Part 135 First Officer Intern Wanted

[JAFI]

I cannot "confront" a POI or Office about anything; you need to go to a higher pay grade than me. (I have tried in the past, everyone I confronted got a promotion) That office, region or HQ can do that.

OP Specs are not private. There are Freedom of Information legal issues though. A written request to that office to obtain copies of documents (there is a copy fee involved).

A citizen can contact that Regional Office or HQ with their concern. A letter does leave a paper trail. Or call the national hot line phone number. This is tracked by HQ.

Senator Oberstar is a contact and he likes to hear about the FAA.

http://www.oberstar.house.gov/

D.C. Office
2365 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-6211

I would be called a whistle blower and given a desk in a closet with a blinking light bulb with nothing to do untill I retire.

Can freight company carry (non-rev employee or non-employee) passengers? That could bear looking into.

There is no FAA requirement that companies be "Smart" or any way of measuring "Smart" that I know of.......

 

[brokeflyer]

the only thing you'll find in the ops specs, is a FAA requirement for an SIC. Which I'm 99% sure they wont have in there. The faa issues that little line when they have an operator they wish to have an SIC regardless of the plane or operation.

I friend of mine worked for a single-pilot operator who added a light twin. The faa REQUIRED them, per section A of their ops specs, to have an SIC in a c310. They were a new operator and this was a safety issue. Otherwise they wouldn't have an sic.

So your right, hold on to your money. You cant log the time in this plane. You will listed on the w&b as a cargo handler, not an sic. Good luck explaing that 500 hours of BE99 time. You're next employer will know what you're talking about more than you would.

good luck with that one.

 

[livin'thesim]

Again, any examples of the FAA stopping this anywhere, or violating a pilot for logging this type of time?

The FAA certainly knows that this happens.

 

[livin'thesim]

the only thing you'll find in the ops specs, is a FAA requirement for an SIC. Which I'm 99% sure they wont have in there. The faa issues that little line when they have an operator they wish to have an SIC regardless of the plane or operation.

What page would that be on?

I friend of mine worked for a single-pilot operator who added a light twin. The faa REQUIRED them, per section A of their ops specs, to have an SIC in a c310. They were a new operator and this was a safety issue. Otherwise they wouldn't have an sic.

A015 gives the authority to use an autopilot in lieu of SIC. Why would the FAA need to specify that an SIC is required? All they would need to do is not issue this authorization and the SIC would be required by default.

 

[brokeflyer]

Can freight company carry (non-rev employee or non-employee) passengers? That could bear looking into.

well normally yes, provided said passenger isn't being carried for compensation.

but this winner of the next safety award freight company is CHARGING for people to sit in the right seat and log illegal flight time. If they aint crewmembers, and they are paying an hourly rate, does that make it an instructional flight? Now they are giving flight instruction during a 135 leg. Is the PIC a check airman, that is the only way that would work. Is he a company designated instructor?

I could really rip that one apart.

 

[brokeflyer]

What page would that be on?




A015 gives the authority to use an autopilot in lieu of SIC. Why would the FAA need to specify that an SIC is required? All they would need to do is not issue this authorization and the SIC would be required by default.

yes, but if you have a autopilot, or fly freight, they need to ADD that a SIC is required otherwise you cant use the autopilot, because the autopilot is a required part of the checkride. unless one isnt installed.

 

[brokeflyer]

Again, any examples of the FAA stopping this anywhere, or violating a pilot for logging this type of time?

The FAA certainly knows that this happens.

yes, I know one of my co-workers a few years ago nailed a guy for his log book during a type ride in a lear.

This joker "claimed" to have 1200 hours "sic" in a king air. Problem was after blowing the check ride and further diggin, he was doing exactly what this place is doing.

 

[avbug]

Could anyone please cite the Operations Specifications page that would cover this issue?

I already devoted a post to the OpSpecs, demonstrating that a SIC is not required in the case in question. Neither is a provision available in the OpSpecs to require the SIC. It's not an issue for the Operations Specifications.

The operations in question may very well have an approved SIC program. The regulation does not need to require a SIC or order to obtain approval for a training program, and use a SIC. However, the question isn't whether the operation can have a SIC on board. The question is whether the SIC can log the time. As we've seen in more than enough detail, 14 CFR 61.51 has no provision to enable one engaged in the operations in question to log the flight time as SIC.

The SIC may be legally trained and may legally operate in the aircraft (though as the defenders of the practice have already noted...they're not employees, but individuals buying flight time for the purposes of logging hours)...but can't log the time. The problem here is that the programs are expressly developed and sold, and advertised, for the purposes of logging flight time. Freightrunners Express, as advertised by the original poster, is selling a service it cannot legally provide. The sum at which they are selling this service makes it not only fraudulent, but a felony.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

What about my prior employer? I got a SIC checkout in our aircraft, none of which required an SIC. We would then do online training for a week or so and then take our PIC checkout. This company also had SIC's who would pay for training. You are saying I can not log the time as an SIC in that aircraft? Even if the Ops Specs have approved of this program? I have an FAA guy on here who thinks I possibly could have been an illegal passenger and then at points carried illegal passengers? All under the oversight of the local FAA examiners and FSDO? Come on guys. Are you all serious? You guys really need to find a hobby.

 

[avbug]

Again, anyone can use an SIC under 135, if they have an approved training program.

The particulars of your question have been spelled out, over and over, throughout the length of this thread, and reading them first would probably be a better choice than repeating the same answered questions over and over.

The regulation, and the operations specifications covering the answer to your question has been provided line by line.

You failed to cite the kind of operation applicable to your operation. If you were in an all cargo operation lacking a requirement for a SIC under Part 135 (the opspecs don't require a SIC for an all cargo operation, as previously explained)...the no, you had no grounds to log the time. If you were a passenger operation, then yes, you did, depending on the authorizations extended your operation, and the type and scope of the operation itself. Again, all previously explained.

Then again, you're not really asking a question, are you? You're arguing a point you don't understand. Go back and read the thread, digest it a little, and you might learn something.

This company also had SIC's who would pay for training.

That would put you in the same pathetic society as 8inman and time builder, then.