FAA Accuses British Airways of Recklessness

L Grasso wrote:

On 8 Mar 2005 14:32:01 -0800, "NEWS" wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/bu...r=MOREOVERNEWS

F.A.A. Accuses British Airways of Recklessness
By DON PHILLIPS

Published: March 8, 2005


International Herald Tribune

Federal Aviation Administration officials said yesterday that they were
preparing to take strong action against British Airways, including a
charge of "careless and reckless operation of an aircraft," because it
allowed a Boeing 747 to fly from California to Britain with one of its
four engines inoperable.

Under normal circumstances, the United States would not take action
against British Airways because such issues would be handled by
Britain. But senior United States aviation officials have become
concerned about the actions of the flight crew and its supervisors.

F.A.A. officials said that the United States had the right to block
entry to the United States by British Airways but that a fine was more
likely.

British Airways expressed surprise over the developments. Steve
Shelterline, general manager for the 747 program with British Airways,
said it was clear that F.A.A. rules would not prevent a four-engine
airplane like the 747 from continuing flight with one engine out.

"The 747 is fully certificated to operate on three engines," he said.
"There is no requirement to land."

British Airways Flight 268 took off from Los Angeles on Feb. 19 and
quickly developed trouble with one engine. Mr. Shelterline said this
was caused by an engine surge, which occurs when the mixture of air and
fuel is suddenly incorrect. As the jet approached the English coast,
the crew decided to declare an emergency and land early in Manchester.

On Feb. 25, six days later, the same 747 flew 11 hours on three engines
when an engine gave out on a flight from Singapore to London.

So, the FAA is going to ignore what FAR 121.565 allows, and punish the
airline (basically under FAR 91.3)? I don't think that is going to stick.

Note that FAA often uses 91.3 to throw pilots in the brig when they can't find a clear violation of any rule. Also note that 121.565
permits a 4 engine airliner to continue flying to the destination on 3 engines. So a US scheduled carrier would explicitly (under
FAA's own regs) to do so.

Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even required to follow 14 CFR 121. It looks like FAA is grandstanding,
probably under the guise of having to "do something" after the recent negative publicity over the incident. Personally, I don't see
what the big deal is.

Would this be the same FAA that denied the Air Transat flight permission to
land?

"Sam Whitman" wrote in message
...

L Grasso wrote:

On 8 Mar 2005 14:32:01 -0800, "NEWS" wrote:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/bu...r.html?ex=1110
949200&en=a8ef80ec613e88a4&ei=5040&partner=MOREOVE RNEWS

F.A.A. Accuses British Airways of Recklessness
By DON PHILLIPS

Published: March 8, 2005


International Herald Tribune

Federal Aviation Administration officials said yesterday that they were
preparing to take strong action against British Airways, including a
charge of "careless and reckless operation of an aircraft," because it
allowed a Boeing 747 to fly from California to Britain with one of its
four engines inoperable.

Under normal circumstances, the United States would not take action
against British Airways because such issues would be handled by
Britain. But senior United States aviation officials have become
concerned about the actions of the flight crew and its supervisors.

F.A.A. officials said that the United States had the right to block
entry to the United States by British Airways but that a fine was more
likely.

British Airways expressed surprise over the developments. Steve
Shelterline, general manager for the 747 program with British Airways,
said it was clear that F.A.A. rules would not prevent a four-engine
airplane like the 747 from continuing flight with one engine out.

"The 747 is fully certificated to operate on three engines," he said.
"There is no requirement to land."

British Airways Flight 268 took off from Los Angeles on Feb. 19 and
quickly developed trouble with one engine. Mr. Shelterline said this
was caused by an engine surge, which occurs when the mixture of air and
fuel is suddenly incorrect. As the jet approached the English coast,
the crew decided to declare an emergency and land early in Manchester.

On Feb. 25, six days later, the same 747 flew 11 hours on three engines
when an engine gave out on a flight from Singapore to London.

So, the FAA is going to ignore what FAR 121.565 allows, and punish the
airline (basically under FAR 91.3)? I don't think that is going to
stick.

Note that FAA often uses 91.3 to throw pilots in the brig when they can't
find a clear violation of any rule. Also note that 121.565
permits a 4 engine airliner to continue flying to the destination on 3
engines. So a US scheduled carrier would explicitly (under
FAA's own regs) to do so.

Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even
required to follow 14 CFR 121. It looks like FAA is grandstanding,
probably under the guise of having to "do something" after the recent
negative publicity over the incident. Personally, I don't see
what the big deal is.

Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even
required to
follow 14 CFR 121.

Untrue.
121.1
This part prescribes rules governing--
....
(f) Each person who is an applicant for an Air Carrier Certificate or
an Operating Certificate under part 119 of this chapter, when
conducting proving tests.

119.1(a) This part applies to each person operating or intending to
operate civil aircraft -
(1) As an air carrier or commercial operator, or both, in air
commerce;

So if they want to operate as an air carrier in the U.S. then for the
portion of their flight in U.S. territory they are indeed subject to 14
CFR 121.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even
required to
follow 14 CFR 121.

Untrue.
121.1
This part prescribes rules governing--
...
(f) Each person who is an applicant for an Air Carrier Certificate or
an Operating Certificate under part 119 of this chapter, when
conducting proving tests.

119.1(a) This part applies to each person operating or intending to
operate civil aircraft -
(1) As an air carrier or commercial operator, or both, in air
commerce;

So if they want to operate as an air carrier in the U.S. then for the
portion of their flight in U.S. territory they are indeed subject to 14
CFR 121.

You're both wrong.. Part 119 and Part 121 specifically deal with Air
Carriers with an Operating Certificate issued by the FAA (US registered
aircraft). Since the BA fleet, as far as I'm aware are all UK registered
aircraft, operated out of the UK, then ICAO regulations or ANO's apply,
whatever. They *probably* (I don't know) contain something like this, which
incidentally is applicable to US registered aircraft operating under an FAA
issued certificate.

§ 121.11 Rules applicable to operations in a foreign country.
Each certificate holder shall, while operating an airplane within a foreign
country, comply with the air traffic rules of the country concerned and the
local airport rules, except where any rule of this part is more restrictive
and may be followed without violating the rules of that country.

which, as best I can tell, means they need to comply with Part 91, and
applicable Part 121 rules while in US airspace.



Limey.

I believe 121 is mostly a copy of ICOA, which is reflected by both the
FAA and the JAA.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
I believe 121 is mostly a copy of ICOA, which is reflected by both the
FAA and the JAA.


I'm sure they're very similar.

Limey.

"Limey"
:


wrote in message
oups.com...
Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even
required to
follow 14 CFR 121.

Untrue.
121.1
This part prescribes rules governing--
...
(f) Each person who is an applicant for an Air Carrier Certificate or
an Operating Certificate under part 119 of this chapter, when
conducting proving tests.

119.1(a) This part applies to each person operating or intending to
operate civil aircraft -
(1) As an air carrier or commercial operator, or both, in air
commerce;

So if they want to operate as an air carrier in the U.S. then for the
portion of their flight in U.S. territory they are indeed subject to
14 CFR 121.

You're both wrong.. Part 119 and Part 121 specifically deal with Air
Carriers with an Operating Certificate issued by the FAA (US
registered aircraft). Since the BA fleet, as far as I'm aware are all
UK registered aircraft, operated out of the UK, then ICAO regulations
or ANO's apply, whatever. They *probably* (I don't know) contain
something like this, which incidentally is applicable to US
registered aircraft operating under an FAA issued certificate.

§ 121.11 Rules applicable to operations in a foreign country.
Each certificate holder shall, while operating an airplane within a
foreign country, comply with the air traffic rules of the country
concerned and the local airport rules, except where any rule of this
part is more restrictive and may be followed without violating the
rules of that country.

which, as best I can tell, means they need to comply with Part 91, and
applicable Part 121 rules while in US airspace.


Yep.

Bertie

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Limey wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even
required to
follow 14 CFR 121.

Untrue.
121.1
This part prescribes rules governing--
...
(f) Each person who is an applicant for an Air Carrier Certificate or=

an Operating Certificate under part 119 of this chapter, when
conducting proving tests.

119.1(a) This part applies to each person operating or intending to
operate civil aircraft -
(1) As an air carrier or commercial operator, or both, in air
commerce;

So if they want to operate as an air carrier in the U.S. then for the=

portion of their flight in U.S. territory they are indeed subject to =
14
CFR 121.

You're both wrong.. Part 119 and Part 121 specifically deal with Air
Carriers with an Operating Certificate issued by the FAA (US registered=

aircraft). Since the BA fleet, as far as I'm aware are all UK registere=
d
aircraft, operated out of the UK, then ICAO regulations or ANO's apply,=

whatever. They *probably* (I don't know) contain something like this, w=
hich
incidentally is applicable to US registered aircraft operating under a=
n FAA
issued certificate.

=A7 121.11 Rules applicable to operations in a foreign country.
Each certificate holder shall, while operating an airplane within a for=
eign
country, comply with the air traffic rules of the country concerned and=
the
local airport rules, except where any rule of this part is more restric=
tive
and may be followed without violating the rules of that country.

which, as best I can tell, means they need to comply with Part 91, and
applicable Part 121 rules while in US airspace.

Incorret. 14 CFR 121.11 refers to USA carriers certificated to fly under=
14 CFR
121 operating in foreign (non-USA) territories or countries. Like any ot=
her
non-USA carrier certified to fly in the USA, British Airways operates und=
er part
129 while in the USA.

"Sam Whitman" wrote in message
...
Limey wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Finally note that British Airways is not a US carrier and not even
required to
follow 14 CFR 121.

Untrue.
121.1
This part prescribes rules governing--
...
(f) Each person who is an applicant for an Air Carrier Certificate or
an Operating Certificate under part 119 of this chapter, when
conducting proving tests.

119.1(a) This part applies to each person operating or intending to
operate civil aircraft -
(1) As an air carrier or commercial operator, or both, in air
commerce;

So if they want to operate as an air carrier in the U.S. then for the
portion of their flight in U.S. territory they are indeed subject to 14
CFR 121.

You're both wrong.. Part 119 and Part 121 specifically deal with Air
Carriers with an Operating Certificate issued by the FAA (US registered
aircraft). Since the BA fleet, as far as I'm aware are all UK registered
aircraft, operated out of the UK, then ICAO regulations or ANO's apply,
whatever. They *probably* (I don't know) contain something like this,
which
incidentally is applicable to US registered aircraft operating under an
FAA
issued certificate.

§ 121.11 Rules applicable to operations in a foreign country.
Each certificate holder shall, while operating an airplane within a
foreign
country, comply with the air traffic rules of the country concerned and
the
local airport rules, except where any rule of this part is more
restrictive
and may be followed without violating the rules of that country.

which, as best I can tell, means they need to comply with Part 91, and
applicable Part 121 rules while in US airspace.

Incorret. 14 CFR 121.11 refers to USA carriers certificated to fly under
14 CFR
121 operating in foreign (non-USA) territories or countries.

OK, I just assumed that there may be some relevance being that the more
restrictive 121 rules might apply, but that is prolly covered under 129,
with which I am not at all familiar. Thx for the clarification.


Like any other
non-USA carrier certified to fly in the USA, British Airways operates
under part
129 while in the USA.

Yup.

Cheers, Limey.

Limey wrote:

"Sam Whitman" wrote in message
...
Limey wrote:


§ 121.11 Rules applicable to operations in a foreign country.
Each certificate holder shall, while operating an airplane within a
foreign
country, comply with the air traffic rules of the country concerned and
the
local airport rules, except where any rule of this part is more
restrictive
and may be followed without violating the rules of that country.

which, as best I can tell, means they need to comply with Part 91, and
applicable Part 121 rules while in US airspace.

Incorret. 14 CFR 121.11 refers to USA carriers certificated to fly under
14 CFR
121 operating in foreign (non-USA) territories or countries.

OK, I just assumed that there may be some relevance being that the more
restrictive 121 rules might apply, but that is prolly covered under 129,
with which I am not at all familiar. Thx for the clarification.

Like any other
non-USA carrier certified to fly in the USA, British Airways operates
under part
129 while in the USA.

Intruiged that you pilots seem to find room for disagreement over which FARs
apply.

Part 129 .Operations: Foreign air carriers and foreign operators of
U.S.-registered aircraft engaged in common carriage. Section 19 - Air traffic
rules and procedures

(a) Each pilot must be familiar with the applicable rules, the navigational and
communications facilities, and the air traffic control and other procedures, of
the areas to be traversed by him within the United States.

(b) Each foreign air carrier shall establish procedures to assure that each of
its pilots has the knowledge required by paragraph (a) of this section and
shall check the ability of each of its pilots to operate safely according to
applicable rules and procedures.

* (c) Each foreign air carrier shall conform to the practices, procedures, and
other requirements prescribed by the Administrator for U.S. air carriers for
the areas to be operated in. *

129.19(c) appears to infer that foreign carriers have to comply with Part 121
whilst in US airspace.


Graham