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

Aviation Law 101

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
avbug said:
Under Part 91 operations only, pilots may interchange the responsibility of being PIC by mutual agreement. This is not particular to any seat, nor a "seat locked" responsibility.

avbug- this is what i am interested in. what is the basis of this knowledge? just curious.

-fido
 
I'm not sure what your question is. There is no regulationto the contrary. It's more a matter of what's not the basis of this knowledge. There is no regulation prohibiting a pilot from being pilot in command from either seat, nor is there any regulation requiring the pilot in command to occupy a particular seat, while acting as pilot in command.

My reference is no reference, as there's no regulation preventing it...ergo, you can do whatever you like. In other words, unlike Parts 121 and 135, which are beholden to Part 91 and add to it, a Part 91-only pilot isn't bound by the requirement that the company designate a PIC, nor by the restriction that the PIC designated by the certificate holder remain the PIC. Why? Because under Part 91, there is no such regulation.

For operators under 14 CFR Part 91, subpart K, which parallels for the most part 14 CFR Part 135, it's a different matter. Subpart K covers fractional operations, and an operator under Subpart K is issued an operating certificate just like an operator under 121 or 135, and is also issued M Specs, or Management Specifications. These are similiar in nature to Operations Specifications (OpSpecs) issued under 121 or 135.

The answer to your question is that the pilots can decide among themselves who will be PIC and situate themselves as they see fit, because there is no regulation to the contrary. This assumes, of course, that they are not operating under 91K, 121, or 135.
 
semperfido said:
This is a hypothetical question regarding legal resposibility. A Gulfstream biz jet has three assigned pilots on board due to length of the leg and all are Captains. There are two pilots are in the cockpit during landing and the Company assigned Captain who is the FP assigned PIC, is in the Crew Rest. The aircraft slides off the runway. Who is legally responsible?

Is this 91 or 135? Only the latter provides for the "assingment" of a PIC. If 91, I would think it will come down to the 'flying pilot'.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top