Another FTer brought up this NTSB report as part of the incident in SFO.
https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/h...docketID=61112
There are multiple interviews that are documented and while I would just copy and paste relevant sections, unfortunately it would appear that it would be far too lengthy. What concerns me the most is that while AC is more profitable and healthy as ever, there are some serious safety concerns that are being raised by pilots.
This is taken from page 31, and is one of several interviews and several pilots who have voiced serious concerns about safety. It seems Calin's hyper obsession with maximizing profit (not that there is anything wrong with that) is pushing AC closer and closer to the edge of a fatality.
"Working for Air Canada was the best aviation job in the country. When asked about the safety culture, he stated the following. He was the fleet manager for the Embraer and in the last 10 years he feels that the company has a huge overemphasis on money and cost control. He had told management he needed help in his department but it didn’t really matter. The preoccupation with money has caused the flight ops staff to shrink significantly. There were known problems that were ignored because of money. When asked to provide a specific example, he recounted that in standards in 2000 there were 8 pilots and now there are 3 and there are more aircraft now. The flight operations management and support staff now don’t necessarily have a clear aviation background. Certain positions are being filled by first officers because they can be paid less. Also, technical programs were stifled because of money. They were either delayed or not implemented well. For example, the A320 GPS project has been ongoing for 10 years."
Here is another in regards to GPS on the A320:
"When asked if there are differences among Air Canada’s fleet of A320s, he thought that there was a fleet “mish mash” of Airbus airframes and there were SOP concerns across the board. He thought it was a real issue in terms of training. Training was done in specific type of Airbus aircraft, but there are lots of different types of equipment in the same type aircraft. He doesn’t feel that the company gives this issue its due. There are 3 different training manuals. The company training doesn’t adequately address or train these differences. The newer aircraft have GPS, this year they started putting GPS in older aircraft.
When asked if having no GPS increases workload for pilots, he said yes. The airline has all sorts of restrictions for non-precision approaches because some aircraft don’t have GPS. Now they can’t fly some of these approaches anymore unless you have another way (e.g., DME) to measure position. But in day to day operations, there not much difference, other than doing GPS NAV accuracy checks in older aircraft. In newer aircraft, these systems are integrated.
The non-GPS aircraft are restricted to non-precision approaches. They also have to do accuracy checks. These take 15-30 seconds each. They’re not a big deal. They do these during takeoff, climbing through 1,000 feet, during cruise, prior to approach, or if nav accuracy is low.
DCA17IA148 – Air Canada Personnel Interview Summaries Page 31 of 72
When asked, he has seen minor map shifts that were not significant. Anecdote: when flying ILS into Victoria BC on non-GPS aircraft, and into Edmonton, when go by FAF, all of a sudden, it would say that you are left of course and out of fuel. The FMCG manufacturer said that “
your FMCG’S are so old, that we’re not even going to try to fix it”. So now there is a note in their Jeppesen chart advising of this phenomenon."
(bolding is mine)
I'm not so sure I want to fly Air Canada anymore, or at least not so sure I should feel as safe as I used to.