A hypothetical for y'all

[TIS]

Had this one posed to me the other day.

This deals with heavy crew requirements under Part 135. The basics are as follows according to 135.269:

Three pilots gets you an 18 hour duty period and 12 hours aloft with no one in the seat more than 8 hours.

Four pilots gets you a 20 hour duty period and 16 hours aloft with no one in the seat more than 8 hours.

So let's suppose that you have a trip that is 14 hours aloft and 17 hours of duty by the planning. There is fuel stop planned at 8 hours aloft and 11 hours of duty elapsed. By the rules you will need a fourth crewmember to make the planned time aloft work out.

The question is this. Suppose you want to depart with just three crewmembers on the first leg. You will add a fourth crewmember at the fuel stop airport to fulfill the requirement for the trip. Is this a legal way to meet regulatory obligations? Or, is it necessary for all four crewmembers to be aboard the flight from the beginning of the duty period.

What do you think? I'd love to hear opinions, especially legal ones!

TIS

 

[350DRIVER]

Or, is it necessary for all four crewmembers to be aboard the flight from the beginning of the duty period.

I believe that this is what needs to take place to be "legal".. I don't think that you can get away with making a stop then "adding" the additional crew member and then being able to do this. If any incident or accident were to happen I am sure the FAA would probably be all over this.

I think it all starts when the duty time begins..

just my $.02

3 5 0

 

[stillaboo]

I don't think that you can get away with making a stop then "adding" the additional crew member and then being able to do this

Now, if you were to change the flight # at the fuel stop . . . a whole new set of rules comes into play to further complicate the situation.

I'm gonna' go with the 'legal to start, legal to finish' idea of 350 . . . for now.

 

[TIS]

In general, I agree with both of you

The answer is obvious if the scope of the situation is narrowed by deleting the fuel stop.

The interesting thing is that the rule does not SAY, or even imply, that the ENTIRE crew must be on duty for the entire flight. The way this was asked of me was from that point of view. What the rule says (in a nutshell) is that a three pilot crew may not exceed 12 hours aloft and 18 hours of duty. Woven into those requirements are the rules for a four pilot crew which are 16 hours aloft and 20 hours of duty.

The rule does not say or even imply that the crew must be constituted and defined at the beginning of the duty period. It does not say that you can't "revise" the crew count from three to four during the duty period in order to cross the line between what a three pilot crew can do and what a four pilot crew can do.

In other words, there is no prohibition against fortifying a three pilot flight crew to four pilots during a fuel stop so that it is legal for the flight to continue beyond the limits of what a three pilot crew can do. Does this therefore, make it legal to do?

As I say, I agree with the legal to start, legal to finish axiom, but as I look at his more and more, I'm finding that I would really like to know if there is any case law on this one. I think the FAA migh really be stuck pushing a case with rules this flimsy. If this is the way this can be interpreted I think there are a lot of charter operators out there who would like to know it!

TIS

 

[Snoopy58]

TIS,

Interesting question! While I have neither knowledge nor opinion to contribute, let me offer another hypothetical:

A crew of 4 pilots is good for 20 hours of duty, with nobody in the seat for more than 8 hours, right?

Okay, suppose that Al, Bo, Chas, and Duke are your 4 pilots. Al & Bo start out in the seat, they fly 2 hours, & sit for 5. Now Al & Chas are in the seat, fly for another 2 hours, and sit for 5. Now Al and Duke fly for 4 hours. Total flight time for Al, 8 hours. Total duty time for Al, 18 hours plus his time from show to takeoff & his time after finally blocking in (i.e. probably 19.5 hours total duty).

If all 4 of these guys are a formed crew from the start of the day until its end, this scenario is legal, yes?

Now the hypothetical: suppose that Bo is only around for the first leg then goes to the hotel, Chas comes in only for the second leg, and Duke only for the third. None of them had a 20-hour day. Did Al suddenly become illegal, because his crew-mates now have a shorter day than he did under the "everybody together the whole day" scenario?

You can see some obvious ugliness here... such as Bo also having a 20 hour day (though only 2 hours of it spent flying with Al), Chas likewise, etc.

Thoughts?

 

[stillaboo]

If Al has 5 hours, Bo has twice as many hours as Chas, and Chas has 1/2 the hours of Luke, how many hours does Bo have?

It's like taking an IQ test Glad the FAA's on this one.

 

[bart]

ANSWER:

Not near enough to get on with the majors, and he never will if he doesn't stop giving all his stick time to Luke.

 

[KingAirKiddo]

Completely off subject, but does "TIS" stand for The Interview Specialist?

 

[TIS]

Yup!

NT