Far 135.263 and .267 unscheduled

[rk772]

I have a question concerning my companies interpretation of duty day requirements for Unscheduled one and two pilot crews.


Sec. 135.263 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: All certificate holders.

(d) A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time
in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is
assigned normally terminate within the limitations, but due to
circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight
crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of
departure expected to reach their destination within the planned flight
time.

I see paragraph (d) as only applying to actual flight time. My company, however, takes the view that this applies to duty time and rest as well.

Example:
-14 hour duty day with 5 hours of flying
-10 hours of rest was given before duty day began.
-On last leg of trip, weather moves through, delaying the departure by 1.5 hours. If we depart, we will still be under our regulated flight time but a look back from the completion of the trip will show 15.5 hours of duty and 8.5 hours of rest in the proceeding 24 hour period.
Are we legal to depart. I don't see any regs in .263 or .267 to provide for reduced rest for circumstances beyond our control. It only considers flight time as highlighted above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

My second question is concerning part 91 legs on a part 135 trip.
Example 2:
-14 hour duty day
-10 hours of rest before duty day begins
-5.5 hours of flying
-leg 2 and 3 are 135 with passengers
-leg 1 and 4 are 91 with no passengers.
-leg 3 has a 1 hour hold in the air (weather)
-leg 4 (empty returning home leg) will now arrive in the 15th or 16th hour, reducing my rest (in the past 24 hours) to below 10 hours.
Is leg 4 considered part of the whole 135.267 trip and therefore covered under the 24 hour look back rule which requires 10 hours rest.
I guess my question is, would you continue and just call it part 91 or would you get a hotel and try it 10 hours later. I've heard it said before that one drop of poison, spoils the whole barrel. (one part 135 leg on a trip makes the whole trip 135)

 

[flyfastinmy10]

I'm pretty sure that the rest requirement for 135 is 10 hours preceeding your duty period. If your first leg is empty (91) it still counts toward your 14 hours 135. However at the end of the day It is legal to fly home part 91. I've always found it hard for my body to tell the difference between 91 and 135. I still get tired on a 15 hour 91 day. The company just never seems to understand why.

 

[G100driver]

Here is the real question ... are you in charge or is "dispatch"

 

[pilotyip]

Planned

The key word is planned, if it was planned to be completed inside duty limits then it is legal. If crew can't do it they call fatique.

 

[Yknot]

test test

 

[gunfyter]

Example:
-14 hour duty day with 5 hours of flying
-10 hours of rest was given before duty day began.
-On last leg of trip, weather moves through, delaying the departure by 1.5 hours. If we depart, we will still be under our regulated flight time but a look back from the completion of the trip will show 15.5 hours of duty and 8.5 hours of rest in the proceeding 24 hour period.
Are we legal to depart. I don't see any regs in .263 or .267 to provide for reduced rest for circumstances beyond our control. It only considers flight time as highlighted above.


​

NO

 

[AngelKing]

My opinion is you can depart, you just need the required amount of rest before your next trip. As long as you were legal to begin that trip, if you get delayed beyond your control, you can finish the trip.


And G100driver, you know it is a little more complicated than that.


AK

 

[gunfyter]

.... Before you depart the gate on each flight segment, you must calculate whether you will arrive and be released at the destination airport so that you can "look back" 24 hours from the release time and find at least 10 hours of rest. In determining your arrival time, you must consider actual conditions, such as weather, ATC, ground holds, or any other known delays. If you estimate you cannot reach the destination and at release meet the look-back provision, you should not depart the gate, even if you were legally scheduled.

If you estimate at the gate that you will arrive at the destination and be released in time to comply with the look-back requirement, but you have an unexpected ground delay prior to take off so that you will not arrive in time to comply with the look-back requirement, you cannot take off and must return to the gate.

 

[rice]

The key word is planned, if it was planned to be completed inside duty limits then it is legal. If crew can't do it they call fatique.

Come on YIP!!!!!! We all know you're a management type guy, quit looking at it from only one side.
The truth of the matter is the FAA General Counsel has repeatedly issued a differing opinion from the operational side (FSDO's/POI's). In fact, recently the FAA put out a request for comment because there have been numerous requests for clarification on this very issue. If the feds can't speak with one voice on this subject, how can you????
BTW, what constitutes "circumstances beyond the control of.................."??? They (feds) have different answers for that too. Don't be to surprised if the entire industry gets a wake up call before the end of the year. After all, it is supposed to be a "one level of safety" standard.

 

[gunfyter]

Nprm

Loophole for tail end 91 reposition flight is going away soon!

This is in the current NPRM for 135

OTHER FLYING FOR A CERTIFICATE HOLDER
Proposed § § 121.487 and 135.275 establish duty period and flight time limitations for other flying for a certificate holder, including flying under part 91. Flight crewmembers and certificate holders must ensure that any duty periods and flight assignments assigned by the certificate holder are scheduled, assigned, and performed under the applicable requirements of parts 121 and 135 (14 CFR 121.473, 121.477, 121.479,121.481, 121.483, and 14 CFR 135.263, 135.265, 135.267, 135.269, and 135.271) even if the flight is not conducted under part 121 or 135. In addition, any flight crewmember who is employed by two or more air carriers or commercial operators must ensure that any duty periods and flight assignments are scheduled, assigned and performed under the applicable rules of parts 121 and 135. In other words, when certificate holders assign flight crewmembers to conduct ferry flights, or other flights under part 91, this flight assignment is treated just as any other duty period involving flight.

This proposal is based on NTSB recommendation A-94-105, which was issued as a result of the Guantanamo Bay accident, discussed above under "NTSB Recommendations" and the FAA's belief that other flying for a certificate holder such as training flights for a 121 or 135 certificate holder may cause both short term and cumulative fatigue which may adversely effect that flight crewmember's flight duties performed under parts 121 and/or 135. This would include flying for more than one part 121 and/or 135 certificate holder.
​