Question about re-position flt’s

[fxbat]

Funny thing about re-position flights, The company clams your operating under part “91” But I have yet to see a dispatch release that specifically said in accordance with part “91”. The company I work for (121 sup.) has a template that they use and nowhere is part “91” listed.

Is that legal provided they respect 121 flt. times and duty day? And what if they don’t?

 

[b82rez]

Sure....i would guess that the release they're giving you is for "informational purposes" only. When you operate a Part 91 flight it's your flight. If you wish to have the dispatcher do some work for you....weather planning, filing a flight plan, you can.

This is all assuming of course that your company doesn't have any language in your GOM that addresses this.

 

[fokkers&beer]

If you have a release and its signed by you and the dispatcher, its part 121. At least thats the way it went at the old company I worked for.
Now you also have to do a weight and balance.

 

[fxbat]

It’s in the GOM, but I do question the flight time and duty legalities. (As perceived by the dispatcher)
If your 91 legs count for that duty day only, or are they included in the 30/7 for the week. They should be included in your yearly total.

 

[A Squared]

If you have a release and its signed by you and the dispatcher, its part 121. At least thats the way it went at the old company I worked for.
Now you also have to do a weight and balance.

Not necessarily. when we have a part 91 leg, our flight release says "part 91" on it. We still sign the release, although strictly speaking, it's not necessary. I would argue that whether or not it says "Part 91" on the release, it doesn't automatically make it Part 121, you're just doing unnecessary paperwork for a part 91 leg. I agree though that it would be comforting to have the "Part 91" printed on the release for a leg that you're going to go over time, or disregard some other Part 121 reg. Then there is no question if somone asks ...."see, says right there on the flight release, Part 91"

Just to muddy the waters further, I've been told (by co-workers who flew for that company) that another airline here has in thier GOM that *any* and *all* flights operating with no revenue cargo on board are Part 91 flights.

Would this hold up before the NTSB? I dunno.

 

[ksu_aviator]

As far as daily, weekly and yearly totals, part 91 flight time (that is commercial flight time) counts towards all flights after the part 91 time.

Example:

You fly 8 hours under 121, then have to repo 3 hours part 91 home. Legal.

You repo 3 hours to start the day, then are scheduled to fly 8 hours Part 121. Not Legal

All part 91 flight time (that is commercial flight time) counts towards monthly, weekly and yearly totals unless it is the last flight of the week, month or year.

The duty day works very much the same way. If you are on duty for 4 hours prior to starting 121 flight time (flying 91 or not) you have burned 4 hours of duty time (or rest time if you want to be technical). However, if you are at the end of the day and you are asked to repo part 91 it is legal. That is assuming that you consider yourself safe to fly, because if you aren't (too tired or too pissed off, both work for me ) then it isn't legal even if the duty time doesn't matter. Think 91.13.

 

[fxbat]

Thanks KSU

That explains it more clearly. What a grate loophole for dispatchers.

 

[mar]

Holding out.

Just to muddy the waters further, I've been told (by co-workers who flew for that company) that another airline here has in thier GOM that *any* and *all* flights operating with no revenue cargo on board are Part 91 flights.

Would this hold up before the NTSB? I dunno.

It's an interesting question but please understand the bulk of this post is not directed at you. It's mostly for those new to commercial flying.

But I'd start with this question: When would it matter?

How about an instrument approach with the visibility below mins? Of course, Part 91 you can "take a look", Part 121 you can't pass the FAF.

So, hypothetically, Company ABC operates Flight 123 by "holding out" to the public. But on this day the public don't show up. It's a scheduled flight and departs as Flight 123. But on descent, while outside the FAF the vis drops below mins...

...see where I'm going with this?

If I'm gonna take a look I'm sure as hell not gonna be using my Flight 123 call sign. A Part 91 flight should be Part 91 all the way and be using its N-number as a call sign.

And just to expound a little on the topic of a flight release. A flight release doesn't make the flight a commercial flight. The concept of "holding out", the operating certificate and the OpSpecs make it a commercial flight.

The flight release is a document that serves to divide the responsibility for the operation of the aircraft between the PIC and the dispatcher.

Under 121 domestic rules dispatchers may cancel and delay flights and even declare emergencies when the flight crew is unable. They are every bit as much of the crew as the PIC, SIC and FE.

 

[SSDD]

It also affects your takeoff minimums. alternate requirements, Cat II operations., and a host of other things that may be authorized under Part 121, but not for a Part 91 flight.

 

[minitour]

So, hypothetically, Company ABC operates Flight 123 by "holding out" to the public. But on this day the public don't show up. It's a scheduled flight and departs as Flight 123. But on descent, while outside the FAF the vis drops below mins...

So the flight starts out a 121 flight but magically enroute you revert to part 91? I'm not seeing how that works...

-mini