V-Flyer

Basically my queries are based around aviation standards and laws.

Here goes.

Is it contrary to aviation law?

1. for crew members to be UN secured in their seats and walking around the cabin during takeoff?

2. To allow passengers in the cockpit mid flight?

3. For crew to operate a flight originating in the UK whose English language skills are insufficient to carry out a pre flight safety briefing?

4. To not provide any aircraft safety cards onboard a commercial flight originating within U.K?

5. For aircraft seats to be known as being faulty, (having inoperative seatbelts and be not fully secured to the aircraft floor but still seat passengers in them?

6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

Thanks in advance for any helpful input.

Jerseyboy

Sounds just like flying on a RAF Hercules!

Sounds just like flying on a RAF Hercules!

Originally posted by woggledog
Sounds just like flying on a RAF Hercules!

I think I would rather fly in the hercules than get on a Cairo Aviation aircraft.

Originally posted by woggledog
Sounds just like flying on a RAF Hercules!

I think I would rather fly in the hercules than get on a Cairo Aviation aircraft.

Originally posted by jerseyboy
Basically my queries are based around aviation standards and laws.

Here goes.

Is it contrary to aviation law?

1. for crew members to be UN secured in their seats and walking around the cabin during takeoff?
2. To allow passengers in the cockpit mid flight?

3. For crew to operate a flight originating in the UK whose English language skills are insufficient to carry out a pre flight safety briefing?

4. To not provide any aircraft safety cards onboard a commercial flight originating within U.K?

5. For aircraft seats to be known as being faulty, (having inoperative seatbelts and be not fully secured to the aircraft floor but still seat passengers in them?

6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

Thanks in advance for any helpful input.

Jerseyboy

1.no unless it is to deal with an emergency
2.def no no! according to uk law
3.unsure of this as i wasn on a nouvelair flight dep from uk and none of the crew had any good english skills
4.cards should be given to all pax
5.depends on airline but generally no
6.not sure as my husband was on a logainair flight last week and interior panelling came off on take off![:0]
7.never heard of them

Originally posted by jerseyboy
Basically my queries are based around aviation standards and laws.

Here goes.

Is it contrary to aviation law?

1. for crew members to be UN secured in their seats and walking around the cabin during takeoff?
2. To allow passengers in the cockpit mid flight?

3. For crew to operate a flight originating in the UK whose English language skills are insufficient to carry out a pre flight safety briefing?

4. To not provide any aircraft safety cards onboard a commercial flight originating within U.K?

5. For aircraft seats to be known as being faulty, (having inoperative seatbelts and be not fully secured to the aircraft floor but still seat passengers in them?

6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

Thanks in advance for any helpful input.

Jerseyboy

1.no unless it is to deal with an emergency
2.def no no! according to uk law
3.unsure of this as i wasn on a nouvelair flight dep from uk and none of the crew had any good english skills
4.cards should be given to all pax
5.depends on airline but generally no
6.not sure as my husband was on a logainair flight last week and interior panelling came off on take off![:0]
7.never heard of them

Originally posted by jerseyboy
6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

Surely if this were true, then half of the US airlines' planes would be grounded [}:)].

Originally posted by jerseyboy
6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

Surely if this were true, then half of the US airlines' planes would be grounded [}:)].

I would not trust my good self to a Tupolev - certainly not one from Cairo!

As to slinky's comment - too true.
Not long since I had the door I was leaning on pop open every time on take-off and landing!
(Known fault with the Otter!)
And I was sat up-front (right-hand seat!)

I would not trust my good self to a Tupolev - certainly not one from Cairo!

As to slinky's comment - too true.
Not long since I had the door I was leaning on pop open every time on take-off and landing!
(Known fault with the Otter!)
And I was sat up-front (right-hand seat!)

I'm guessing you had a bit of a rough trip.

I suggest you give the CAA a call while the details are still in your mind. The Safety Regulation Group can then investigate.

CAA contacts

I'm guessing you had a bit of a rough trip.

I suggest you give the CAA a call while the details are still in your mind. The Safety Regulation Group can then investigate.

CAA contacts

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
I'm guessing you had a bit of a rough trip.

I suggest you give the CAA a call while the details are still in your mind. The Safety Regulation Group can then investigate.

CAA contacts

H
Hi Darren.

Actually I was not lucky enough to be on this flight, by 5 members of my family were.

I am preparing a letter on behalf of the family for the CAA, ABTA and Thomas cook.

I just wanted to check were they stood on the concerns raised as I am pretty sure much of it is contrary to aviation law but that's just my opinion and I just wanted to get some input from others.
I would like to add about the loose panel it was actually totally dethatched on boarding and was freely floating around in the floor area of the seats occupied by my family. There was a hole of approximately 4 ft by 1ft of insulation and the like open and unprotected as a result of the unattached panel. I know that it looked bad but probably would not affect the aircraft but the unattached panel freely moving around the cabin would surely be a risk.

Anyway thanks everyone so far for your input.

Jerseyboy

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
I'm guessing you had a bit of a rough trip.

I suggest you give the CAA a call while the details are still in your mind. The Safety Regulation Group can then investigate.

CAA contacts

H
Hi Darren.

Actually I was not lucky enough to be on this flight, by 5 members of my family were.

I am preparing a letter on behalf of the family for the CAA, ABTA and Thomas cook.

I just wanted to check were they stood on the concerns raised as I am pretty sure much of it is contrary to aviation law but thats just my opinion and I just wanted to get some input from others.
I would like to add about the loose panel it was actually totally dethatched on boarding and was freely floating around in the floor area of the seats occupied by my family. There was a hole of approximately 4 ft by 1ft of insulation and the like open and unprotected as a result of the unattached panel. I know that it looked bad but probably would not affect the aircraft but the unattached panel freely moving around the cabin would surely be a risk.

Anyway thanks everyone so far for your input.

Jerseyboy

My experience of Egyptian carriers has been much the same. I always assumed that they did not have the same regulations? ABTA is a British association and while they should have a stance in which airlines UK holiday companies like Thomas Cook use as carriers I would have thought that an Egyptian airline need not be compliant with British law?

Would be interesting to see what response you get.

Thanks,
Sarah

My experience of Egyptian carriers has been much the same. I always assumed that they did not have the same regulations? ABTA is a British association and while they should have a stance in which airlines UK holiday companies like Thomas Cook use as carriers I would have thought that an Egyptian airline need not be compliant with British law?

Would be interesting to see what response you get.

Thanks,
Sarah

Hi Sarah

Thanks for your input, The letter to ABTA is concerning the package holiday and services covered by Thomas Cook as the tour operator. Whilst a menton of the aircraft charted by thomas cook will be made it will however not be the main source of complaint in the letter.

I will let you know what happenes.

Cheers
Jerseyboy

Originally posted by HighFlyer
My experience of Egyptian carriers has been much the same. I always assumed that they did not have the same regulations? ABTA is a British association and while they should have a stance in which airlines UK holiday companies like Thomas Cook use as carriers I would have thought that an Egyptian airline need not be compliant with British law?

Would be interesting to see what response you get.

Thanks,
Sarah

Hi Sarah

Thanks for your input, The letter to ABTA is concerning the package holiday and services covered by Thomas Cook as the tour operator. Whilst a menton of the aircraft charted by thomas cook will be made it will however not be the main source of complaint in the letter.

I will let you know what happenes.

Cheers
Jerseyboy

Originally posted by HighFlyer
My experience of Egyptian carriers has been much the same. I always assumed that they did not have the same regulations? ABTA is a British association and while they should have a stance in which airlines UK holiday companies like Thomas Cook use as carriers I would have thought that an Egyptian airline need not be compliant with British law?

Would be interesting to see what response you get.

Thanks,
Sarah

Originally posted by jerseyboy
7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

A little searching revealed this which suggested Cairo Air is a resurrection of 'Flash' which was well known for safety infringements and had one of their aircraft crash into the Red Sea in 2004.

FM

Originally posted by jerseyboy
7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

A little searching revealed this which suggested Cairo Air is a resurrection of 'Flash' which was well known for safety infringements and had one of their aircraft crash into the Red Sea in 2004.

FM

Originally posted by HighFlyer
My experience of Egyptian carriers has been much the same. I always assumed that they did not have the same regulations? ABTA is a British association and while they should have a stance in which airlines UK holiday companies like Thomas Cook use as carriers I would have thought that an Egyptian airline need not be compliant with British law?

Would be interesting to see what response you get.

Thanks,
Sarah

Your gracious lady Grace,

This sounds like a mission for His Grace. We need His unique insight into the experience of flying upon such a carrier. Please clear His calendar for next week and I shall organise tickets.

GJ

Originally posted by HighFlyer
My experience of Egyptian carriers has been much the same. I always assumed that they did not have the same regulations? ABTA is a British association and while they should have a stance in which airlines UK holiday companies like Thomas Cook use as carriers I would have thought that an Egyptian airline need not be compliant with British law?

Would be interesting to see what response you get.

Thanks,
Sarah

Your gracious lady Grace,

This sounds like a mission for His Grace. We need His unique insight into the experience of flying upon such a carrier. Please clear His calendar for next week and I shall organise tickets.

GJ

Originally posted by jerseyboy


1. for crew members to be UN secured in their seats and walking around the cabin during takeoff?

2. To allow passengers in the cockpit mid flight?

3. For crew to operate a flight originating in the UK whose English language skills are insufficient to carry out a pre flight safety briefing?

4. To not provide any aircraft safety cards onboard a commercial flight originating within U.K?

5. For aircraft seats to be known as being faulty, (having inoperative seatbelts and be not fully secured to the aircraft floor but still seat passengers in them?

6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

1, 2, and 5 all go against aviation law.

3 and 4 can be combined. All pax must be informed of the safety features and emergency procedures. The reason cards are usually provided is to break the language barrier. Pre-recorded safety instructions in multiple languages are also fine.

6 is a no only if the missing panel will be hazardous to pax. There is no law forcing airlines to make their aircraft look pretty, but if there are wires exposed...

7 is a definite no, and will always be a no [:D]

Originally posted by jerseyboy


1. for crew members to be UN secured in their seats and walking around the cabin during takeoff?

2. To allow passengers in the cockpit mid flight?

3. For crew to operate a flight originating in the UK whose English language skills are insufficient to carry out a pre flight safety briefing?

4. To not provide any aircraft safety cards onboard a commercial flight originating within U.K?

5. For aircraft seats to be known as being faulty, (having inoperative seatbelts and be not fully secured to the aircraft floor but still seat passengers in them?

6. To operate an aircraft whilst knowing that panelling is unattached to the interior of the aircraft and?

7. Has anyone ever flown Cairo Aviation?

1, 2, and 5 all go against aviation law.

3 and 4 can be combined. All pax must be informed of the safety features and emergency procedures. The reason cards are usually provided is to break the language barrier. Pre-recorded safety instructions in multiple languages are also fine.

6 is a no only if the missing panel will be hazardous to pax. There is no law forcing airlines to make their aircraft look pretty, but if there are wires exposed...

7 is a definite no, and will always be a no [:D]