Where: Riverside Pub, 3673 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, ON K1V 1G8, Phone: 613-733-8459
When: 29 November 19:00 to 21:00
COPA Flight 8 remembers Dennis Pharoah. All are welcome to come and share your Dennis experiences.
As many of you may know, several of us accompanied Dennis to the Riverside after Flight 8 meetings for a session of hangar flying. Dennis' brother Jon Pharaoh will join us. He wants to meet Dennis' flying friends and hear their Dennis Stories.
See you there!
COPA Flight 8 Captain Mike Shaw will be the contact person for Flight 8's input into this study, so please send your comments to him or, better yet post them here for discussion.
30 October 2012
Notice Of Aeronautical Study - Review Of The Structure And Classification Of The Ottawa Terminal Control Area
Nav Canada will be undertaking an aeronautical study to review the structure and classification of the Ottawa terminal control area.
As the provider of civil air navigation services, NAV CANADA regularly reviews its services to ensure that they match the requirements of aircraft operators. The study will involve consultation with customers and other stakeholders. A hazard and risk analysis will be conducted on any proposed changes.
Further information is available on the NAV CANADA web site page Windsor-Toronto-Montreal Airspace and Services Review.
Consultation on this proposal will be conducted during the fall of 2012. Persons wishing to be identified as stakeholders, wanting to obtain further information or interested in commenting on this study are invited to notify the study team leader identified below:
Yan Tremblay
Shift Manager
Montréal Area Control Centre
Nav Canada
1750 Chemin St Francois
Dorval, QC
H9P 2P6
Yan.tremblay@navcanada.ca
service@navcanada.ca
Phone: (514) 633-3365
Fax: (514) 633-3371
As I previously reported Hawker Beechcraft was under offer to be purchased by Superior Aviation Beijing. The deal looked close to a done-deal in the middle of the summer, but it failed to be completed and Hawker Beechcraft is back to looking at emerging from bankruptcy on its own.
So what scuttled the deal? That depends of who you listen to. Different sources have each attributed it to:
So what now?
The company has indicated that it plans to emerge from bankruptcy protection as a stand-alone company and will be renamed Beechcraft Corporation. The new entity will focus on the company's most profitable products, which will mean piston aircraft manufacturing and refurbishing older aircraft, including turboprop and diesel upgrades for piston planes. In other words ending jet production.
The latest news this week is that the Beechcraft Premier will be produced as a single engine turboprop design with seating for up to 11 passengers, that looks remarkably like a Pilatus PC-12.
It will be interesting to see what happens over time as the company emerges from bankruptcy protection.
Longtime COPA Flight 8 member Dennis Pharoah, 49, died when the car he was driving collided with a tree on Cavan Street, between Raven Avenue and Larose Street. The collision happened shortly after 4 pm on Wednesday 24 October 2012. Ottawa Police indicated speed was a factor in the collision.
Pharoah was involved in aviation for most of his life, flying single and twin-engined airplanes for both recreation and professionally. He worked in aviation as well, as an Accident Investigation Technician for the Transportation Safety Board of Canada laboratory at the Ottawa International Airport, specializing in the analysis of Flight Data Recorders and Cockpit Voice Recorders.
Flight 8 members will always remember Pharoah for his insightful and penetrating questions directed at speakers at the flight's meetings and also for his habit of being the last flight member to arrive. When Dennis showed up the meeting could then begin, although sometimes Flight Captain Mike Shaw would jump the gun and start the meeting without Dennis.
Pharoah was also an avid curler, playing on the Flight 8 Curling Team. He played Second on the Flight 8 team that were runners up in section B of the 2012 ATC Bonspiel held in Niagara Falls in April 2012.
Dennis's presence as a member of Flight 8 will be greatly missed.
Obituraries:
Media report:
The latest edition of the Aeronautical Information Manual from Transport Canada is now available!
The AIM was at one time the AIP and only available on paper. Today is it primarily an on-line publication, with html versions of each chapter on the TC website and also the full book available as a free PDF download. VIP Pilot Centre also offer a paper version for sale for $19.95.
The AIM is released twice a year, in April and October. This new version includes many illustrations now in colour.
Civil Aviation Issues Reporting System (CAIRS) is a new system put in place by Transport Canada. Transport’s website says, “The CAIRS provides our stakeholders, including our clients and the public, with a means to raise issues (concerns, complaints, compliments, and suggestions for improvement) to the Civil Aviation Program of Transport Canada.” http://bit.ly/RonR6d
Well, I tried it and I am disappointed with the results, at least when compared to how well Nav Canada replies to queries. Since hearing about CAIRS at a Transport Canada safety seminar (http://bit.ly/RonFUy) in Ottawa last month I have posed a couple of queries but had no response, not even acknowledgement that they were received.
The CAIRS process requires filing-in an MS Word document that one can download, fill in and send to CAIRS email address, CAIRS_NCR@tc.gc.ca. Alternatively one can download the same form as a “pdf” file and fill that in by hand and send it to the above-noted email address.
27 September I sent CAIRS their form indicating that pilots were being confused by the wording in the TC Airman’s Information Manual (AIM) on joining the circuit at uncontrolled airports. The substance of my comments were based on my blog posting, http://bit.ly/Roo1L1. This confusion was amplified by the discussions at the above-noted safety seminar.
Also on 27 September I copied CAIRS on my note to Nav Canada suggesting they eliminate the VFR reporting point called Rockcliffe Park, adjacent to Rockcliffe Airport and close to restricted airspace over Rideau Hall (CYR 538).
On 28 September Nav Canada confirmed by email that they had received my query and told me who would be handling it. On 5 October Nav Canada replied by email that they agreed with my analysis and would be eliminating the Rockcliffe Park reporting point, see http://bit.ly/Roo9tY.
CAIRS has yet to acknowledge my queries. Transport Canada should at least let their “stakeholders, including our clients and the public” know that they received a query and what their intentions are with respect to it. In fact, why not put them all on the TC website so we can all see them and track activity and results?
The bottom line, Nav Canada gets an “A” for excellence, Transport Canada CAIRS less.
Nonetheless, I thank Transport Canada Civil Aviation Inspectors Oonagh Elliott and Claude Hurley for delivering a stimulating safety seminar for COPA Flight 8 on 26 September 2012.
Transport Canada Civil Aviation Safety Inspector Oonagh Elliott made a note of some questions asked by attendees at the Safety Seminar that was presented as COPA Flight 8's September meeting.
Here are the questions and the answers:
1) Radio Licence:
Pilots are required to have a radio-telephone operators' certificate when operating an aircraft radio. One attendee indicated that his certificate was included in his old paper licence. However, as that licence is no longer valid, and he is using the Aviation Document Booklet, he should obtain a replacement radio certificate from Industry Canada. They will do this free of charge. What people in this situation need to do, is email their request to Industry Canada at spectrum.certificates@ic.gc.ca. They need to provide their full name, date of birth and mailing address.
2) MF, Standard Radio Calls @ 5 minutes
The five minute reference is contained in CAR 602.101 and it is qualified by a "where circumstances permit" statement.
3) IFR/VFR traffic at MF airport (VMC)
General procedures in the vicinity of an aerodrome are contained in CAR 602.96. MF procedures for VFR and IFR are contained in CAR 602.97 to 602.103 IFR procedures at uncontrolled airports are contained in CAR 602.104. This clarifies the fact that IFR aircraft are NOT required to conduct a VFR circuit when arriving at an uncontrolled airport. They have several options to choose from depending on the circumstances of the day. They are operating under IFR, which requires them to follow published IFR procedures, including published approach procedures. These procedures generally involve a straight in on final approach to the runway from an FAF. The pilot may choose to conduct a circling approach in some cases, which may or may not have a higher inherent risk in itself. He may alternately choose to cancel his IFR flight plan and then conduct a VFR arrival, however, once the flight plan is cancelled, the SAR portion also disappears, therefore, there is a higher inherent risk in this case also. The key is communication between all traffic to sort out any potential conflicts.
4) Transborder Flight Plans
Must be filed, and must be opened on departure. COPA/AOPA have both published guides relating to transborder flights.
5) ELT 406 Update?
No new information was available on this subject.
I wrote to Nav Canada’s Services folks and suggested they eliminate the reporting point. They checked with ATC, Gatineau FSS, local flight schools and concluded that my suggestion made sense. Below is there reply.
“A submission has been made to remove the check point from the Ottawa VTA and the VTPCs in the CFS and Water Aerodrome Supplement (WAS). This change should be reflected in new Ottawa VTA due in February 2013, the Jan 10, 2013 CFS and the next WAS due March 7, 2013.”
Thanks for listening Nav Canada!
Landings, or at least bad landings, seem to be making the aviation news lately. At Flight 8's recent Transport Canada Safety Seminar Claude Hurley & Oonagh Elliott pointed out that 53% of recent light aircraft accidents have been landing accidents and, of those, half were assessed as being due to lack of skill. Judgement only made up 25%, so lack of skill is twice the problem that judgement is at present.
On 30 September 2012 AVweb's Paul Bertorelli published a blog post entitled Johnny Can Read, But He Can't Land making some similar observations about the accident record in US Light-Sport Aircraft. He noted "The leading type of accident for most aircraft is what we call R-LOCs or runway loss of control. This broad category describes a multitude of aeronautical blunders—from crosswind-induced excursions, to drop-ins, to landing long or short or just running into stuff. (Runway lights, localizer bars and, yes, cows.)"
Why is it that lack of skill mostly shows up in landing accidents, rather than in other phases of flight? Bertorelli sums this up very succinctly "Of all the tasks in flying, landing requires the most refined motor skills and hand-eye coordination in reaction to a stream of subtle cues." In other words it is the hardest part of aircraft flight and a lack of skill will show up first and worst in landing accidents.
So why are pilots suddenly turning up with lack of skill accidents? Bertorelli focuses on lack of transition training to the lightweight and easy to over-control LSAs. I am sure that is a factor, but the TC statistics show this same trend in all types of privately-flown light aircraft.
Like everything in flying, landings take time to initially learn how to do them right, but then they require constant practice or else the skills get rusty and deteriorate. I believe this is the crux of the problem.
The recent 2012 COPA membership survey shows some disturbing trends when comparing data to the previous 2007 survey. One of the most worrying to me is the reported median number of hours flown annually, which in that five year period dropped from 40 to 27. This means that half the pilots flew less than 27 hours in 2011. On top of that almost half the pilots (46.6%) reported flying fewer hours in 2011 than previously, with only 15.7% reporting flying more.
The number of hours a pilot needs to fly annually to be sufficiently safe varies a lot and there are many factors involved. Higher total time pilots can get by with fewer hours, as they lean on their accumulated experience. Lower time pilots need more recent practice. The median reported total flying time in the COPA survey was 680 hours, which makes the vast majority of pilots surveyed quite "low time". Flying complex tasks, like helicopter vertical reference long-lining requires a lot of recent practice unless you want to wrap the line around a tree or ten. Fixed wing, day, VFR flying is less demanding.
I think that for low time pilots 27 hours a year is not enough to fly safely, even if they are only flying day, VFR and in light winds. That is barely two hours a month. If you fly that infrequently someone is going to get hurt and the accident statistics exactly bear that out.
There are lots of reasons why people don't fly more, but "too expensive" seems to be at the head of many people's lists. This is supported by the COPA survey again that shows an average member age of 57.2 years, meaning a large number of pilots are retired and living on pensions. They used to be able to afford to fly more and now they can't.
If the high cost of flying is keeping people from flying enough to be safe then something has to be done to reduce costs. Many pilots I listen to grumble about high fuel prices, but even today fixed costs, like maintenance, insurance and hangarage add up to more money than gas does for most aircraft. I think the problem here is that owners have to pay the fixed costs and then many of them pay for gas out of what is left over after that, which often doesn't leave much.
There are lots of ways to reduce the cost of flying. One of the easiest ways is to take on partners. Four partners will cut the fixed costs by 75% per person. It always amazes me how many people insist on owning their own plane, which they can barely afford and can't fly much, but always have excuses to not take on partners.
There are lots of other solutions to high costs as well. The new generation of electric aircraft, like the Yuneec International E430 can be flown for pennies an hour in fuel costs and have much lower engine maintenance costs as well. For many people if you aren't flying much and only locally renting makes more sense than owning.
Whatever the reason is keeping pilots from flying enough to be safe really doesn't matter. We have to look at our own circumstances and if we aren't flying enough to be safe then we can't just keep doing that until we have an accident. Instead we need to either find creative ways to fly more or admit we can't fly enough to fly safely and hang it up.
The National Airports Policy (NAP) was introduced in 1994 by Transport Minister Doug Young and has been continued by every minister ever since. That policy basically said that Canada has far too many airports and that the number needs to be reduced.
To accomplish this end TC got out of the airport management business, turning the national system of airports over to local municipalities and local authorities to run. This naturally meant that they did what they thought was best for their community and not for a national transportation system. It has taken a while, but the results of this short sighted policy are now being felt as local communities move to close their airports.
Already we have lost Toronto's privately-owned Buttonville, slated to close in the next few years. This week another move was made to close Edmonton City Centre Airport.
Edmonton has been the scene of a long battle over this airport. It is used for airline connections, medevac flights as well as business and private aircraft. The location is amazing - right downtown. Originally an RCAF Station out in the countryside, the city grew around it as the airport brought in so much trade and commerce.
A 1992 plebiscite indicated a narrow margin (54%) of citizens were in favour of keeping the airport open to all traffic. But a 1995 plebiscite asked whether citizens were in favour of consolidating all traffic at the Edmonton International and 77% voted for that. It is clear these days that the majority of the people of Edmonton want the airport closed and turned into public housing, shopping and condos. To this end citizens recently elected a mayor and council in favour of getting rid of the airport and they are now proceeding to do just that.
The municipality actually owns the airport, so they can do what they want with it. They have set aside $80M to expropriate everyone with an interest or business at the airport with the aim of it being closed by 2013. The only thorn in the side of the plan is a recently filed lawsuit by the Edmonton Flying Club. They have a lease on their site that doesn't expire until 2028 and are seeking $18M and an injunction to prevent the city from closing the airport. On 25 September 2012 a judge allowed the club to apply for a temporary injunction until the lawsuit is settled. The club have indicated they will drop the suit if they get a permanent injunction.
Will the club succeed and keep the airport open against the wishes of the city that owns the facility and the people who live in Edmonton? Perhaps, but I think it is unlikely for long. The federal government certainly isn't defending the airport as what is happening in Edmonton is exactly what the NAP promotes.
All of this shows that the NAP is doing what it set out to do, put airports in local hands so that local people and their governments can decide what they want for their community. As always feared local governments and citizens don't consider what is in the best interests of Canada, what sort of national network of airports the country needs, but just what they want and usually that means "close the airport". Over the years it has been clear that, for the people of Edmonton at least, this has been about aircraft noise and nothing more.
So does this mean that businesses will move their head offices elsewhere, that tourist dollars will disappear, that hotels and restaurants will go out of business and medevacs be diverted? Once the airport is closed I guess we will see what the impact on the city will be.
In the 2012 COPA Membership Survey members indicated that the biggest growing concern was the failure of the NAP and the loss of airports that it brought. It has taken 20 years for the full effects of the policy to be felt, but airports are now closing and airplanes and the business that they were home to are leaving. Many businesses will have no where else to go and will be shutdown. Many aircraft will also have no where to go and will be sold.
Edmonton still has some airports left, like far-out-of-town Villeneuve and the GA-hostile Edmonton International with its high "go away" landing fees. The loss of the Muni, when it does happen, will be felt and right across Canada, too. It is too bad that only the people of Edmonton have a say.
The last word on the issue goes to the man that signed the NAP, Transport Minister Doug Young. In January 2003 the Globe and Mail quoted him as saying that he regretted handing over control of Canada's airports and that the National Airports Policy was the worst decision of his career. I think the citizens of Edmonton would disagree with Young, but most pilots think his assessment is spot on. Too bad his policy endures, seemingly with a life of its own.
Further Reading:
By André Durocher
It’s done! 53 horses have now arrived at the new equestrian centre just north of the Pontiac Airpark!
Elevage Fabie have moved into their new quarters and now offer their services to the airpark and the Pontiac’s residents.
The aerial photo shows the Ottawa River, the airpark, 85 acres of wooded residential land and the equestrian centre located on the left hand side of Highway 148.
A golf course, hotel, restaurant and spa will be located on the right hand side of the airpark! I am looking for someone for these projects!
Good on you guys and gals at Vintage Wings Canada! Your 2012 Wings Over Gatineau-Ottawa was a great airshow! Thanks for allowing pilots to fly-in and see the show.
Showers dampened Saturday’s event causing folks to seek shelter under the wings of display aircraft. Nonetheless, the show was largely uninterrupted and Saturday’s smaller crowed went home with smiles on their faces. I only attended on Sunday and the show was great and the crowds large. I understand over 30,000 showed up over the weekend to see Canada’s Snowbirds, CF-18 Demo Team, the Discovery Air F-86 Golden Hawk Saber, wing walker Carol Pilon and much of the Vintage Wings fleet of WWII hero planes.
The only disappointment was a mechanical problem kept the Canadian Warplane Heritage Mynarski Memorial Lancaster on the ground on Sunday. Vintage Wings’ Spitfire, Hurricane and Corsair along with other aircraft joined a formation to fly past Rockcliffe Airport to help the Canadian Aviation and Space Museum celebrate of the Battle of Britain.
The event is well on its way to being the major family event in the Nations Captial each September. The airshow, which expanded from a one to two-day event this year, takes place at the Vintage Wings of Canada hangar at the Gatineau-Ottawa Executive Airport (CYND), just 15 minutes from Ottawa. The Wings Over Gatineau-Ottawa airshow returns September 14 and 15, 2013. See you there, eh.
by Mark Braithwaite, Acting CFI, Rockcliffe Flying Club
Due to the Battle of Britain and Wings Over Gatineau-Ottawa event, the weekend of September 14-16, 2012, the following NOTAMS have been issued.
Please read and abide by them accordingly.
121197 CZUL MONTREAL FIR
CZUL PURSUANT TO SECTION 5.1 OF THE AERONAUTICS ACT, THE AIRSPACE WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY A CIRCLE OF 7 NM RADIUS CENTERED ON 453118N 753349W (OTTAWA/GATINEAU AD), SFC TO 8000 FT MSL, IS RESTRICTED (AIRSHOW), EXCLUDING CYR538, CYOW CTL ZONE AND THE AIRSPACE S OF THE N SHORE OF THE OTTAWA RIVER BLW 1200 FT MSL. NO PERSON SHALL OPR AN ACFT WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED UNLESS AUTH BY THE AIRSHOW COORDINATOR AT 819-790-1639 EXC FOR MEDEVAC AND POLICE OPS WITH 10 MIN PN. SEE AIC 32/12 FOR MORE INFO. SEP 14, 1730-2000, SEP 15 AND 16 1400-2200.
1209141730 TIL 1209162200
121198 CZUL MONTREAL FIR
CZUL DAH IS AMENDED AS FLW:
CYR650 CLASS F RESTRICTED AIRSPACE IS ESTABLISHED WITHIN THAT PORTION OF THE GATINEAU CTL ZONE N OF THE OTTAWA RIVER. IN ADDITION TO NORMAL REGULATIONS IN THE GATINEAU CTL ZONE AND MF AREA, ACFT INBOUND FOR OTTAWA/GATINEAU AD MUST OBTAIN PERMISSION TO ENTER THE CZND CTL ZONE FROM OTTAWA TML ON FREQ 127.7, APCH VIA THE CUMBERLAND OR CHELSEA DAM REPORTING POINTS AND BE EQUIPED WITH A FUNCTIONNING MODE C TRANSPONDER. NO CONTINUOUS CIRCUITS OR SIMULATED IFR APCH ARE PERMITED. CONTROLLING AGENCY: NAV CANADA, OTTAWA TML FREQ 127.7, PHONE 800-633-1353 DLY 1200-1400
1209151200 TIL 1209161400
121199 CZUL MONTREAL FIR
CZUL DAH IS AMENDED AS FLW:
OTTAWA TCA IS RECLASSIFIED CLASS C AIRSPACE
1209151000 TIL 1209162359
Are the RCMP afraid of the owners / operators of light aircraft? Their actions suggest so. Somehow they concluded that a banner towing light aircraft was a safety risk for Government Officials. The banner towing aircraft was of course certified by Transport Canada as safe to conduct such operations, as was the pilot. It never enter restricted airspace over our Parliament nor Rideau Hall. It appears to have followed all appropriate Canadian Air Regulations and committed no other infractions. Still the RCMP requested the pilot land the aircraft at the near by Rockcliffe Airport because they considered it a security risk. The RCMP should get off their “high horses” and into this century.
Surely, the many cars, trucks, busses, bikes, etc. that pass the Prime Minister’s residence, the Governor General’s Residence and Parliament Hill are significantly more of a risk than light aircraft. It is unfortunate when false perceptions dictate security risks to the RCMP. Their actions should be based in facts not misperceptions.
By Kathleen Van Benthem
The ACE Lab at Carleton University is looking for participants for a study to explore cognition and general aviation.
If you are:
Please contact one of us to learn more and/or to arrange a time to participate in the study.
The study session is approximately four hours and takes place at Carleton University.
Participation is completely voluntary. You will not be compensated monetarily or otherwise for participating in this study but parking costs will be paid by the study.
The crash of a light aircraft is never a good thing, but some crashes are worse than others and this one seems to be in that category.
On 4 August 2012 Neil Herland tweeted about the crash of a Zenair CH601XL near Carp Airport and provided some pictures:
The 601 looks pretty badly damaged, but the good news is that reportedly the pilot survived, although there is no information provided about injuries. The crash looks serious enough that injuries would have been likely.
The bad news is that the aircraft was unregistered and thus also presumably uninsured.
Herland reports the aircraft carried the US registration N59PA and a check of Airliners.net confirms that this is the same plane. Airliners.net also notes that the aircraft was imported to Canada in 2011.
A quick check of the FAA aircraft registry shows that the Zenair was stricken from the US registry on 27 July 2011, more than a year before the accident. Running the serial number through the Canadian Civil Aircraft Register shows it wasn't registered here, of course, since it still had its US registration numbers painted on it.
So since it was in Canada over a year there are lots more questions that hopefully Transport Canada and the Transportation Safety Board will ask, such as whether it had a current annual inspection? Hopefully it will be investigated, as it wasn't listed in the CADORS.
Why do people do this sort of thing?
In what is becoming an increasingly frequent story yet another US aircraft manufacturer has been sold to a Chinese company. This time it is kit maker Glasair Aircraft, who build the Glasair and Glastar series of kit planes in Arlington, Washington, that has been sold.
The buyer is a private Chinese company, Jilin Hanxing Group, who have formed a new company to operate Glasair, Glasair Aviation USA LLC.
The new owners say that they plan to certify the Glastar Sportsman design and retain all production and jobs in the USA. Of note a certified version of the Glastar was previously produced for a short time in Canada as the Symphony SA-160.
So here is how the foreign ownership list now looks:
I wonder who will be next.
by Gini Green, Founder, Pilots N Paws Canada
Pilots N Paws Canada connect general aviation pilots with responsible Canadian rescue groups and shelters to help in the adoption process for animals at risk of being destroyed. Volunteer pilots under our program help move animals from areas they are threatened, to areas that their chances of adoption are increased, thereby reducing the number of healthy animals killed every year because no-one could or would care for them.
Our mandate is to only work within Canada with Canadian pilots and only work with responsible Canadian rescues and shelters.
Pilots N Paws has been an extremely successful program in the US and we hope our own Canadian organization will be equally successful but we need your help to get the word out to general aviation pilots. Could you please consider circulating our flyer which is attached or posting our press release to your website?
If anyone has any questions, please send them my way! I know there are a lot of questions regarding the tax benefits available for pilots flying with us.
In what has become the repeat of a very familiar story, another financially ailing US aerospace company has been bought out by Chinese interests.
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (HBC) was a new company put together in 2006 from the old Raytheon Aircraft, purchased for US$3.3B by Onex Partners and GS Capital Partners, part of Goldman Sachs. That was all well and good, but the owners insisted that the company pay for its own purchase, which meant it was carrying US$500,000 a day in interest payments. It was just staying afloat when the 2008 recession hit and bizjet orders dried up. Anyone who thought a company with that kind of debt could survive the recession wasn't paying attention.
The company hired a new CEO, turnaround specialist Steve Miller, who planned to keep it out of bankruptcy, but on 3 May 2012, it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy anyway. Despite attempts to restructure the huge debt burden of more than US$2.14B (the last count, as of September 2011), it seems that it was either going to be sold or cease to exist. The final result was that Superior Aviation Beijing of The People's Republic of China made the best offer for US$1.79B. The deal does not include Hawker Beechcraft Defense Co., the subsidiary that builds two military aircraft, the T-6 trainer and the derivative AT-6 light attack aircraft. That exclusion was most likely to avoid any hold-ups in US government approval of the sale.
Superior Aviation Beijing and HBC now have 45 days to put the details together, but it is probably close to a done deal, putting HBC on the same list as a growing number of US aerospace companies that have been recently sold to foreign interests:
As I have noted before while selling out the whole US aerospace industry to foreigners may not be seen as a good thing, when these companies all needed domestic financial help none was forthcoming. This has meant that each had a choice between the company ceasing to exist or being bought out by middle eastern or far eastern interests.
The bottom line is that if Americans are really worried about this issue then they would put up the money and buy these companies themselves. In the capitalist system the market sorts these things out and if Americans don't want their domestic aerospace industry then apparently other people do.
Transport Canada announced today that they will require terrain awareness and warning systems (TAWS) to be installed in all private turbine-powered and commercial airplanes with six or more passenger seats.
The Honourable Denis Lebel, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, today announced new regulations to improve aviation safety in Canada. The new regulations require private turbine-powered and commercial airplanes with six or more passenger seats to be equipped with an alert system known as the “terrain awareness and warning system” (TAWS).
"While Canada has one of the safest aviation systems in the world, we are committed to the continuous improvement of aviation safety," said Minister Lebel. “Terrain awareness and warning systems will help save lives."
The system provides acoustic and visual alerts to flight crews when the path of their aircraft is likely to collide with terrain, water or obstacles — a situation that can happen when visibility is low or the weather is poor. This gives the flight crew enough time to take evasive action.
The new regulations will also significantly increase safety for small aircraft, which fly into remote wilderness or mountainous areas where the danger of flying into terrain is highest.
Under the new regulations, operators will have two years to equip their airplanes with TAWS.
The regulations comply with the International Civil Aviation Organization’s standards and bring Canadian regulations closer to those of other aviation authorities, including the United States and European Union. Canada’s Transportation Safety Board also recommends the wider use of TAWS to help pilots assess their proximity to terrain.
