FAA Accuses British Airways of Recklessness

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

James Robinson wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:

Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the first from LAX
to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning engine was replaced.

the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines' recently i.e. the SIN-LHR
sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.


Graham

Pooh Bear
:


James Robinson wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:

Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the
first from LAX to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning
engine was replaced.

the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines'
recently i.e. the SIN-LHR sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.

OooW Did you put it in yur planespotter log?

"Today I seen a Boeing 747, City of Bishop's Dorking, flying on three
engines. I don't know what sort of engines they wuz, but they made loads of
noise. Airplane had a real pretty pattern on the tail of some primitive
country's primitive artwork. We was flying some nice english people over to
this primitive country to show 'em how to wazzit.



Bertie

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

"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

JL Grasso :

On 10 Mar 2005 19:26:06 -0600, Bertie the Bunyip XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX
wrote:

Pooh Bear
:


James Robinson wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:

Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the
first from LAX to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning
engine was replaced.

the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines'
recently i.e. the SIN-LHR sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.

OooW Did you put it in yur planespotter log?

"Today I seen a Boeing 747, City of Bishop's Dorking, flying on three
engines. I don't know what sort of engines they wuz, but they made
loads of noise. Airplane had a real pretty pattern on the tail of some
primitive country's primitive artwork. We was flying some nice english
people over to this primitive country to show 'em how to wazzit.

Bwahaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Keyboard!



Thenkew. I should realy be on the stage. I coudl be the next Bob Denver.


Bertie

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

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

JL Grasso :


On 10 Mar 2005 19:26:06 -0600, Bertie the Bunyip XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX
wrote:


Pooh Bear
:


James Robinson wrote:


Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:


Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the
first from LAX to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning
engine was replaced.


the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines'
recently i.e. the SIN-LHR sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.

OooW Did you put it in yur planespotter log?

"Today I seen a Boeing 747, City of Bishop's Dorking, flying on three
engines. I don't know what sort of engines they wuz, but they made
loads of noise. Airplane had a real pretty pattern on the tail of some
primitive country's primitive artwork. We was flying some nice english
people over to this primitive country to show 'em how to wazzit.

Bwahaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Keyboard!




Thenkew. I should realy be on the stage. I coudl be the next Bob Denver.

Sure, Maynard.

I gotta kill that boy. I just gotta.

Rich Ahrens :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

JL Grasso :


On 10 Mar 2005 19:26:06 -0600, Bertie the Bunyip XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX
wrote:


Pooh Bear
:


James Robinson wrote:


Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:


Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the
first from LAX to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning
engine was replaced.


the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines'
recently i.e. the SIN-LHR sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.

OooW Did you put it in yur planespotter log?

"Today I seen a Boeing 747, City of Bishop's Dorking, flying on
three engines. I don't know what sort of engines they wuz, but they
made loads of noise. Airplane had a real pretty pattern on the tail
of some primitive country's primitive artwork. We was flying some
nice english people over to this primitive country to show 'em how
to wazzit.

Bwahaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Keyboard!




Thenkew. I should realy be on the stage. I coudl be the next Bob
Denver.

Sure, Maynard.

I gotta kill that boy. I just gotta.

Tuesday Weld, now THERE isan ingenue.



Bertie

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

"Bertie the Bunyip" XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX wrote in message
6.21...
JL Grasso :

On 10 Mar 2005 19:26:06 -0600, Bertie the Bunyip XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX
wrote:

Pooh Bear
:


James Robinson wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:

Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the
first from LAX to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning
engine was replaced.

the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines'
recently i.e. the SIN-LHR sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.

OooW Did you put it in yur planespotter log?

"Today I seen a Boeing 747, City of Bishop's Dorking, flying on three
engines. I don't know what sort of engines they wuz, but they made
loads of noise. Airplane had a real pretty pattern on the tail of some
primitive country's primitive artwork. We was flying some nice english
people over to this primitive country to show 'em how to wazzit.

Bwahaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Keyboard!



Thenkew. I should realy be on the stage. I coudl be the next Bob Denver.


Bertie

Who knows, keep this up & you may one day be Hosting The Oscar
Presentations". Talk about blowing your anynomous act..
Ralph Nesbitt
Professional FD/CFR/ARFF Type
Posting From ADA

"Ralph Nesbitt"
. com:


"Bertie the Bunyip" XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX wrote in message
6.21...
JL Grasso :

On 10 Mar 2005 19:26:06 -0600, Bertie the Bunyip XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX
wrote:

Pooh Bear
:


James Robinson wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

khobar wrote:

Actually the same plane made two flights with 3 engines - the
first from LAX to MAN,

Yup. Then it proceeded less pax to LHR. Where the malfunctioning
engine was replaced.

the second

Third actually. Second with pax though.

Fifth, to be accurate. It flew MAN-LHR-SIN-MEL-SIN-LHR

I was simply referring to the 'third time it flew on 3 engines'
recently i.e. the SIN-LHR sector.

The former 2 being LAX-MAN and MAN-LHR.

OooW Did you put it in yur planespotter log?

"Today I seen a Boeing 747, City of Bishop's Dorking, flying on three
engines. I don't know what sort of engines they wuz, but they made
loads of noise. Airplane had a real pretty pattern on the tail of some
primitive country's primitive artwork. We was flying some nice english
people over to this primitive country to show 'em how to wazzit.

Bwahaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Keyboard!



Thenkew. I should realy be on the stage. I coudl be the next Bob Denver.


Bertie

Who knows, keep this up & you may one day be Hosting The Oscar
Presentations". Talk about blowing your anynomous act..


Sidestepping the obvious, I could pull it off!

Doh!


Bertie

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