Stifler's Mom
MILF...MILF...MILF
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 5,125
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
8 hour flight time limit
- Thread starter Eric
- Start date
- Watchers 20
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
SiuDude
Internet tough guy
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2004
- Posts
- 969
All this leg-by-leg nonsense that AtpCliff is talking about does not involve flight time, but rest requirements. If you read the Whitlow letter, it says that after every leg, you must look back and find at least 8 hours of rest. Here's the quote:
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]"If, when this information is factored in, it is known or should be known that arrival based upon the actual expected flight time will not result in at least eight hours of look-back rest, then the flight may not leave the gate. If the flight is away from the gate, but not yet in the air, then the flight may not take off."[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]"If, when this information is factored in, it is known or should be known that arrival based upon the actual expected flight time will not result in at least eight hours of look-back rest, then the flight may not leave the gate. If the flight is away from the gate, but not yet in the air, then the flight may not take off."[/FONT]
Turtlesfly
Need a room check?
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2003
- Posts
- 678
sorry - diversions count as a change to your originally scheduled pairing. So does an air return, gate return et cetera et cetera . . .
the whole purpose of the legal to start legal to finish is that you don't have to taxi back to the gate if your taxi to the runway took 10 minutes longer than expected. Nor do you have to plummet out of the sky and divert if you get in a holding pattern and end up bumping over 8 hours. But, once you start adding diversions or returns or new assignments and re-dispatching, you no longer claim legal-to-start-legal-to-finish.
Bytheway, in response to the original post #1, it is never 8 hours in a "day." It is 8 hours in a duty period - I figured you knew, I just have to make sure you keep your "i"'s dotted and "t"'s crossed.
the whole purpose of the legal to start legal to finish is that you don't have to taxi back to the gate if your taxi to the runway took 10 minutes longer than expected. Nor do you have to plummet out of the sky and divert if you get in a holding pattern and end up bumping over 8 hours. But, once you start adding diversions or returns or new assignments and re-dispatching, you no longer claim legal-to-start-legal-to-finish.
Bytheway, in response to the original post #1, it is never 8 hours in a "day." It is 8 hours in a duty period - I figured you knew, I just have to make sure you keep your "i"'s dotted and "t"'s crossed.
SiuDude
Internet tough guy
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2004
- Posts
- 969
Cloudroller
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2005
- Posts
- 232
At Air Wisconsin, we are legal to start, legal to finish. Last month I had 1 day with 10.6 FAR block and another with 8.6 FAR block. I did not break any regs. I was legal to start, legal to finish due to circumstances beyond the company's control (wx). If you are fatigued, don't fly it. Otherwise you are legal in scheduled 121 ops.
regionalcap
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Posts
- 903
As for as diversions go...read the bold print, turtlesfly
November 12, 1992
Richard P. Schweitzer
Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger 888 Seventeenth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-3959
Dear Mr. Schweitzer:
This is in response to your request dated July 31, 1992, for interpretation of 14 C.F.R. Section 121.471(g).
You ask about the following scenarios:
(1) When a carrier knows at the beginning of a multi-leg flight that adverse weather during the final leg will preclude the pilot from completing all the legs within the allowed flight time.
(2) When, prior to the final leg of a multi-leg flight, the carrier knows that adverse weather conditions along the final leg will preclude the pilot from completing the final leg within the allowed flight time.
Discussion:
Section 121.471(g) applies to both the scenarios you describe. It reads:
A flight crewmember is not considered to be scheduled for flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned are scheduled and normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the air carrier (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the scheduled time.
If the schedule was set up by the air carrier so as to meet the requirements of §121.471(a)(4), deviations within the particular time frames due to weather or other unforeseen delays would be permitted. The key to the applicability of such an exception is the unforeseen weather conditions or other unforeseen delays disrupting an otherwise properly scheduled flight. If the original scheduling is upset because the weather causes a diversion, the final segment(s) may,
nonetheless, be conducted, notwithstanding that the final segment(s) will be completed outside the eight hour period originally planned.
This interpretation is supported by the preamble to the mostrecent revision of the flight time rules. "Subsection 121.471(g) ... state that a flight crewmember is not considered to be scheduled for duty in excess of flight time limitations if the scheduled flights normally terminate within the limitation" (emphasis original) 50 FR 29306 at 29314,
July 18, 1985. No penalty exists in §121.471 for circumstances under which actual flight time exceeds scheduled flight time when the delay is due to circumstances beyond the control of the operator.
The flight time regulations have a premise that each certificate holder is scheduling realistically. The aforementioned preamble specifically states: "compliance with the flight scheduling rules requires each air carrier to schedule realistically. If actual flight time is consistently higher than the scheduled flight time allowed, the schedule should be adjusted." Thus, constant deviations from the flight and duty time limitations of Part 121 based upon such delays are not acceptable if the certificate holder is not scheduling realistically.
In light of the above discussion it should be clear that in both scenario (1) and (2) the remaining legs may be legally completed.
We hope that this satisfactorily answers your inquiries. Sincerely,
Donald P. Byrne Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
November 12, 1992
Richard P. Schweitzer
Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger 888 Seventeenth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-3959
Dear Mr. Schweitzer:
This is in response to your request dated July 31, 1992, for interpretation of 14 C.F.R. Section 121.471(g).
You ask about the following scenarios:
(1) When a carrier knows at the beginning of a multi-leg flight that adverse weather during the final leg will preclude the pilot from completing all the legs within the allowed flight time.
(2) When, prior to the final leg of a multi-leg flight, the carrier knows that adverse weather conditions along the final leg will preclude the pilot from completing the final leg within the allowed flight time.
Discussion:
Section 121.471(g) applies to both the scenarios you describe. It reads:
A flight crewmember is not considered to be scheduled for flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned are scheduled and normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the air carrier (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the scheduled time.
If the schedule was set up by the air carrier so as to meet the requirements of §121.471(a)(4), deviations within the particular time frames due to weather or other unforeseen delays would be permitted. The key to the applicability of such an exception is the unforeseen weather conditions or other unforeseen delays disrupting an otherwise properly scheduled flight. If the original scheduling is upset because the weather causes a diversion, the final segment(s) may,
nonetheless, be conducted, notwithstanding that the final segment(s) will be completed outside the eight hour period originally planned.
This interpretation is supported by the preamble to the mostrecent revision of the flight time rules. "Subsection 121.471(g) ... state
July 18, 1985. No penalty exists in §121.471 for circumstances under which actual flight time exceeds scheduled flight time when the delay is due to circumstances beyond the control of the operator.
The flight time regulations have a premise that each certificate holder is scheduling realistically. The aforementioned preamble specifically states: "compliance with the flight scheduling rules requires each air carrier to schedule realistically. If actual flight time is consistently higher than the scheduled flight time allowed, the schedule should be adjusted." Thus, constant deviations from the flight and duty time limitations of Part 121 based upon such delays are not acceptable if the certificate holder is not scheduling realistically.
In light of the above discussion it should be clear that in both scenario (1) and (2) the remaining legs may be legally completed.
We hope that this satisfactorily answers your inquiries. Sincerely,
Donald P. Byrne Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
Turtlesfly
Need a room check?
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2003
- Posts
- 678
I am sch. 8 hours 3 legs...GDL-ATL-OKC-ATL
GDL-ATL 4.5 hours...45 mins over...so now my sch would be 8:45. that leg completed!!!
Weather in ATL...
ATL-OKC scheduled 2.5 hours. t.Now im in OKC with 7 hours for the day.. can I knowingly as a commercial pilot go start another leg back to ATL 2.5 to 3.0 with the weather.
If you were a flight instructor and you have 7.8 hours instructing can you start instrcuting another student for 2.5-3.0 hours. Legal to start the instructing legal to finish.
I think it is on leg by leg now!! I don't think we can knowingly exceed 8 hours?
GDL-ATL 4.5 hours...45 mins over...so now my sch would be 8:45. that leg completed!!!
Weather in ATL...
ATL-OKC scheduled 2.5 hours. t.Now im in OKC with 7 hours for the day.. can I knowingly as a commercial pilot go start another leg back to ATL 2.5 to 3.0 with the weather.
If you were a flight instructor and you have 7.8 hours instructing can you start instrcuting another student for 2.5-3.0 hours. Legal to start the instructing legal to finish.
I think it is on leg by leg now!! I don't think we can knowingly exceed 8 hours?
The point we should all gather from this is that the whole dam* system is too complicated thanks to our federal government. Also I suspect the guy who said that he flew 10.** whatever hours was fatigued although he should not admit it at this point. It should also be noted that when one is thinking they may be fatigued--they were probably an hour earlier as well. Oh and I will go as far as to say: not one pilot has worked a full 16 hour day without being fatigued a couple of hours earlier. The problem is that fatigue becomes more difficult to judge the more fatigued we are.
B727FA
Bring your own FOD bucket
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2006
- Posts
- 635
It only requires double the block if you land in an "off-line" city, that is, a city not served by the Certificate Holder on a regular or scheduled basis.
But, either way, you're legal to finish it.
regionalcap
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Posts
- 903
DC8 Flyer
It's SO BIG!
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Posts
- 426
DrewBlows
Go Tigers!
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
- Posts
- 2,031
Mr Wu
Swe'gen
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2005
- Posts
- 1,278
Here ya go Biatches........
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...pretations/data/interps/2006/February 23.doc
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...pretations/data/interps/2006/February 23.doc
"may accept an assignment for flight time ETC..."
Lets say your going to be 30/7 on day 4 of a 4 day trip by about 5 minutes. It's day 1. Would checking in and actually starting the pairing be "accepting" the assignment? Or can they schedule be fixed for example on the evening of day 3? Say you think you would probably be able to make up the 5 minutes the first three day because the wx is good.
Or would it need to ammended prior to checking in on day 1?
I guess what's the definition of assignment? A pairing or a duty day?
Lets say your going to be 30/7 on day 4 of a 4 day trip by about 5 minutes. It's day 1. Would checking in and actually starting the pairing be "accepting" the assignment? Or can they schedule be fixed for example on the evening of day 3? Say you think you would probably be able to make up the 5 minutes the first three day because the wx is good.
Or would it need to ammended prior to checking in on day 1?
I guess what's the definition of assignment? A pairing or a duty day?
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
