? If you attend a tribunal hearing one is almost certain to hear the accused state that he didn’t think he was busting minimums. Why does ATC sit back and watch the so called offence unfold and then record the infraction? It’s their airport, why can’t “cleared to land” be taken to mean “the wx is legal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mad cow Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 At least in YYC it's not up to the controllers to infract you guys, that's all the airport authority's doing. The airport authority has the same access to radar tapes and flight following displays as we do. As for saying "cleared to land", that DOES NOT absolve you from following noise abatement procedures (unless you're in an exempt aircraft). I've always maintained that noise abatement is the pilot's responsibility since it's going to be the pilot that takes the hit (and quite the big hit from what I've seen). Also, I've never seen any controller trying to sucker someone into breaking noise. Sometimes we're just as confused about the rules as you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 I'm only suggesting the rules be "simplified" with regard to TO & landing clearances as opposed to the trap that's set with the present rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.