duty times

[pilotyip]

Yip, It's simply not there.

Well I just dont agree and that is fine. It is very American to not agree. We operate under that rule. We exceed 14 hours duty on an irregualr basis. Our POI knows about and says it is legal. Been doing it under 135 for 17 years, filling out the truck driver sheets with comments on what casued us to exceed 14 hours. So you do it your way, we will do it our way. Best of luck and blue skies.

 

[X-rated]

Well I just dont agree and that is fine. It is very American to not agree. We operate under that rule. We exceed 14 hours duty on an irregualr basis. Our POI knows about and says it is legal. Been doing it under 135 for 17 years, filling out the truck driver sheets with comments on what casued us to exceed 14 hours. So you do it your way, we will do it our way. Best of luck and blue skies.

That's the problem with the way the duty rest regs are currently written. Some POI's will let you get away with it, and others including my former POI won't.

 

[fu69atacafyeah]

Lets try again so you don't get busted....you're actually violating the "look back" part of the reg in that you haven't had 10 consecutive hours of rest in the last 24 hours upon completion of your duty period. 135.267(d) doesn't contain an explicit duty time limitation BUT crewmember MUST meet the rest requirements of 135.267(d). You'll notice the only allowance for anything to be exceeded "beyond the control of the operator" in all of 135.267 is ONLY flight time.

Even though your POI may be in agreement with you violating a rule, you won't have to answer to your POI when something happens, you will have to answer to an ALJ or the Board...your POI will also have to answer to them as well (at least you won't be alone). Again, there's a legal interpretation from the FAA's General Council that specifically talks about this. Just because you've been doing it this way for 17 years doesn't mean it's correct. Be careful, your hanging yourself out there.

 

[CaptSeth]

For arguments sake, I also happen to think that a 91 tail end ferry also must be included in duty time if it is required by the company. Flight time you may get a pass, but it is still company required duty in most cases and goes towards the 14 hours.

 

[bizjet800]

Yip, It doesn't say that. Read the whole thing again. It says you can exceed the flight time limits provided you were scheduled no more than 10 hrs flight and 14 hours duty. It does not say you can exceed the 14 hour duty period anywhere.

The only mention of a maximum assigned 14 hour duty period is where it is listed as one of the requirements needed to exceed the 10 hour flight time limit as described in paragraph (b). It does not say you can exceed the 14 hour duty limit. If you can quote something that says you can exceed 14 hours of duty, I'd be happy to learn something new. However, 135.267 does not give a provision to fly an aircraft under pt 135 rules after 14 hours of duty. It's simply not there.

The whole argument rests on chapter d:

(d) Each assignment under paragraph (b) of this section must provide for at least 10 consecutive hours of rest during the 24-hour period that precedes the planned completion time of the assignment.

This says it all--planned completion.

 

[bizjet800]

Lets try again so you don't get busted....you're actually violating the "look back" part of the reg in that you haven't had 10 consecutive hours of rest in the last 24 hours upon completion of your duty period. 135.267(d) doesn't contain an explicit duty time limitation BUT crewmember MUST meet the rest requirements of 135.267(d). You'll notice the only allowance for anything to be exceeded "beyond the control of the operator" in all of 135.267 is ONLY flight time.

Even though your POI may be in agreement with you violating a rule, you won't have to answer to your POI when something happens, you will have to answer to an ALJ or the Board...your POI will also have to answer to them as well (at least you won't be alone). Again, there's a legal interpretation from the FAA's General Council that specifically talks about this. Just because you've been doing it this way for 17 years doesn't mean it's correct. Be careful, your hanging yourself out there.

Can you post the legal interpretation? I'd like to read that, perhaps I have had it wrong all these years.

 

[wingnutt]

tough call, I have worked for seven different 135 companies, and about half carry the same idea as YIP. The main thought being that one cannot plan on exceeding 14 hours...

Drunk passengers being late, Teterboro weather delays, ambulance getting lost to some podunk airport, a random aircraft with a blown tire that shutdown the runways; all rumors of situations that may have caused exceedence of duty times.

...and I cant even count the Part91 repo legs demanded, usually at the end of a 13.6 hour day, and home base is over an hour away. My response was always based on that idea that my tired brain does not care if I am 135 or 91

Honestly, I would like to know who decided (and how) a 14 hour workday was ever considered "normal"

 

[bizjet800]

Honestly, I would like to know who decided (and how) a 14 hour workday was ever considered "normal"

Pretty sure it wasn't a 135 freight company, they would have made 20 hours!

 

[pilotyip]

For arguments sake, I also happen to think that a 91 tail end ferry also must be included in duty time if it is required by the company. Flight time you may get a pass, but it is still company required duty in most cases and goes towards the 14 hours.

At our place it is always up to the crew to do a tail end ferry, you are given the option, would you like to do a 20 minute ferry back to LRD or go on a 30 minute cab ride to the cheapest hotel in MMIO at 0300?

 

[fu69atacafyeah]

The 91 tail end ferry is not in question.....that absolutely can go over 14 hours.

I'm not sure how to upload things to this forum.

 

[cloud_chaser]

tough call, I have worked for seven different 135 companies, and about half carry the same idea as YIP. The main thought being that one cannot plan on exceeding 14 hours...

Drunk passengers being late, Teterboro weather delays, ambulance getting lost to some podunk airport, a random aircraft with a blown tire that shutdown the runways; all rumors of situations that may have caused exceedence of duty times.

First of all, drunk pax shouldn't be allowed to board which gets into other problems, so flight cancelled.

With regards to the other excuses, if those cause you to block out knowingly to exceed 14hrs than that is violating the reg. You the pilot would be accepting a mission that is violating .267.

"Legal to start, legal to finish" is for the birds. Its an old timers mentality and its time to hang it up!

 

[wingnutt]

First of all, drunk pax shouldn't be allowed to board which gets into other problems, so flight cancelled.

With regards to the other excuses, if those cause you to block out knowingly to exceed 14hrs than that is violating the reg. You the pilot would be accepting a mission that is violating .267.

"Legal to start, legal to finish" is for the birds. Its an old timers mentality and its time to hang it up!

1) Oh I totally agree on the drunk part, but where is the line? I'm sure not gonna break out a breathalyzer when they show up late. If they come back smelling like beer but are walking straight, and cognizant of their surroundings...they get to fly

2) Again dont disagree, but not a ONE of those four reasons could possibly be known before blocking out...then again, wasn't that the point of the examples

3) Not my phrase either. But, here is the first legal paper I ever read...

http://www.fr8ghtdog.com/contract/Stephens.pdf

 

[cloud_chaser]

1) Oh I totally agree on the drunk part, but where is the line? I'm sure not gonna break out a breathalyzer when they show up late. If they come back smelling like beer but are walking straight, and cognizant of their surroundings...they get to fly

2) Again dont disagree, but not a ONE of those four reasons could possibly be known before blocking out...then again, wasn't that the point of the examples

3) Not my phrase either. But, here is the first legal paper I ever read...

http://www.fr8ghtdog.com/contract/Stephens.pdf

Thank you for backing the cliche', but it only deals with 121 interpretation. Its a moot point.. To my knowledge there are no reduced rest periods for 135.

Weather delays are verbally broadcasted over atis. Pilot calls for clearance and is immediately issued a EDCT. Flight cancelled if that EDCT prohibits you from completing the flight within 14hrs of duty. I know EDCTs come and go.
To further emphasize, if you block out knowingly to exceed 14hrs for a 135 mission your are breaking regs!

 

[osy007]

If your on the ground and you know that you will exceed 14 hrs, you can't take off...If you unknowingly exceed it in the air due to re-routes etc...You can exceed the 14 hours. If your on the ground at TEB waiting for pax and you are going over duty time, you have to cancel the trip.

Example...A cargo crew was violated for exceeding their duty time by 4 hours because their truck was late by 4 hours. They thought that this was "out of their control" and they were legal to continue.

 

[pilotyip]

If your on the ground and you know that you will exceed 14 hrs, you can't take off...If you unknowingly exceed it in the air due to re-routes etc...You can exceed the 14 hours. If your on the ground at TEB waiting for pax and you are going over duty time, you have to cancel the trip.

Example...A cargo crew was violated for exceeding their duty time by 4 hours because their truck was late by 4 hours. They thought that this was "out of their control" and they were legal to continue.

We talking 135 or 121 here?