Taxing jets single pilot

[Tonto]

Does anyone know if taxing a jet single pilot to repostition on the airport in an aircraft the requires two pilots for flight is legal? I know mechanics taxi airplanes on the airport, so I don't see this as being a violation against any FARs.
Any thoughts?

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Does anyone know if taxing a jet single pilot to repostition on the airport in an aircraft the requires two pilots for flight is legal? I know mechanics taxi airplanes on the airport, so I don't see this as being a violation against any FARs.
Any thoughts?

My first thought was, No. If it requires two pilots to fly it needs two to taxi. However given the fact that mechanics normally are not rated in what they taxi around........I guess it would probably depend on the op specs. No idea how it is looked at outside of 135 or 121.

Any mechanics out there?

 

[Lead Sled]

My first thought was, No. If it requires two pilots to fly it needs two to taxi. However given the fact that mechanics normally are not rated in what they taxi around...

Sounds good to me. However, you'd probably have a lot of 'splaining to do if you happened to catch a wingtip on your blindside. Personally, I've always found some "warm body" (pilot) willing to sit in the seat if it had to be moved and the other guy wasn't available.

'Sled

 

[transpac]

The only applicable regulation is 91.13(b) which applies to careless or reckless operation not involving intent for flight. The only time it's going to come into play in regard to this issue is if someone has a taxiing incident that could have reasonably been prevented by a second set of eyes, hands, or feet. The feds will probably object to someone taxiing a large aircraft without a lookout in the co-pilot seat, but it's a non-issue on small and medium jets.

 

[minimums]

Don't mechanics have a taxi waiver or something similiar for taxiing to the run-up pad?

 

[Tonto]

91.5 says no person may operate an aircraft that is type certificated for more than one required pilot flight crewmember.

General definitions page 1-8 defines "operate" as with respect to aircraft, means use for the purpose of air navigation including the piloting of aircraft. (except as provided in 91.13)

91.13 Talks of careless and reckless and has two sections. One for operations for the purpose of air navigation and one for operation other than for the purpose of air navigation.

As I understand it, taxi to reposition is not for the purpose of air navigation and there for the aircraft is not being "operated" and 91.5 does not have to be met.

I know that the feds can always get you on any careless and reckless, but I just wanted to know if it is against any FARs. I don't see that it does.
Thanks for the input.

 

[LR25]

As a mechanic I used to taxi DC-8's with just me up front and another on the engineer panel.

No biggy, if I needed an eyeball on the other side the person on the panel would come up and check it out.

Someone could also ride in the right seat after engine start and monitor the panel from the right seat also.

Idealy I would want 3 up front, but almost always that wasnt the case.

You do what you have to do when short handed.

As far as being qualified, each airline has training for MX people to operate the airplane, and have to go through recurrent training to keep your status

 

[avbug]

For surface operation, no pilot certificate is required. Accordingly, if no pilot certificate is required, then two pilots do not need to be aboard. Operating as a student pilot, mechanic, or as joe blow with only taxi training and nothing else, one may move from A to B. One need not have on one's person a medical certificate, pilot certificate, drivers license, dominos pizza card, or even a library card.

I encountered a humerous interlude between a pilot in a private airplane some years ago, and a FAA inspector. The inspector saw the individual taxi up wearing only thongs (footwear) and shorts, and proceeded to engage in a ramp check. the inspector was upset at the lack of ID, and complained about the pilot's apparel. The pilot said he wasn't aware he needed ID, or that a pilot certificate was required...the air is free to breathe after all, isn't it?

He had a go at the inspector for a while before he allowed that he was indeed a certificated pilot who had been washing his airplane (a T-6, if I recall), and had never operated it with the intention of flight. He needed no certificate or ID. The inspector left in a red faced huff.

I've often operated large crewed airplanes alone, and legally so. Not a big deal at all.

Some companies have mandates as to the number of personnel requried for taxi or ground operations, including wing walkers for maintenance functions. One little ding can cost a whole lot more than many, many hours of wing walking overtime.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

I encountered a humerous interlude between a pilot in a private airplane some years ago, and a FAA inspector. The inspector saw the individual taxi up wearing only thongs (footwear) and shorts, and proceeded to engage in a ramp check. the inspector was upset at the lack of ID, and complained about the pilot's apparel. The pilot said he wasn't aware he needed ID, or that a pilot certificate was required...the air is free to breathe after all, isn't it?

He had a go at the inspector for a while before he allowed that he was indeed a certificated pilot who had been washing his airplane (a T-6, if I recall), and had never operated it with the intention of flight. He needed no certificate or ID. The inspector left in a red faced huff.

I read an AOPA, or maybe ALPA article about a very similar story. Sounds almost identical. Anyhow in the version I saw, the fed had the guys certs. revoked a day or so after the encounter. He got them back after an extended legal battle, but it took a year or so. Wonder if it is the same guy?

 

[Tonto]

Avbug,

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate the experience and the humor. In my situation we operate a Lear and where drop off our pax is not near the aircraft's hangar, so either I or the copilot taxi it over by ourselves. I didn't think anything of it, but just wanted to ask around. Thanks again.