repositioning legs

[hawkercpt]

In a 135 operation, are the repositioning legs indeed under 135 as well? If you are positioning to do a revenue leg then would it not be considered under 135?

 

[vclean]

Depends on how you are dispatched.

 

[pilotyip]

If you are flying into a 135 revenue, leg all the time and duty must count toward 135 flight and duty. If you have no revenue on board, you may operate under certain 91 rules. I.e. Op. Spec C-64 (approved source of weather) need not apply to land at the airport. On tail end, ferries accepted by the crews where fight time or duty has been exceeded can only operate under part 91.

 

[Canucit]

I thought that if it was a non rev flight it was Part 91 unless your op specs says different

 

[pilotyip]

Yes you can operate under 91 on non-rev legs. However all flight time and duty on a 91 leg flying into a revenue leg has to be counted towards 135 limits.

 

[User546]

I second what PilotYip said. That's the way our 135 operates as well.

Saves lots of paperwork on our end doing it that way.

 

[WMUSIGPI]

also when flying internationally (at least at my company) we operate all legs 135 because customs considers us a commercial operation both directions even if we only flew pax one way

 

[soarby007]

part 135 legs

We consider all legs part 135. The customer is usually paying for the whole trip, not just one leg, at least in our operation that is the case. I think it is a little shaky to call it a part 91 leg because no passengers are on board. The key, is 'revenue', and I have been told that if the customer is paying for all legs, then it is revenue. Our DO says we are a part 135 operator, not 91 and to save any confusion, all legs are part 135, unless the owner is flying.

 

[Daveman]

I'll third what the PilotYipper has said. Though we all know of the sinister operators.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Hawkercpt,

This is another issue that may vary from fed to fed. I have heard inspectors say if the flight is dispatched by the certificate holder or operates under the company call sign, it is 135. I have heard it interpreted as if your job title is as a 135 SIC, then everything you fly for-hire with that company is 135. Others may take a more "common sense view". I suggest calling your FSDO or POI and asking them.

CR

 

[Guitar Guy]

Hawkercpt,

This is another issue that may vary from fed to fed. I have heard insectors say if the flight is dispatched by the certificate holder or operates under the company call sign, it is 135.

That's not necessarily the case at the fractionals. We use our company call-sign on Part 91 legs as well as our Part 135 legs.

 

[soarby007]

One has to think about the reason for wanting a part 91 leg. Weather, runway length, duty times, etc., and determine if using part 91 legs is the best thing to do.

I still believe that if you are flying part 135, then all legs are part 135, not to exclude the ones with no passengers and call them repositioning legs. Certainly there are sometimes when it is advantageous to use part 91, I agree. There apparently is no clear cut answer from the type of responses I'm seeing here as to whether you fly the aircraft 20 miles to pick up passengers and call it a repositioning leg, thus part 91.

 

[fly4free]

If it is duty time your worried about

In a 135 operation, are the repositioning legs indeed under 135 as well? If you are positioning to do a revenue leg then would it not be considered under 135?

Empty legs can be dispatched under part 135, that gives an obvious answer.

However, when there are no dispatch rules against it, repositioning flights may be dispatched under 91. the tricky part about non-sched 135 is that since there is no definition of duty day we have to look at flight time and rest time on a sliding 24 hour scale (the 24hr look back).

Front end ferries as well as tail end ferries are not duty time but they are not rest time either. The flight time on a front end or tail end ferry is not 135 but it counts towards your total commercial flying time for the 24hr period. Front end ferries always affect revenue legs and tail end ferries only under certain circumstances affect revenue legs.

Example 2 man crew - after a couple days off, crew show time is 0000z wheels up @ 0100z repo empty 5hrs away for a revenue flight back @ 0700z, a mechanical delays your off time to 0900z and another 5hrs puts you on @1400z. In this case, looking back 24 hrs from the completion of the revenue leg the crew has flown the maximum 10hrs and had the required minimum 10hrs of rest. No more revenue legs for this crew until they receive 10hrs of rest.

However, after the revenue leg that same night, dispatch asks the crew to reposition empty 5 hrs away...that puts them on the ground lets say 2000z. This is perfectly legal because it is not a revenue leg, albeit probably not the best use of judgement. 15hrs flying is tough.

Here is the tricky part. Dispatch says your show time is 0700z, 11 hours from your block-in to allow for post-flight and travel to the hotel and 10hrs of rest. This is all perfectly legal so far. You get your leg schedule and it says you will be for wheels up @0800z doing a 7hr revenue leg that puts you on at 1500z. Its only 7hrs of flying and you've had your 10hrs of rest, right. Wrong!!

This is how the tail end ferry will screw you. If you look back 24hrs from the end of your revenue leg of 1500z, you will find another 5hrs of commercial flying the day before. That makes your total, if you accept the 7hr trip, 12hrs of flying in a 24hr period.

The lesson here is that the 10hr rest period does reset the duty day sliding period but it does not reset your flight time period.

The best method - look at the planned completion time of the scheduled revenue legs. Then from that time on the clock look back 24hrs. If you can find 10 consecutive hrs of rest and not more than 10hrs of commercial flying, including the planned revenue legs, then you can accept the trip.

I hope this helps.

Fly

 

[7B2]

Anyone know of cases that ended up in court because of this 91 reposition stuff.

I tend to lean toward 135 on a reposition leg and especially on a tail end reposition, partly based on a discussion about this (one of the many discussions about this) with a cut dry no nonsense aviator.

His "beer-theory" applies; he told me: "When I come off duty I can drink beer, right?" "Well, I can't if I have to ferry the plane back the customer is paying for, so therefor it is duty time and therefor it is 135 time" (yeah I know, unless his rest time is only 8 hrs, bla bla)

He's got a point.

 

[Clutch_Cargo]

7B2,

I don't know of any court cases concerning 91 repos but I do know there have been a number of FAA legal interpretations about it.

I wish that your "no nonsense aviator" friend had a point but I'm afraid he doesn't. It wouldn't matter who paid for the plane, he wouldn't be able to fly it if he had been drinking. Heck, he could own it... still wouldn't matter... that is a whole different set of regs.

Unfortunately, the 91 repos are legal. They can, as others have pointed out, affect your flight and duty time limits, but they're still legal. Of course, if you're fatigued or something you could play the 91.13 card, I guess. Just my .02. Maybe I'll rummage through some legal interps and see if I can find anything more definite to post.