135 duty times... again

[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.