Exemption to the CARs

[Squaretail]

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/refere ... tions-cars

If you're bored, its interesting to peruse to see what weird things people are doing. Most are delays in paperwork issues. Interesting TC anticipated covid related issues to last a lot longer since most of the exemptions in this regard are dated to expire in 2027. So get those telemedicals done while you can! On the face it seems that a lot of them as well address a shortage of flight attendants.

Of interest NAV CANADA operates under a continuing exemption to the CARs to be able to issue instructions and clearances...

Unsurprisingly, WestJet and Air Canada are the subject of a majority of the exemptions.

Has anyone ever made an application for one of these? If so, for what?

[Scudrunner]

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/refere ... egulations

This one we use that allows us to not complete 5 night take offs and landings in a 6 month period. We had rented sims in the past to go Spin around a circuit.

In my opinion It’s kind of a stupid requirement for CAR604 operations, we don’t always fly at night but most of us have decades of experience. It doesn’t make much sense to rent a sim of a completely different aircraft to what you fly to rip around just to check a box in the name of safety.

Down in the USA the FAA allows 12 months for pilots night currency if they have completed training in a level d sim or some such wording. Link to NBAA night requirements https://nbaa.org/aircraft-operations/sa ... -currency/

[Colonel]

It’s stupid to assume that a 100 hour pilot is the same as a 10,000 hour pilot.

This is especially true of tailwheel flying for which there is no regulatory requirement whatsoever. I tell new tailwheel pilots to be extremely careful if they don’t fly for a while - hey, life happens- and this simply isn’t a problem if you have 10,000 tailwheel landings.

The problem is that regulations need to be moronically simple. I would divide pilots into 2 groups- those with ATP’s and those without, and have different rules for each.

Admittedly this isn’t fair to a CPL with 10,000 hours but maybe he could get off his lazy ass and write 2 exams?

It’s so essy to get an ATP in Canada…. Down here I’m told that you need to be sponsored by Delta or United to even register for the course.

[Slick Goodlin]

I would divide pilots into 2 groups- those with ATP’s and those without, and have different rules for each.

As if you’ve never met an ATP who was a complete doofus. I think in some cases those are the ones to watch out for.

[Squaretail]

Actual currency matters more than what paper you got in your pocket. Most of the guys I couldn't hire even if they had an atp and how many thousands of hours if they hadn't flown in two or more years were useless. How many hours it was going to take of training just to get some back to even Private pilot levels was a large unknown quantity. For whatever reason stuff learned while flying just doesn't stick with some people.

[Colonel]

Skill deteriorates over time. How much it can deteriorate and still be at a safe level, depends upon where it started.

I think we can all agree that a 100hr pilot can take time X off, jump into an airplane by himself and still be safe.

I think we can all agree that a 1,000hr pilot can take time Y off, jump into an airplane by himself and still be safe.

I think we can all agree that a 10,000hr pilot can take time Z off, jump into an airplane by himself and still be safe.

I think we can all agree that Z > Y > X regardless of what the exact values are for the set of {X,Y,Z}

If a 100 hour pilot hasn't flown in a year, he probably needs a dual flight.

But if a 10,000 hour pilot hasn't flown in a year, just point him at the airplane and he can get himself current.

There are certainly exceptions to the above, but some of you might be familiar with this:



Various branches of aviation military services have nauseatingly detailed rules about this sort of thing.

[Squaretail]

For the most part I agree with that assessment, its just that experience hasn't always born it out to the point of where I feel someone who follows that retention curve is the exception rather than the rule.

But if a 10,000 hour pilot hasn't flown in a year, just point him at the airplane and he can get himself current.

This is the main grouping that has almost consistently disappointed me, some of the worst pilots I've had the misfortune to share an airplane with were in this bit, only seconded by the 2000-10000 hour guys. The sub 1000 hour guys perform as expected according to that curve. The better ones are the more current ones. After that, it seems to be a crap shoot. I mean last year had a guy come in during the hiring process who boasted that "if he didn't impress during the check flight he would eat his license" Spoiler alert, I hope he used some dressing to get that fibre down. The worst and best guys were both fighter pilots - the best a spitfire pilot who it felt like, in spite of decades not flying, he had been thinking about airplanes since the last time he was at the stick. The worst among his thousands of hours had time in MiG-21s, I thought this guy is going to be awesome. It was really hard to square that this guy couldn't handle a Cessna.

I think the key is you only retain a skill set if its something you really care about. If you assume that it can be put on the shelf with no further thought and will be there when you need it, it probably won't.

I mean I know there are some sub 500 hour guys I know who are better than their logbook would dictate, probably because they think about flying and want to get back to it. If you're happy at the carpet store though, and suddenly you decide to dust off the license, well you probably need a lot of dual again.

[Nark]

I like that graph. It explains a bunch.

I see that daily/monthly (when I work) there is a training backlog for various reasons. No one who comes in fresh from the Sim’s/observations is noticeably better than someone who has taken 1-2 months off (not of their own fault).

Attitude has everything to do with the success of a student.

[Colonel]

Shiny: I am suspicious that you seem to routinely run across very high time pilots that have become completely incompetent after not flying for a while.

Did these guys really spend 10 years flying 1000 hours/yr?

I’m not buying it. Bring in your stack of logbooks. Bet they’ve “lost” them.

I hate to break it to you, but sometimes people lie on their resumes. I’ve seen some whoppers.

[Squaretail]

I'm well aware there's a lot of logbook padders Colonel, and that's in the mix. I mean I recall one fellow who applied with 500 hours, then next week showed up with a resume that had 5000. Maybe he didn't think I would remember him?

Some of these guys did have log books. I mean the MIG guy had a very neat and well kept one complete with signatures from commanding officers certifying his time... I have theories about why some guys have lots of hours and are bad pilots. All of them unique to the individual. Some guys I felt probably did the same hour ten thousand times. Some guys it was longer than 2 years out of the seat, sometimes it was a decade.

That's not to say that guys with 10K+ hours can't be good but the ones... looking for a job flying a Cessna... well you had to wonder if they had left all those other jobs of their own accord. Which probably skews my results. The good ones really weren't in the market for a full time job if we could have afforded them, but there's a lot of guys who manage to get seats when its boom time.

Remind me, when was the last time you hired a pilot? Remember, I've spent a lot of this life actively seeking out other pilots and flying with them.