Planenutz From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1282 posts, RR: 10 Posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3657 times:
Today the FAA downgraded both Poland and Bulgaria to Category 2 status, meaning that they don't meet aviation safety standards as set forth by the ICAO.
This will undoubtedly be an embarrasment for LOT, which is trying to join Star Alliance and codeshare with United. Until Poland emerges from Cat. 2, LOT will be unable to deviate from surrent operational patterns (meaning no new routes or flights).
Interestingly, Cape Verde Islands, off the coat of Africa, had their status upgraded to Category 1.
Jaws707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3554 times:
Thats kind of interesting. I would never have guessed that would happen to Poland now, especially that they have a modern airport in Warsaw and it is currently undergoing an expansion. Also LOT has a pretty modern fleet.
Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3505 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3370 times:
Seems that guys who took that decision had no idea what's going on in Poland. Did they know where it is at all?
I wonder if there is any known explanation or reasons that influenced that decision? Acctually nothing happened in recent years apart from modernisation of airports and ATC stations so it really sounds ridiculous.
Ben From Switzerland, joined Aug 1999, 1391 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3339 times:
Uh.. that is absolutely ridiculous.
I havent heard of any Balkan Tu-154s being driven into buildings in downtown Sofia (or Warsaw) ... or Hemus Yak-40s crashing into the Black Sea because someone was too tight-fisted to replace the elevator jackscrew.
Anyway, what does it mean if these countries are 'downgraded' ?? Just that the US Navy is no longer allowed to send their personnel on aircraft registered LZ- or SP- ?? So cry me a river....
Airzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1187 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3330 times:
Before you guys start jumping to conclusions about why the US made this determination. I pulled this directly off the FAA website in two minutes. Read the first two paragraphs closely. I think that answers all your questions.
The assessments are not an indication
of whether individual foreign carriers
are safe or unsafe. Rather, they
determine whether or not foreign civil
aviation authorities (CAA) are meeting
ICAO safety standards, not FAA
Countries with air carriers that fly to
the United States must adhere to the
safety standards of ICAO, the United
Nations’ technical agency for aviation
that establishes international
standards and recommended practices for
aircraft operations and maintenance.
The FAA, with the cooperation of the
host civil aviation authority, assesses
countries with airlines that have
operating rights to or from the United
States or have requested such rights.
Specifically, the FAA determines
whether a foreign civil aviation
authority has an adequate
infrastructure for international
aviation safety oversight as defined by
standards. The basic elements that the
FAA considers necessary include: 1)
enabling the appropriate government
office to adopt regulations necessary
to meet the
minimum requirements of ICAO; 2)
current regulations that meet those
requirements; 3) procedures to carry
out the regulatory requirements; 4) air
carrier certification, routine
inspection, and surveillance programs,
and 5) organizational and personnel
resources to implement and enforce the
The FAA has established two ratings for
the status of these civil aviation
authorities at the time of the
assessment: (1) does comply with ICAO
standards, (2) does not comply with
· Category 1. Does Comply with
ICAO Standards: A civil aviation
authority has been assessed by FAA
inspectors and has been found to
license and oversee air carriers in
accordance with ICAO aviation safety
· Category 2. Does Not Comply
with ICAO Standards: The FAA assessed
this country’s CAA and determined that
it does not provide safety oversight of
its air carrier operators in accordance
with the minimum safety oversight
standards established by ICAO. This
rating is applied if one or more of the
following deficiencies are identified:
(1) the country lacks laws or
regulations necessary to support the
certification and oversight of air
carriers in accordance with minimum
international standards; (2) the CAA
lacks the technical expertise,
resources, and organization to license
or oversee air carrier operations; (3)
the CAA does not have adequately
trained and qualified technical
personnel; (4) the CAA does not provide
adequate inspector guidance to ensure
enforcement of, and compliance with,
minimum international standards; and
(5) the CAA has insufficient
documentation and records of
certification and inadequate continuing
oversight and surveillance of air
carrier operations. This category
consists of two groups of countries.
· One group is countries that
have air carriers with existing
operations to the United States at the
time of the assessment. While in
Category 2 status, carriers from these
countries will be permitted to continue
operations at current levels under
heightened FAA surveillance. Expansion
or changes in services to the United
States by such carriers are not
permitted while in Category 2, although
new services will be permitted if
operated using aircraft wet-leased from
a duly authorized and properly
supervised U.S. carrier or a foreign
air carrier from a Category 1 country
that is authorized to serve the United
States using its own aircraft.
· The second group is countries
that do not have air carriers with
existing operations to the United
States at the time of the assessment.
Carriers from these countries will not
be permitted to commence service to the
United States while in Category 2
status, although they may conduct
services if operated using aircraft wet-
leased from a duly authorized and
properly supervised U.S. carrier or a
foreign air carrier from a Category 1
country that is authorized to serve the
United States with its own aircraft. No
other difference is made between these
two groups of countries while in
The FAA has assisted civil aviation
authorities with less than acceptable
ratings by providing technical
expertise, assistance with inspections,
and training courses. The FAA hopes to
work with other countries through ICAO
to address non-compliance with
international aviation safety oversight
The FAA will continue to release the
results of safety assessments to the
public as they are completed. First
announced in September 1994, the
ratings are part of an ongoing FAA
program to assess all countries with
air carriers that operate to the United
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3278 times:
Is LOT planning to buy Airbus or Boeing...?
That happened recently to Argentina... Category 2...
FYI - if we buy Boeing - we may be considered to go back to Category 1...
If we buy Airbus, we might stay for awhile as Category 2...
Politics... Got it...?
Our minister Lavagna deals with this matter with the US right now...
If you dont believe the dirty side of the business, as I am a former pilot from Panam and American-born, I represent my flight operations department with our dealings with FAA and know inspectors assigned to our case personally.
This is what they told me, "off the record", over a beer, not in their office...
Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3505 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3244 times:
Actually there is signed agreement between the countries that guaranteed LOT rights to open new routes to the USA. This would be violated in this case - however I don't think LOT plans any new routes at this time. Possibly KIAD in a year or two as a result of being part of STAR.
B747Skipper - our 767s are in need of replacement...
ARGinMIA From Argentina, joined Nov 2001, 487 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3121 times:
B747Skipper, how are things going to go back to CAT1? is lavagna really talking about that? I guess that since we came to an agreement with IMF they will take us back to cat1? hehe who knows.. maybe LAFSA is going to buy Boeing.. I really dont think that such a small order from Aerolineas would mean going to Cat2...
JMChladek From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 331 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3060 times:
Since when are they so concerned about standards set by an organization not based in the US?
What do they know about what's going on in the Polish CAA?
They probably know a lot more about Polish CAA then you think or else the Cat 2 downgrade probably wouldn't have occurred. As for their concern, there are implications if an aircraft registered by a foreign CAA crashes on US soil and concerns involving U.S. citizens traveling on aircraft under different CAA registry. The FAA is essentially an inspector in this case and if something like a crash did occur because another country's CAA didn't properly police the airline within their jurisdiction, then its a big legal mess. Granted we are talking about very slim chances of problems here. But, they are concerns and the ICAO is basically the rulebook that EVERYONE has to follow. Besides, I have a feeling that the FAA isn't the only inspector, but other CAAs might do similar checks on CAAs that oversee airlines that send flights within their borders.
As for the Boeing vs Airbus argument, if I read this right that won't have any bearing since its the CAA that needs to shape up, not the airline necessarily.
Bobrayner From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2003, 2227 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2657 times:
I'd rather not speculate much yet!
Yes, it would be tempting to say that the FAA is making another political move, but I thought Poland was earning brownie points recently... so we're back to Occam's Razor. They're probably just doing their job. When/where can we learn more? I didn't see much on the FAA site, no more detail in any press releases...
SPLOBKrakow From Poland, joined Sep 2003, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2517 times:
This has to have been a political moveby the US . Over the past 15 years Lot has been upgrading it's aircraf, maintnace facilities and airports. Their safety regulations are also very strict. The aircraft that LOT operates are still fairly new and there is no need to replace them. Another important fact is that Polish pilots are very well trained. As you can read on LOT's website, all of their pilots have a very wide range of experiance, and they have been recodnized for their skills.
I have flown with LOT on numerous occasions, on both international and domestic flights. This downgrade will definatelly change my opinion of LOT and Polish Aviation rules and regulation.
ILoveORD From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 220 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2487 times:
Wow, this is kind of saddening AND surprising. I've flown to Poland (never directly from the U.S. though) and around Europe on LOT from various European cities in the past and I always that the airports and aircraft looked fairly well-maintained and modern. Furthermore, it seems hard to believe that UAL and Star Alliance could have overlooked something like this if it was known since January? Does anyone how long Poland will be listed as Cat. 2?
[Edited 2003-09-14 23:23:03]
Backhanding the left into submission, one activist judge at a time.