Download
1 / 9
90 likes | 254 Vues
NPA-OPS 39 JAR-OPS 1 Omnibus CRD OPSG Items. Capt. Claude Godel OST 05-3. SUBPART D Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.243 Operations in areas with specific specified navigation performance requirements Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.398 Use of Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS). The OPSG items.
E N D
NPA-OPS 39 JAR-OPS 1 Omnibus CRD OPSG Items Capt. Claude Godel OST 05-3
SUBPART D Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.243 Operations in areas with specific specified navigation performance requirements Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.398 Use of Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) The OPSG items
016 ERA An operator shall ensure that………. …… or on routes where navigation performance requirements have been specified, is certified according to these requirements and, if required (specified), it has been operationally approved………. Inappropriate use of the word “specified” – also repetitive use of the same word. To read more easily and also to be more accurate (op approval is either required or not) the use of “required” is suggested. Accepted Editorial Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.243 One single comment from ERA
The comments received on JAR-OPS 1.398 Use of ACAS in parts proved difficult to address. The comments from Mr T Sindall, UK could not be fully addressed within the time available at the meeting. Comments: 002 T.Sindall, UK “ICAO expects States to publish the guidance … There should be no need to amend any of the PANS-OPS text except to align non-critical terminology with that used by the State (in this case, through JAR-OPS 1). “ OPSG Answer PA (Partially Accepted) The group took account of the most important parts of this comment. The rule has been amended accordingly. Many of the other comments are believed to be appropriate to Section 2 material and are already detailed in TGL 11 recently updated to comply with the last ICAO changes. Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.398OPS (ACAS)
Comments: 033 DGAC France (1) “The « Follow the RA » philosophy is based on a strong recommendation not a rule requirement“. The RA indicates the action but it’s not a requirement (due to responsibility issues). OPSG Answer PA “Action required by the ACAS” replaced by “indicated by the ACAS”. 033 DGAC France (2) “As a minimum there should be some explanations as to why the proposal does not include all the PANS-OPS recommendations following an RA (notification to ATC, compliance with modified RA, return to ATC instruction).” OPSG Answer PA Two items (notification to ATC, return to ATC instruction) have been added to the rule (they were also requested by T. Sindall) Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.398OPS (ACAS)
Comments: 005 UK CAAA “It would be appropriate to include the following two Notes…” OPSG Answer D (Declined) JAR-11 does not allow notes in section one material. These notes are appropriate for TGL and are already included. 017 ERA “The action required by this paragraph shall… (iii) Be at least the minimum possible to comply with the RA. As the wording reads at the moment it instructs the pilot to only take the minimum action, which is not the only acceptable response. OPSG Answer D There are problems with pilots over reacting to RA which can cause additional hazards or conflicts with other aircraft. The text is chosen to take this into account Amendment to JAR-OPS 1.398OPS (ACAS)
