2 in 1 seat, the double belt rule.

[MauleSkinner]

What about airplanes like the PA-12 Super Cruiser that have a large backseat and an oversized belt that were even ADVERTISED as being a "3 person airplane"?

Certification reuirements for the airplane didn't change, but operational rules did...gotta follow the operational ones if they're more restrictive.

Fly safe!

David

 

[midlifeflyer]

And I can say with reasonable certainty that when you're standing in front of an ALJ, s/he could give a rats crapper about some FAA legal interpetation.

I wouldn't go quite that far. In general they do. Far more than a rat's crapper. FAA Legal is the arm of the FAA that interprets the FAR and the NTSB is bound by the FAA interpretations by both statute and case law. Of course, the actual application isn't that black and white. That's especially true in the area of 91.13 where even something that is legal according to an FAR can be found to be reckless. But they definitely care.

 

[JAFI]

I would rather be standing in front of an ALJ stating that I was following a legal interpitation than to say something like "I did it that way because I wanted to". Even when you say "I felt it was the safest course of action" you had better be able to back that up with some logic, guidance, or something the Judge would accept. If you were following some guidance or interpitation you may not get to see the Judge, If you are complying with the rules, why would there be a reason to go to court?

I have seen Judges accept a pilots plea that he was attempting to do it safe. It is all about when you plead your case and if the Inspector, FAA Legal, and the judge believe you.

JAFI

 

[A Squared]

I have seen Judges accept a pilots plea that he was attempting to do it safe. It is all about when you plead your case and if the Inspector, FAA Legal, and the judge believe you.

If the inspector and FAA legal believed you, you wouldn't be trying to convince the judge.

 

[JAFI]

If the inspector and FAA legal believed you, you wouldn't be trying to convince the judge.

Correct, And if the Inspector believes you then Legal may never know about it.

JAFI

 

[pilotviolin]

These posts show why the FARS are too confusing. Everyone has a different opinion, even with a faa interpretation.
So here is my question to you guys. What would you do?

The CEO shows up with 9 people to fly home on his 8 person Lear 40. Two of the them are 13 year old girls whose combine wieght is 165 lbs. Do you go or not?

 

[transpac]

These posts show why the FARS are too confusing. Everyone has a different opinion, even with a faa interpretation.
So here is my question to you guys. What would you do?

The CEO shows up with 9 people to fly home on his 8 person Lear 40. Two of the them are 13 year old girls whose combine wieght is 165 lbs. Do you go or not?

Does the boss know that it would be a violation of the FARs? Does the boss know that an intentional violation would likely have an impact on insurance coverage if things go wrong? Does the boss know that he or she is hanging the crew out to dry if they carry more passengers (other than children less than two years old) than installed seat belts and O2 masks? It's the crew's responsibility to educate bosses before refusing to engage in scenarios such as this.

 

[JAFI]

My favorate was when (I was working as a CFI) my boss (private pilot certificate) told me to do a Part 91 Charter. I told her "there is no such thing as a Part 91 charter". She says "yes there is, we do it all the time. It is a charter when you do not have a 135 certificate.". I said, "then you can do this one with out me". I left for better employment, and she got someone to do the "Part 91 Charter".

JAFI

As to your current boss, this use to work for me:

"I'm not sure about this regulation/leagal issue, I will just call the FSDO and ask them".... You know I never had to make that call. Chief Pilot, Director of Maintenance and Operations all different times, just walked away. Good Luck.