135 duty times... again

[Nolife]

For unscheduled ops.

I've been told that you can exceed 14 hrs duty for circumstances beyond the control of the operator or flight crew, such as weather, cargo and pax late, ect. Looking at 135.267(d) I see no provision that would allow for this. All I see is an allowance for exceeding flight time in sections (c) & (e) of the part but (d) is pretty straight forward in that you must be able to show 10 hrs rest in the 24 hrs preceding the planned completion of the assignment. I interpret this to mean 14 hrs is written in stone and cannot be exceeded.

Any other opinions?

 

[dhc8fo]

§ 135.267 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: Unscheduled one- and two-pilot crews.

......

(e) When a flight crewmember has exceeded the daily flight time limitations in this section, because of circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), that flight crewmember must have a rest period before being assigned or accepting an assignment for flight time of at least—
(1) 11 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by not more than 30 minutes;
(2) 12 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by more than 30 minutes, but not more than 60 minutes; and
(3) 16 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by more than 60 minutes.

 

[Nolife]

§ 135.267 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: Unscheduled one- and two-pilot crews.

......

(e) When a flight crewmember has exceeded the daily flight time limitations in this section, because of circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), that flight crewmember must have a rest period before being assigned or accepting an assignment for flight time of at least—
(1) 11 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by not more than 30 minutes;
(2) 12 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by more than 30 minutes, but not more than 60 minutes; and
(3) 16 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by more than 60 minutes.

What you posted allows going over flight time, not duty time. Still haven't found anything that allows for looking back the previous 24 hrs and not finding 10 hrs consecutive rest.

Any more opinions or interpretations are apprecited.

 

[dhc8fo]

oooops, sorry man. Read too fast.

I will have to do a little more digging to give you another answer, but I do know that pax/cargo late is not a valid reason to extend your duty time.

"Legal to start, legal to finish" is what I will find for you and that will cover things beyond company's control like weather or a mechanical issue.

 

[dhc8fo]

OK, here it is:135.263 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: All certificate holders

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.4.23&idno=14#PartTop(d) A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the planned flight time.

 

[Nolife]

OK, here it is:135.263 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: All certificate holders

(d) A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the planned flight time.

I see what your saying but even this reg only stipulates that under a certain set of circumstances it's ok to exceed flight time limits. It says nothing about exceeding duty time, that is not having 10 hrs rest in the previous 24 hrs.

I've heard of people taking cargo delays, pax delays, mx delays, and wx delays, which extend out duty time not flight time and I believe that is illegal according to 135.267(d). Just seeking to understanding if I'm reading it wrong.

 

[FlyinFife]

FWIW: when I took my checkride for my first 135 gig, I had to do it with the FAA. The inspector basically agreed with what you are asking: flight time can be exceeded, while duty time is a hard limit that cannot. I know this is only anecdotal, but hopefully it helps at least a little bit. Unfortunately, he didn't give me any reference for this (I only assume this is because the regs are supposed to be as clear as mud and easily understandable).

 

[avbug]

I will have to do a little more digging to give you another answer, but I do know that pax/cargo late is not a valid reason to extend your duty time.

Actually it is and can be a valid reason, but bear in mind that there isn't duty time prescribed. There is rest time prescribed. You do not have an excuse for overstepping the prescribed rest requirements.

In this case, an unscheduled crew (different than an unscheduled operation) has no prescribed duty day. Only prescribed rest; 10 hours in the preceeding 24 hours. There is no duty limitation. You are limited by rest, not duty, and you can't compromise the rest period requirements.

You don't have a 14 hour duty limitation. You have a 10 hour rest limitation. That only leaves 14 hours in which to perform your duties, but a duty period isn't spelled out; only rest. It's not the duty issues that jeopardize you; it's the rest.

 

[pilotyip]

legal to start legal to finish, unless you call fatique

 

[avbug]

The term legal to start, legal to finish gets used a lot, but misused even more.

If you were legal to start the day, you're not necessarily legal to finish; a lot can happen between start and finish. Exceeding your rest intervals is one of them, as is exceeding your flight times.

More than anything else, there's that big, fat, hairy 14 CFR 91.13 hanging over you, and it's invoked in every legal interpretation on the subject, as well as being at the core of the regulation itself.

 

[oops!]

people are not an unexpected delay... You know before you close that door for your last flight that your passengers are late and in turn so are you... weather can affect you while in flight but passengers made you late before the flight started.... PILOTYIP needs the FARs spelled out to him

 

[pilotyip]

Understand them well, it is spelled out very clearly

people are not an unexpected delay... You know before you close that door for your last flight that your passengers are late and in turn so are you... weather can affect you while in flight but passengers made you late before the flight started.... PILOTYIP needs the FARs spelled out to him

For you and avbug, if you feel you will be subject to a 91.13 and do not want to finish a legal trip, that is your option. If I leave YIP on a legal trip to YIP-EWR- SHV-MMHO-ELP, and take a three ground delay at ERW for wx, I am 100% legal to make that trip if it goes over 14 hrs duty.

 

[Nolife]

You don't have a 14 hour duty limitation. You have a 10 hour rest limitation. That only leaves 14 hours in which to perform your duties, but a duty period isn't spelled out; only rest. It's not the duty issues that jeopardize you; it's the rest.

Correct... the regulation implies a 14 hr duty day which is what we're talking about.

I'm sent to pick up freight in Mexico and transport it to BFE. The trip is scheduled/planned to be completed well within 14 hrs thereby allowing me to show 10 hrs rest in the 24 hrs preceding the planned completion of the assignment. The freight ends up being late in Mexico and now I complete the assignment in 16 hrs. That, in my interpretation of 135.267(d), is illegal because I can't show 10 hrs rest in the 24 hrs prior to my completing the assignment.

Or does that fact that it was planned in good faith to be completed within the 14 hr duty allow for the extended time.

In the above example, as soon as the crew realizes that they will get too far away from rest should they bag the trip, or can they call freight delay and since it was originally planned to terminate within legal time can they continue?

 

[Nolife]

For you and avbug, if you feel you will be subject to a 91.13 and do not want to finish a legal trip, that is your option. If I leave YIP on a legal trip to YIP-EWR- SHV-MMHO-ELP, and take a three ground delay at ERW for wx, I am 100% legal to make that trip if it goes over 14 hrs duty.

YIP... that's exactly the example I'm looking for. Can you provide reference for why it's legal?

 

[dhc8fo]

YIP... that's exactly the example I'm looking for. Can you provide reference for why it's legal?

I can tell you from experience that in that situation we had to taxi back and change crews. Since we hadn't taken off, we exceeded our rest. Now if you took a delay IN FLIGHT (for say weather), that is acceptable because it would be unexpected.

 

[Way2Broke]

Man.... this is a beaten horse ain't it! It has to be one of the easiest regs in the book. Legal to start....Legal to finish. Cry about it all you want but the reg allows you to get beaten up pretty bad, if your fatigued call fatigued. Its that simple. If you don't like it go fly for a scheduled carrier. Whats that smell? Oh its the horse. Its been dead for years.

Bottom line is that the reg is simple, and if you fly fatigued its you that decided to break a reg. You might have to live with the consequences of your actions for doing so.

 

[ksu_aviator]

One of the key phrases that is being ignored is "beyond the control of the operator." The operator and flight crew are in control of whether or not the aircraft departs. Late pax/freight aside, if you know you will exceed your flight/duty time before you depart, you can not depart. You are in control over the departure.

Arrival, on the other hand, can be completely different. This regulation was put in place to protect the pilots that enter holding with 10 minutes left on their flight/duty time and don't get cleared for approach until an hour later. The idea being that crews won't push landing in questionable conditions because the regulations dictated that they be on the ground now.

 

[pilotyip]

What the FAA allows

YIP... that's exactly the example I'm looking for. Can you provide reference for why it's legal?

The FAA allows this to be the standard. There are no rulings to the contrary. There is a slide in our Interview Presentation. It says to make it through probation, you must, 1. Show up on time, 2. Demonstrate you are reasonable to work with, and 3. Work with the company. Work with the company means, we interpolate the regs. If a pilot does not like how we interpolate the regs. There probably not a good fit for employment. You will probably find different opinions

 

[Seadogrun]

3. Work with the company. Work with the company means, we interpolate the regs. If a pilot does not like how we interpolate the regs. There probably not a good fit for employment. You will probably find different opinions

That right there is good stuff. Who gets thrown under the bus when the FAA comes looking for trouble.

I bet it's not the company that you (the pilot) is trying so hard to work with.

Why don't you just say: "bend or break the regs if it's in the companies best interest."

 

[Way2Broke]

That right there is good stuff. Who gets thrown under the bus when the FAA comes looking for trouble.

Since the current D.O. had been in his position not one pilot has received an certificate action at the company, and he has been around for a while. And trust me, some guys have tried real hard! Tell me what other company can say that. The Feds tend to let us take care of things in house. They know how we do business and not one has come "looking for trouble." You can throw a rock from ops and hit the FSDO. If they were going to come looking for trouble, where do you think they would look first? Listen people, how much easier can I make it to understand for you. It says "ON DEMAND" right there in the name of the reg. Tell me, what does on demand mean?

If your fatigued call in fatigued! If you don't its your fault.

 

[pilotyip]

you have no idea

Why don't you just say: "bend or break the regs if it's in the companies best interest."

You have no idea of what you are talking about. That is not the way we operate. You can ask any current or former crewmember and they will support, it is not the way we operate. No one has received a violation at USA Jet in the 10 years I have been here. We have saved over half dozen pilots from certificate surrendering actions for stupid mistakes the pilot made in violation of company policy. The company stands up for its pilots every time there is even a hint of FAA certificate action. We take extraordinary steps to ensure we operate safely inside the limits established by the FAR’s. Our safety record speaks for itself.

 

[Seadogrun]

Ok yip, maybe that was a low blow. However I'd like you to read your post and try your hardest to pretend that you didn't know who wrote it. What would you think?

Do you think it's appropriate for the "company" to take interpreting the regs. away from the pilots while the company has so many motives (read profit) to lean away from safety?

Now I'm NOT saying that's what your company does because I don't know anything about your company. But if you look at the your quote like I did (not knowing the person or company who wrote it) I doubt it wouldn't smell fishy to you either.

 

[Nolife]

The FAA allows this to be the standard. There are no rulings to the contrary. There is a slide in our Interview Presentation. It says to make it through probation, you must, 1. Show up on time, 2. Demonstrate you are reasonable to work with, and 3. Work with the company. Work with the company means, we interpolate the regs. If a pilot does not like how we interpolate the regs. There probably not a good fit for employment. You will probably find different opinions

Yip... I wasn't trying to pick on you. I'm looking for a reference so that if someone asks I can show them a FAR and say, "here it says..." That's why I ask for a specific reference.

I see legal to start legal to finish means once in-flight you don't have to divert to avoid exceeding limitations. Departing with the knowledge you will exceed a rest/duty/flight limit seems against the spirit of the FARs, unless there is an exemption.

 

[pilotyip]

135.267 (d)

135.267. (d) The key word is assignment and planned, you can not be assigned a trip unless by its planned, note planned, completion, that there are 10 hrs of rest in the 24 preceding the planned completion. To determine a planned completion time, we add 15 minutes per leg to our computerized flight plans, plus 1-2 hours delay on the ground depending upon the pick up poinit to determine if the assigned trip can be completed in the 14 hours of duty.

 

[Nolife]

Thanks Yip, that's what I was looking for.

 

[oops!]

people can interpret the regs anyway they want but it doesn't make them right. pilotyip wants to make it home no matter what and his company backs that then that is fine... again doesn't make them right... legal to start legal to finish begins from the wheels starting their roll to finally stopping at their destination... after that a new flight will begin and any delay on the ground before taxi is controllable by the operator/pilot by not starting the engines in the first place...

 

[pilotyip]

planned desintation

legal to start legal to finish begins from the wheels starting their roll to finally stopping at their destination... after that a new flight will begin and any delay on the ground before taxi is controllable by the operator/pilot by not starting the engines in the first place...

That is right legal to start, legal to go to destination on the assigned trip. You can not start second trip unless it also can be planned to be complete in 14 hours set by the start of the first trip.

 

[Way2Broke]

people can interpret the regs anyway they want but it doesn't make them right. pilotyip wants to make it home no matter what and his company backs that then that is fine... again doesn't make them right... legal to start legal to finish begins from the wheels starting their roll to finally stopping at their destination... after that a new flight will begin and any delay on the ground before taxi is controllable by the operator/pilot by not starting the engines in the first place...

Legal to start legal to finish has nothing at all to do with making it home. If your empty you just part 91 it home as long as your not fatigued your not breaking any rules. No company can ask you to part 91 it home, its strictly at pilot discretion. I still can't believe that we are all having this discussion again.

 

[Way2Broke]

That is right legal to start, legal to go to destination on the assigned trip. You can not start second trip unless it also can be planned to be complete in 14 hours set by the start of the first trip.

The key word here is TRIP.

 

[avbug]

Work with the company means, we interpolate the regs. If a pilot does not like how we interpolate the regs. There probably not a good fit for employment. You will probably find different opinions

I'm not seeking employment with USA Jet, but looks like I'm not welcome there anyway. You don't get to interpret regulation any more than most FAA employees do; that's the job of the FAA regional and chief legal counsel.

Working with the company means the employees do what you tell them, in the way you tell them, including abiding by the regulation as you see fit...or the employee is down the road.

You see, the concept of pilot in command, and even second in command, doesn't mean that the company walks into the cockpit and dictates the regulations that the pilot can read with his own two eyes.

Don't worry what the regulation says boys. We'll tell you what it says, you can trust us. We'll back you up.

If I had a nickle for every time I'd heard that. I'd be two less attempted FAA actions down, if the employers had really meant it. Or had the ability to live up to it.

I'll tell you what...when I'm PIC, or in that cockpit in any capacity with my certificate earning that paycheck, I'll tell you what the regulation means. Work with the company? You work with me. If you can't do that, then find someone else to pilot the airplane, because I'll be gone fast enough you think you saw a ghost.