Please give advice and regs

[flyincheap]

Can a FAR 135 Chief Pilot fly on a turbo jet aircraft as Second in Command? Would this be a conflict on authority? This would put the PIC in authority of the flight, however isnt the Chief Pilot over the safety and operation of the certificate??
If an emergency arises in flight, do you see where this might create a major issue? Is there any regulations that govern this. I can find nothing in FAR 135.

 

[Lindy]

First, pursuant to 14 CFR Part 135.109, "[e]ach certificate holder shall designate a (1) Pilot in command for each flight; and (2) second in command for each flight requiring two pilots." Stating the obvious, if the Chief Pilot is designated as the Second in Command, then in theory that individual would be subordiante to the assigned PIC.

Second, a Chief Pilot should have demonstrated the ability, knowledge, responsibility, authority, to assume any assigned position. Since the facts are not fully known, is the Chief Pilot assigned as the SIC because said pilot isn't PIC qualified for the a/c? For example, a 14 CFR Part 135 Certificate holder may have MANY different a/c on th ecertificate; the CP does not need to be checked out in each and every a/c on the certificate. As such, it would be reasonable that the CP is assigned pursuant to the regs as the SIC.

In the alternative, is the CP training/observing/assisting helping the PIC "get up to speed" while building valuable PIC Turbojet time?

Finally, the PIC does have final authority, but it would be extremely unwise to deny input from others. Just because one is listed as PIC, that pilot isn't always the all-knowing, highest time, most experienced individual; however, the PIC would be the one the FAA has on the hook.

Communication is key and if one has an issue with the assignment of the PIC/SIC, then perhaps flying as SIC to alleviate any possible conflicts is an alternative (if you are worried about conflicts in this arena, then I believe there are bigger issues).

 

[flyincheap]

I so agree, but with your statement " PIC would be the one the FAA would have on the hook? That leads to my whole basis of this. Would the FAA not only have the PIC on the hook, however the Chief Pilot would be the one dealing with the FAA also, since his responsibility of the certificate. No, lets say the PIC decides to, who is in command in flight of the aircraft, do something that the FAA does not agree with, doesnt this put liability on the Chief Pilot also who even though acting as SIC>

 

[Swerpipe]

It's not prohibited

Look in your General Operations Manual. In the description of the chief pilot duties you will see "mantains PIC currency". If his currency lapses (for instance 3 takeoff/landings within 90 days or night currency), then he could be forced to fly as Second in Command. he duties of the CP are general and refer to training, procedures, operations etc... and not necessarily to decision making during a particular flight. However, nothing says that if the operator so desires, he can designate another pilot as the PIC. As far as conflict of interest, a CP is also a supervisor so a valid way is supervising is by flying with you as SIC and evaluating your performance. Are you as PIC implementing procedures and practices as described in the OPS Manual and GOM?
I am not sure where you were going with the question but the bottom line is that it is not prohibited. If you are designated PIC for a flight and your SIC is the CP then you are PIC and you are responsible. If the CP puts you in a position where he is not respecting your responsibility or command authority(highly unlikely) then he has no place flying as SIC or being CP for that matter. If you are PIC and your SIC is the CP, I couldn't think of a better available resource from which to base your decisions.

 

[amfteamster]

Why is this on the Majors board?