Van Air Europe suspended

Del2005

Just read about this.

https://news.aviation-safety.net/2017/03/01/u-k-caa-suspends-flights-van-air-europe-safety-grounds/

Why is the airline in trouble for flying in dangerous conditions and not the ATC for letting it? If it wasn't safe to fly why would they be given permission to take off? We all know that companies will try to always make money and a sitting plane isn't, but the regulators are there to protect the public.


https://www.aviationwales.com/caa-suspends-van-air-europe-czech-authorities-investigate/

LXFlyer

Well it has gone a stage further now.

Citywing, the virtual airline that chartered Van Air, have now gone into liquidation.

Eastern Airways is taking over the Anglesey-Cardiff route from Monday.

Foggy43

This is probably the best report to date
http://avherald.com/h?article=4a567f53&opt=0

And further to Citywing
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-39241378

martinsvi

ATC don't issue a "permission" to take off - they issue a clearance - and what that means is that they are happy that your progress is monitored, you are sequenced and seperated from other traffic. Assesing en route or destination weather is well beyond the scope of clearance. They can close the runway in certain circumstances, but really it is the captains decision whether to go or not to go. ATC don't know what different aircraft are capable of doing and they are not trained to make any assumptions/calls in place of flight crew

it is the operators job to make sure the operations are safe. Authorities will audit them from time to time whenever their operators certificate is due renewal or when there is doubt that operations are safe.. ATC are not part of this, they are not regulators, they are not auditors, their only job is to provide a traffic control service

Locker10a

martinsvi wrote: »

ATC don't issue a "permission" to take off - they issue a clearance - and what that means is that they are happy that your progress is monitored, you are sequenced and seperated from other traffic. Assesing en route or destination weather is well beyond the scope of clearance. They can close the runway in certain circumstances, but really it is the captains decision whether to go or not to go. ATC don't know what different aircraft are capable of doing and they are not trained to make any assumptions/calls in place of flight crew

it is the operators job to make sure the operations are safe. Authorities will audit them from time to time whenever their operators certificate is due renewal or when there is doubt that operations are safe.. ATC are not part of this, they are not regulators, they are not auditors, their only job is to provide a traffic control service

Absolutely, and further to the OPs comment about regulators keeping the public safe, yes they do that in a way, however it truly boils down to the "safety culture" of the airline.
Regulation only goes so far... and scenarios like this where there were various parties involved in this airlines operation loopholes can be overlooked and standards(or lack of) go unnoticed

Del2005

Locker10a wrote: »

Absolutely, and further to the OPs comment about regulators keeping the public safe, yes they do that in a way, however it truly boils down to the "safety culture" of the airline.
Regulation only goes so far... and scenarios like this where there were various parties involved in this airlines operation loopholes can be overlooked and standards(or lack of) go unnoticed

From the link posted by Foggy43 it appears that the only issue was that the flight was operating outside the wind limit for the airline but was still inside the aircraft's limit. I'm sure other airlines have had pilots operating outside company procedures have these had their licence suspended?

The British have suspended them because they said the Czech are investigating, but the Czech aren't investing.

arubex

Van Air are only 'suspended' in the UK, nothing has been done to their Czech-based AOC as apparently the UK CAA hasn't provided any information as to the alleged infraction.

Meanwhile Citywing appear to have tried valiantly to charter aircraft to keep flying services, but ultimately it was too expensive.

So it seems that small communities just have to do without secondary air links unless governments stump-up some subsidy. Certainly none of the established 'big' airlines have shown interest in trying to connect the cities Citywing served and the UK CAA has shown no flexibility in helping small airlines to start. Go big or go home, seems to be their mantra.

Locker10a

Del2005 wrote: »

Locker10a wrote: »

Absolutely, and further to the OPs comment about regulators keeping the public safe, yes they do that in a way, however it truly boils down to the "safety culture" of the airline.
Regulation only goes so far... and scenarios like this where there were various parties involved in this airlines operation loopholes can be overlooked and standards(or lack of) go unnoticed

From the link posted by Foggy43 it appears that the only issue was that the flight was operating outside the wind limit for the airline but was still inside the aircraft's limit. I'm sure other airlines have had pilots operating outside company procedures have these had their licence suspended?

The British have suspended them because they said the Czech are investigating, but the Czech aren't investing.

I was talking to a man who lives in the Isle of Man the other day, he used to use them allot, he said all their crews were East European and that also of the same people involved in the operation were the same folks running the Virtual airline Manx2 that had a fatal accident in Cork. They CAA were monitoring them closely.
The flight in question also landed below minimum fuel, rumour has it they ran out of fuel after landing and couldn't complete the taxi although this could be island gossip!

martinsvi

Locker10a wrote: »

he said all their crews were East European

so?

Locker10a wrote: »

The flight in question also landed below minimum fuel, rumour has it they ran out of fuel after landing and couldn't complete the taxi although this could be island gossip!

according to avherald:

The aircraft departed with 550 kg (trip fuel 453 kg plus 20 minutes of additional holding fuel plus final fuel reserve) (..) [when landing back at IOM] The aircraft still had 200 kg of fuel on board (above required final fuel reserve).

It is true, that these guys are pretty much Manx2 and it is true that CAA were looking at them closely.. however what's now happening is nothing short from a communication disaster and in my mind is not showing UK's CAA in the best light.. there's a complete communications breakdown between Czech CAA and UK, there's no clear reason why Van Air/Citywing was banned.. everyone is referring to an incident but there is not a single official mention to what the incident actually was.. weather diversion is not an incident. Sure as hell, the citywing's decision to pack their bags and flee is a clear indicator that they know what they did.. however for the CAA to not explain the situation at all is just bad form

Locker10a

martinsvi wrote: »

Locker10a wrote: »

he said all their crews were East European

so?

Locker10a wrote: »

The flight in question also landed below minimum fuel, rumour has it they ran out of fuel after landing and couldn't complete the taxi although this could be island gossip!

according to avherald:

The aircraft departed with 550 kg (trip fuel 453 kg plus 20 minutes of additional holding fuel plus final fuel reserve) (..) [when landing back at IOM] The aircraft still had 200 kg of fuel on board (above required final fuel reserve).

It is true, that these guys are pretty much Manx2 and it is true that CAA were looking at them closely.. however what's now happening is nothing short from a communication disaster and in my mind is not showing UK's CAA in the best light.. there's a complete communications breakdown between Czech CAA and UK, there's no clear reason why Van Air/Citywing was banned.. everyone is referring to an incident but there is not a single official mention to what the incident actually was.. weather diversion is not an incident. Sure as hell, the citywing's decision to pack their bags and flee is a clear indicator that they know what they did.. however for the CAA to not explain the situation at all is just bad form

Look I'm only relaying the information I gathered from a resident of the Isle of Man, and someone who frequently used them!!
The CAA obviously had their reason, and I understand they're not really under obligation to provide public accountability for their actions so there may be behind the scenes issues we won't hear about for months or years!

martinsvi

Locker10a wrote: »

Look I'm only relaying the information I gathered from a resident of the Isle of Man, and someone who frequently used them!!
The CAA obviously had their reason, and I understand they're not really under obligation to provide public accountability for their actions so there may be behind the scenes issues we won't hear about for months or years!

that's fine, I wasn't attacking you, just tried to separate one man's feelings from useful hints

the problem that I have with CAA UK is that they are saying Van Air is suspended because/as long CAA CZ are investigating, but CAA CZ have said clearly that they are not investigating anything because there's nothing to investigate/not their case.. It's not even about CAA UK hiding something, but about them making statements that are not true

john boye

Locker10a wrote: »

Look I'm only relaying the information I gathered from a resident of the Isle of Man, and someone who frequently used them!!

Surely to God the AV Herald would be a fair bit more reliable than local gossip?