only one radio required?

[bailout]

We lost comm 1 today and the MEL says its ok as only one is required. I looked at the regs as best I could, but can only find the 121 carriers need two, but 135 only needs 1 for less than 10 seats?
That sound right?

EDIT<. ok found it,. this looks like we need two! One transmit, but two receivers.

135.165


(a) No person may operate a turbojet airplane having a passenger seating configuration, excluding any pilot seat, of 10 seats or more, or a multiengine airplane in a commuter operation, as defined in part 119 of this chapter, under IFR or in extended overwater operations unless it has at least the following radio communication and navigational equipment appropriate to the facilities to be used which are capable of transmitting to, and receiving from, at any place on the route to be flown, at least one ground facility:
(1) Two transmitters, (2) two microphones, (3) two headsets or one headset and one speaker, (4) a marker beacon receiver, (5) two independent receivers for navigation, and (6) two independent receivers for communications.
(b) No person may operate an aircraft other than that specified in paragraph (a) of this section, under IFR or in extended overwater operations unless it has at least the following radio communication and navigational equipment appropriate to the facilities to be used and which are capable of transmitting to, and receiving from, at any place on the route, at least one ground facility:
(1) A transmitter, (2) two microphones, (3) two headsets or one headset and one speaker, (4) a marker beacon receiver, (5) two independent receivers for navigation, (6) two independent receivers for communications, and (7) for extended overwater operations only, an additional transmitter. (c) For the purpose of paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(6), (b)(5), and (b)(6) of this section, a receiver is independent if the function of any part of it does not depend on the functioning of any part of another receiver. However, a receiver that can receive both communications and navigational signals may be used in place of a separate communications receiver and a separate navigational signal receiver.

 

[Hung Start]

Sure, one will do. If you are allowed to fly all day under VFR.
Does your OPSPECS and/or FOM allow you to do that?
We always file and fly IFR, so two fully functioning radios it is!

Hung

 

[Partyfoul]

I would say that if your MEL allows you to dispatch with it that way you are ok. The FAA approves that MEL so they are giving you permission to operate in that environment. If it wasnt there would be a condition in the MEL saying so.

Just my .02.

 

[SecondSegment]

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. If the problem that caused the first failure could cause the second? Sometimes MELs are stretched to accomodate where they shouldn't. It's a judgement call. You're the Captain.

 

[Partyfoul]

MEL's have nothing to do with SHOULD. They allow you to dispatch to get to a maint. base to have it fixed. I have gone many times with an MEL'D comm. It's better than staying in BFE waiting for it to be fixed. Like you said you are the Captain. Judgement is priceless.

 

[Hung Start]

MEL's have nothing to do with SHOULD. They allow you to dispatch to get to a maint. base to have it fixed. I have gone many times with an MEL'D comm. It's better than staying in BFE waiting for it to be fixed. Like you said you are the Captain. Judgement is priceless.

I must agree with Partyfoul's logic.
Your're driving a jet, by God, not a Cessna 150. You REALLY want to be responding with a "two clicks of the mike", or "squack ID if you hear"???

To clairify, I don't think any MEL is structured to allow IFR operations with one radio. Be it a piston twin or a big old jet. There need to be a higher level of safety when you hold yourself out to the public.
One radio, then how about one engine,, or one wing?

Just my humble opinion.

Hung

 

[bailout]

MEL's have nothing to do with SHOULD. They allow you to dispatch to get to a maint. base to have it fixed. I have gone many times with an MEL'D comm. It's better than staying in BFE waiting for it to be fixed. Like you said you are the Captain. Judgement is priceless.

I believe it was a cat c, or OK for regular service, which is more than getting it to a service center which is why I questioned it.

 

[B314Clipper]

You have to take MELs with a big grain of salt. Years ago I was flying a CRJ and we had a problem with the fire loop in the landing gear bay. It came on as we landed in PIA. MX checked it and found it was broken. According to the MEL, we could defer it if we flew with the landing gear pinned down. They actually had a set up in the MEL to allow revenue flight with pax on board with this configuration. Needless to say, we ferried the airplane back empty to ORD, but wouldn't you love to have been a passenger on that flight?

"Why are we flying so low and slow? And why is it so loud?"

As stated above, the MEL can give you a lot of latitude, just be careful.

 

[Some guy]

Be careful deferring the #1 comm...Usually the #1 runs off the emergency bus. If you lose #1 comm then lose electrical, then uhh...well you understand.

SG

 

[ProFracPilot]

To clairify, I don't think any MEL is structured to allow IFR operations with one radio.

Our MEL specifically states '1' required for dispatch, but the remarks section makes it a bit more restrictive. From the remarks section of our MEL, 23 - 1 "Communications Systems - VHF and UHF":

Any in excess of those required by FAR may be inoperative provided Systems (VHF and UHF) and is not powered by the Emergency AC Bus, Emergency DC Bus, Battery Bus, Battery Direct Bus, or the DC Transfer Bus and not required for emergency procedures.​

​

So in this aircraft, if you have an inoperative VHF comm you want to make sure it it NOT in the #1 position (EMER BUS) and that the FAR's you are about to operate under do not require 2 for dispatch.

I can think of only one or two vary unique instances where I MIGHT operate with only 1 operative comm. A short VFR repostion to effect repairs, maybe. Otherwise, send maintenance to me.​