Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Recent FedEx 767 delivery flight


qsman
07-24-2018, 10:15 AM
There were some great shots posted by some photographers to Twitter as this aircraft waited it's turn behind a whole bunch of old warbirds!


https://twitter.com/JenSchuld/status/1020437562161168384

I was wondering if the delivery pilots are forum members and took any pics or movies from their vantage point. From what I understand the warbirds drowned out the FedEx for quite a while.


trip
07-24-2018, 03:11 PM
There were some great shots posted by some photographers to Twitter as this aircraft waited it's turn behind a whole bunch of old warbirds!


https://twitter.com/JenSchuld/status/1020437562161168384

I was wondering if the delivery pilots are forum members and took any pics or movies from their vantage point. From what I understand the warbirds drowned out the FedEx for quite a while.

Airline pilots can't do that stuff, FAA says so.

JohnBurke
07-25-2018, 04:51 AM
Airline pilots can't do that stuff, FAA says so.

Pilots can't get held up, or take pictures? Of course a pilot can take a picture. Don't be ridiculous.

The 767 isn't held up by the piston airplanes. The A26 is on the taxiing onto the runway, and the other three are holding short, possibly doing runups. There's a fuel truck "in the way" too, so there's no appearance of the radial airplanes holding anybody up.

The two B25's are noisy in taxi because 7 of the 14 cylinders on each engine only have short-stacks; exhausts that are only 3-4" long, while the top cylinders use a collector that produces the "radial sound" that most are familiar with. The P51 and A26 aren't loud in taxi or the runup, really. I used to sit between four engines from the B25, and used a sound meter to record the decibel level in the cockpit at idle and takeoff. I'd have to go dig for the readings, but I did a comparison by standing at the departure end with the db meter while an F-16 departed in afterburner; it was louder in the airplane at idle than standing next to the F-16.

And my kids wonder why I'm deaf.


tomgoodman
07-25-2018, 05:29 AM
Whenever I see an A-26, I think of “Duke Elegant”.
If you haven’t read his tale yet, here it is:

The Big Chill -Tales of an old aviator -Duke Elegant (http://www.equinedzine.com/Duke_Elegant.htm)

JohnBurke
07-25-2018, 08:12 AM
I remember Duke.

From fires, a lot of that is strangely familiar. At least in the good old days. It's not like that, now.

The good old days make great stories, but weren't that good.

trip
07-25-2018, 09:23 PM
http://qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/when-can-a-pilot-take-a-picture-in-the-cockpit_diagram_004.png

Be sure to post it up on your Instagram.

JohnBurke
07-25-2018, 11:47 PM
That information is not correct. How about the regulatory references, chief legal counsel interpretations, and federal register preambles?

trip
07-26-2018, 05:25 AM
That information is not correct. How about the regulatory references, chief legal counsel interpretations, and federal register preambles?

I've read them and so have you.

JohnBurke
07-26-2018, 06:09 AM
That's fine. You made the statement and can't defend it except with cartoons. Enough said.

trip
07-26-2018, 07:00 AM
That's fine. You made the statement and can't defend it except with cartoons. Enough said.

If you think pulling out your film camera during taxi to snap pics is OK then were not even in the same universe. During cruise, does it have batteries? auto focus? Looks like 60K airline pilots got it wrong but JB got it right! Whatever.

JohnBurke
07-26-2018, 07:43 AM
If you think pulling out your film camera during taxi to snap pics is OK then were not even in the same universe. During cruise, does it have batteries? auto focus? Looks like 60K airline pilots got it wrong but JB got it right! Whatever.

Again, all you had to say is that you didn't have a leg to stand on. You made a statement you couldn't defend, couldn't cite a single reference, and now you're making idiotic references to autofocus? What is the regulatory reference for that?

Sixty thousand airline pilots are irrelevant: they do not make the regulation, nor is their position on regulation meaningful. The regulation is meaningful. The FAA Chief Legal Counsel and Assistant Chief Legal Counsel and even Regional Legal Counsel legal interpretations are relevant and meaningful. The Federal Register preambles associated with the introduction of regulation and regulatory change is meaningful, because those sources comprise the basis for a correct legal understanding of the regulation.

You've drawn from none of those, but a cartoon flow chart and straw man indefensible arguments to support a baseless statement founded on conjecture.

People sometimes do that when they haven't a leg on which to stand.

trip
07-26-2018, 09:14 AM
No need to get personal and all uptight!

I'll take your bait and give you a couple more clicks (if that's what you're really after)


§121.542 Flight crewmember duties.
(a) No certificate holder shall require, nor may any flight crewmember perform, any duties during a critical phase of flight except those duties required for the safe operation of the aircraft. Duties such as company required calls made for such nonsafety related purposes as ordering galley supplies and confirming passenger connections, announcements made to passengers promoting the air carrier or pointing out sights of interest, and filling out company payroll and related records are not required for the safe operation of the aircraft.

(b) No flight crewmember may engage in, nor may any pilot in command permit, any activity during a critical phase of flight which could distract any flight crewmember from the performance of his or her duties or which could interfere in any way with the proper conduct of those duties. Activities such as eating meals, engaging in nonessential conversations within the cockpit and nonessential communications between the cabin and cockpit crews, and reading publications not related to the proper conduct of the flight are not required for the safe operation of the aircraft.

(c) For the purposes of this section, critical phases of flight includes all ground operations involving taxi, takeoff and landing, and all other flight operations conducted below 10,000 feet, except cruise flight.


49 U.S.C.
United States Code, 2016 Edition
Title 49 - TRANSPORTATION
SUBTITLE VII - AVIATION PROGRAMS
PART A - AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY
subpart iii - safety
CHAPTER 447 - SAFETY REGULATION
Sec. 44732 - Prohibition on personal use of electronic devices on flight deck
From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov

§44732. Prohibition on personal use of electronic devices on flight deck
(a) In General.—It is unlawful for a flight crewmember of an aircraft used to provide air transportation under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, to use a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer while at the flight crewmember's duty station on the flight deck of such an aircraft while the aircraft is being operated.
(b) Exceptions.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to the use of a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer for a purpose directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in accordance with procedures established by the air carrier and the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
(c) Enforcement.—In addition to the penalties provided under section 46301 applicable to any violation of this section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may enforce compliance with this section under section 44709 by amending, modifying, suspending, or revoking a certificate under this chapter.
(d) Personal Wireless Communications Device Defined.—In this section, the term "personal wireless communications device" means a device through which personal wireless services (as defined in section 332(c)(7)(C)(i) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(C)(i))) are transmitted.
(Added Pub. L. 112–95, title III, §307(a), Feb. 14, 2012, 126 Stat. 61.)
Regulations
Pub. L. 112–95, title III, §307(d), Feb. 14, 2012, 126 Stat. 62, provided that: "Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Feb. 14, 2012], the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall initiate a rulemaking procedure for regulations to carry out section 44732 of title 49, United States Code (as added by this section), and shall issue a final rule thereunder not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act."

Sec. 91.21 — Portable electronic devices.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft:
(1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or

(2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR.

(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to—

(1) Portable voice recorders;

(2) Hearing aids;

(3) Heart pacemakers;

(4) Electric shavers; or

(5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used.

(c) In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft.

Have a great day JB!

JohnBurke
07-26-2018, 09:19 AM
No need to get personal and all uptight!

I'll take your bait and give you a couple more clicks (if that's what you're really after)

Stopped short of the runway watching warbirds ahead do a runup and takeoff, while the parking brake is set, is not a critical time, and there is no prohibition against taking a photograph.

Auto focus is irrelevant, as are your other unsupported points.

You didn't have a leg to stand upon, it seemed, and you've verified that. The regulation does not prohibit taking the picture.

Nor posting it online, if desired.

Nice try, though.

Sure you don't want to try a straw-man appeal to 60,000 pilots again?

trip
07-26-2018, 10:13 AM
This is fun, kind of!
It's OK to be wrong JB!

C. Operational Timeframes for Prohibition
Section 307 of the Act states that it is unlawful to use a device for personal use while an aircraft is being operated. The meaning of an “aircraft being operated” as it pertains to some FAA regulations is very broad, to include being parked at the gate while passengers are boarding. The FAA clarifies that for the purposes of this rule, the meaning of an “aircraft being operated” mirrors the definition of “flight time” in 14 CFR 1.1. Therefore, the prohibition on the personal use of laptop computers and personal wireless communications devices commences at taxi (movement of the aircraft under its own power) and ends when the aircraft is parked at the gate at the end of the flight segment.

Your battery powered auto focus 35mm still meets the definition of electronic device, so unless your "operator" determined it OK for 91.21 B5 it not OK.

You wouldn't do it with a FAA observer and you know that to be true.
Just ask him to snap the pic and email it to you, save some headaches!

Do you have an FAR compliant rig? Lots of us would like to see it.

tomgoodman
07-26-2018, 11:22 AM
For safety reasons, I would need a picture of all the slow warbirds in front of me, so I don’t lose count and rear-end one. Call it the geezer exemption. :D

JohnBurke
07-26-2018, 04:09 PM
This is fun, kind of!
It's OK to be wrong JB!



Your battery powered auto focus 35mm still meets the definition of electronic device, so unless your "operator" determined it OK for 91.21 B5 it not OK.

You wouldn't do it with a FAA observer and you know that to be true.
Just ask him to snap the pic and email it to you, save some headaches!

Do you have an FAR compliant rig? Lots of us would like to see it.

You've still provided no citation for your assertion.

Try to focus, if you can.

The thread involves a B767 parked, with four aircraft at the end of a runway. There is no regulatory prohibition against taking photographs from that position, and in response to your mistatement, I would take a picture with the FAA on board, as I have done. Most likely the FAA would either hand me their camera, or lean past me to take a picture. As has been done.

Still looking for your regulatory basis for "auto focus." Is that found in the sixty thousand pilots, too, or just the cartoon flow chart?

trip
07-26-2018, 09:00 PM
Cool story with the FAA! Bet you've got a lot of them Big John.
Still waiting for the link to that camera you use on the flight deck that can post up pics? Curious, you ever find your flying partner staring out their window for hours in silence?

JohnBurke
07-27-2018, 05:41 AM
Cool story with the FAA! Bet you've got a lot of them Big John.
Still waiting for the link to that camera you use on the flight deck that can post up pics? Curious, you ever find your flying partner staring out their window for hours in silence?

You made a false statement, and couldn't support it. You tried straw-man, focused on the irrelevant (still waiting on that autofocus argument), and now its an attempt to put down, still without substance.

People do that when they've no leg to stand on. Are you really missing both?

Given that most operators have allowance for portable electronic devices today, to include cell phones operated in "airplane mode," that have capability of taking a photo, and most all operators utilize electronic flight bags, many of which are iPads with camera capability, and given that any of those may be used to take a picture, particularly when sitting in the parking space, brake set, holding short, you're on bloody stumps there, mate.

JohnBurke
07-27-2018, 07:01 AM
For several years now airlines have operated with and used guidance to permit electronic devices on board, from EFB's in the the cockpit and noise cancelling headsets to music players, cameras, cell phones, iPads, laptop computers, and hundreds of other devices. If you haven't flown in the last fifteen years, you might have missed it.

You might have missed the more recent guidance to operators on compliance and establishing operator use and approval of such devices.

It's commonly used.

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/info/all_infos/media/2013/InFO13010.pdf

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/info/all_infos/media/2013/info13010sup.pdf

You attempted to quote 14 CFR 121.542 in part, without citation or link or reference, but omitted the most relevant part to this discussion.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=58363424df6dbcaa06540c04d829fefa&mc=true&node=se14.3.121_1542&rgn=div8

§121.542 Flight crewmember duties.
(a) No certificate holder shall require, nor may any flight crewmember perform, any duties during a critical phase of flight except those duties required for the safe operation of the aircraft. Duties such as company required calls made for such nonsafety related purposes as ordering galley supplies and confirming passenger connections, announcements made to passengers promoting the air carrier or pointing out sights of interest, and filling out company payroll and related records are not required for the safe operation of the aircraft.

(b) No flight crewmember may engage in, nor may any pilot in command permit, any activity during a critical phase of flight which could distract any flight crewmember from the performance of his or her duties or which could interfere in any way with the proper conduct of those duties. Activities such as eating meals, engaging in nonessential conversations within the cockpit and nonessential communications between the cabin and cockpit crews, and reading publications not related to the proper conduct of the flight are not required for the safe operation of the aircraft.

(c) For the purposes of this section, critical phases of flight includes all ground operations involving taxi, takeoff and landing, and all other flight operations conducted below 10,000 feet, except cruise flight.

Note: Taxi is defined as “movement of an airplane under its own power on the surface of an airport.”

(d) During all flight time as defined in 14 CFR 1.1, no flight crewmember may use, nor may any pilot in command permit the use of, a personal wireless communications device (as defined in 49 U.S.C. 44732(d)) or laptop computer while at a flight crewmember duty station unless the purpose is directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in accordance with air carrier procedures approved by the Administrator.


The note is important. When the parking brake is set and the aircraft is not moving under its own power on the surface of the airport, it has suspended taxi. It's for this reason that if a non-essential item needs addressing (eg, company call, etc) during the taxi, one should stop the aircraft, set the brake, make the call; same for studying charts that require crewmembers to go heads down, and so forth.

The 767 above is parked. It's not going anywhere. It's got four aircraft and a fuel truck immediately in front of it. There is no regulatory restriction to the crew on that aircraft from taking a picture with a camera, their phones, or their electronic flight bags, and there is absolutely NO regulatory restriction against sharing that picture as they see fit.

METO Guido
07-27-2018, 09:10 AM
Airline pilots can't do that stuff, FAA says so.

You're correct and it's codified specifically under 121.542. Take a look at ASI guidance for conducting route inspections. Even if this leg was conducted under Pt. 91, the operator's FM/GOM will provide binding policy as to aircraft operations on the surface. ICAO/EASA verbiage may vary. An aircraft/crew does not leave the taxi phase just because somebody set the brakes.

Flight Standards Information System (FSIMS) (http://fsims.faa.gov/PICResults.aspx?mode=Search&q=at%20jta%202.3.4&kw=at%20jta%202.3.4&status=a&syn=1&sort=0&searchwv=0&searchfuzzy=0&)

trip
07-27-2018, 09:51 AM
The old parking brake argument will never hold up in court if sterile violations are suspected when you abort and go off the end. How do you prove the brake was set when you were snapping pics at the runway end?
The P brake argument is only for ops/MX calls. As always your operation may have variances approved or not allowed that take precedence.
So all you new RJ drivers go ahead and pull out your cell/sandwich/newspaper at the runway end, Big John on the Internet said it's OK as long as the P brake is set.

AC 120-74B is a good read

"(b) Remind all cockpit occupants of the importance of maintaining a sterile cockpit, but encourage the ability to speak up if anyone sees a potential conflict or interprets a clearance differently. Encourage jump seaters to monitor communications.
(c) When operating an aircraft that does not have a door between the flight deck and the passenger compartment, the pilot may need to ask passengers to maintain a sterile cockpit and refrain from unnecessary conversation from the time the preflight preparations begin until the time the aircraft is clear of the terminal area and at cruising altitude. "

"(k) Though the use of cell phones and other electrical devices are prohibited during commercial use of aircraft, use of cell phones or personal devices can be a valuable asset such as, communicating with maintenance, ATC, as well as obtaining realtime weather. Typically these uses should only be allowed on inactive taxi areas when stopped, or parked with engines shut down. It is important to assure that everyone present in the aircraft have their phones and devices turned off during taxi operations to prevent any distractions."

What say you JB? Hey BTW good job getting dead thread up to 3 pages!
Let's hope our banter gets some new (and old pilots) thinking about this.

JohnBurke
07-27-2018, 01:00 PM
The old parking brake argument will never hold up in court if sterile violations are suspected when you abort and go off the end. How do you prove the brake was set when you were snapping pics at the runway end?


You're really dense enough to think that the B767 in the picture in this thread is going to slide off the end of the runway because one of the pilots takes a picture while holding short? You think it would have any bearing at all, or impact safety of flight, or become a legal issue in any way, shape, or form? You're not that dense, are you? Say it isn't so.

Were the aircraft or aircrew to have an issue and slide off the end for any number of reasons, the fact that the crew took a picture of four antiquated airplanes sitting on the end of the runway wouldn't have any impact at all. None.

But then you haven't been able to link or cite regulation stating otherwise, and let's face it, your citations are cropped, and sorely lacking. Chiefly ancedotal references to autofocus, cartoon flow charts, and references to what sixty thousand pilots might do. You do love the straw man.

It was your assertion, after all; you're unable to support it. This seems to upset you.

trip
07-27-2018, 01:37 PM
I'm not upset, I made a lighthearted statement about how airline pilots might not want to share pics with random requests or social media. You immediately resorted to name calling, ridicule and personal attacks as you usually do.
You provided zero references to back up your assertion that Pbrake equals a freebie.
If you can't read or comprehend I can't help you.

JohnBurke
07-27-2018, 07:00 PM
And still no citations. No support. No leg up on which to stand.

Yet you keep stomping those bloody stumps. Why is that?

Grumble
07-28-2018, 12:32 AM
JB youre wrong, and need to look up the definitions and differences of a PED and EFB. The exact same device can be both and depending on how and when you use it can get you violated.

If you’re so confident, I dare you to start posting pictures on social media you’ve taken, especially during sterile cockpit times.

Trip, let him go... hopefully he’s senior to you.

Sluggo_63
07-28-2018, 06:16 AM
You've still provided no citation for your assertion.

Try to focus, if you can.

The thread involves a B767 parked, with four aircraft at the end of a runway. There is no regulatory prohibition against taking photographs from that position, and in response to your mistatement, I would take a picture with the FAA on board, as I have done. Most likely the FAA would either hand me their camera, or lean past me to take a picture. As has been done.

Still looking for your regulatory basis for "auto focus." Is that found in the sixty thousand pilots, too, or just the cartoon flow chart?The auto focus isn't the point. It's whether or not the device you are using can transmit data wirelessly.

(d) During all flight time as defined in 14 CFR 1.1, no flight crewmember may use, nor may any pilot in command permit the use of, a personal wireless communications device (as defined in 49 U.S.C. 44732(d)) or laptop computer while at a flight crewmember duty station unless the purpose is directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in accordance with air carrier procedures approved by the Administrator.

Flight time means:

(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing;

(d)Personal Wireless Communications Device Defined.—
In this section, the term “personal wireless communications device” means a device through which personal wireless services (as defined in section 332(c)(7)(C)(i) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(C)(i))) are transmitted.So if you have started movement of the aircraft for the purpose of flight and are at a flight crewmember station, you can't use any device that transmits through a cell service, which would be all smartphone cameras and other cameras that transmit cellularly. If it's a camera that doesn't (old school SLR), you're probably good.

Of course, if it's Part 91, all that 121 stuff may not apply.

HwkrPlt
07-28-2018, 06:57 AM
Cell phones have airplane mode, so it doesn't transmit. Plus I bet 50% of the pax in back have their phones on, so I wouldn't worry about it screwing up an aircraft system. And if you can't take a pic while the other guy flies/taxis without crashing, perhaps you should choose a different career.

tomgoodman
07-28-2018, 07:26 AM
So if you have started movement of the aircraft for the purpose of flight and are at a flight crewmember station, you can't use any device that transmits through a cell service, which would be all smartphone cameras and other cameras that transmit cellularly.

Ah, so just set the brake and get up (for any plausible reason ;)).
Now you are not at a flight crewmember station. :D

METO Guido
07-28-2018, 07:30 AM
And if you can't take a pic while the other guy flies/taxis without crashing, perhaps you should choose a different career.

Because distraction during critical phases of flight has proven deadly & best practice crews work within the standards they've been qualified to.

HwkrPlt
07-28-2018, 08:07 AM
Because distraction during critical phases of flight has proven deadly & best practice crews work within the standards they've been qualified to.

Sure, sending a text at 1000 AGL on an ILS to mins is probably not a good idea. Taking a pic of a B-25 while holding short of a taxiway most likely won't lead to anyone dying.

But you need to tailor the regs to the lowest common denominator, so therefore you get what we have.

JohnBurke
07-29-2018, 07:32 PM
The auto focus isn't the point. It's whether or not the device you are using can transmit data wirelessly.


Autofocus is absolutely not the point, and irrelevant, but whether the device can transmit wirelessly is also irrelevant.

Whether it's used to transmit wirelessly is another matter, but not whether the device can, or not.

I am issued an iPad electronic flight bag which most certainly CAN transmit wirelessly. It's not used or that purpose in flight, though some are. It can also take pictures. Go figure.

In fact, just prior to departure, just before entering the runway, a departure message is sent from that EFB, updated with the takeoff time, and one is sent after landing.

Parked, holding short of the runway, with no possibility of movement given four warbirds and a fuel truck, there is no prohibition against a crew on a ferry flight, which is the subject of this thread, from taking a picture of those aircraft (or fuel truck). None.

Someone suggested that I post to social media; I don't do facebook or the myriad other rubber-boned teenager sites, so you won't be finding those pictures posted to "social media."

The fedex crew in the picture at the outset of this thread have not been referenced as having taken a picture, but had they done so, they'd have been neither wrong nor in violation of the regulation.

Sluggo_63
07-29-2018, 09:41 PM
That information is not correct. How about the regulatory references, chief legal counsel interpretations, and federal register preambles?

...you couldn't defend, couldn't cite a single reference...

You've still provided no citation for your assertion.

But then you haven't been able to link or cite regulation stating otherwise...

And still no citations. No support. No leg up on which to stand.

Yet you keep stomping those bloody stumps. Why is that?

Sluggo63: **Types a response with citations and support**

JohnBurke: **That’s stupid and doesn’t make sense to me, so you’re wrong**

The fact that your company issued EFB is allowed to be used in flight and transmits a message is a straw man that has no bearing on whether or not you can use a personal electronic device during flight to take photos.

You ask others for citations and references to support their statements, but you don’t provide any supporting your side. Where are they? Where are your Chief Counsel Opinions? You do know that as recent as 2014 the FAA actively has gone after pilots who were posting photos to social media, right?

One thing I will agree with you on is that you’re right, it’s doesn’t make sense. An aircraft parked with the parking brake set is not going to be in any danger if the pilot snapped a few warbird pictures. But, the FAA rarely makes sense, and if you took that photo with a device that is capable of transmitting wirelessly (whether it was in “airplane mode” of not), you were in violation.

JohnBurke
07-30-2018, 12:35 AM
The fact that your company issued EFB is allowed to be used in flight and transmits a message is a straw man that has no bearing on whether or not you can use a personal electronic device during flight to take photos.


The fact that you haven't read the thread or responses, or the citations (with links), and that that you think taking photos in flight is somehow relevant, points clearly to the simple fact that further discussion with you would be a waste of time.

The discussion is about a crew of an airplane on a ferry flight, held short of the runway on the ground by four warbirds and a fuel truck. Read the damn thread.



You ask others for citations and references to support their statements, but you don’t provide any supporting your side. Where are they? Where are your Chief Counsel Opinions? You do know that as recent as 2014 the FAA actively has gone after pilots who were posting photos to social media, right?


You really didn't read it, did you, boy?

I posted not only the regulation, but additional supporting materials, references, AND links, which you'd know if you'd read the damn thread.

Social media is irrelevant.

I didn't make the statement that pilots can't take pictures. That was another poster, who has been wholly unable to support his own statement, and who has posted partial quotes of material without citation, and without link, and who has misunderstood that which he attempted to quote.

You too, it seems.

The thing is, it was his assertion, not mine. It's his responsibility prove, not mine.

Sluggo_63
07-30-2018, 01:32 AM
The fact that you haven't read the thread or responses, or the citations (with links), and that that you think taking photos in flight is somehow relevant, points clearly to the simple fact that further discussion with you would be a waste of time.

The discussion is about a crew of an airplane on a ferry flight, held short of the runway on the ground by four warbirds and a fuel truck. Read the damn thread.



You really didn't read it, did you, boy?

I posted not only the regulation, but additional supporting materials, references, AND links, which you'd know if you'd read the damn thread.

Social media is irrelevant.

I didn't make the statement that pilots can't take pictures. That was another poster, who has been wholly unable to support his own statement, and who has posted partial quotes of material without citation, and without link, and who has misunderstood that which he attempted to quote.

You too, it seems.

The thing is, it was his assertion, not mine. It's his responsibility prove, not mine.
I read the whole thing, and the one reference you did cite, you skipped over the important and relevant part.

Read 121.542(d) and tell me how you arrive at your conclusion.

Sluggo_63
07-30-2018, 07:19 AM
You really didn't read it, did you, boy?You must be a joy to fly with.

I posted not only the regulation, but additional supporting materials, references, AND links, which you'd know if you'd read the damn thread.Two of your links are irrelevant, since they had to do with passenger use of PEDs. ("Expanding Use of Passenger Portable Electronic Devices (PED)", dated 10/28/13 and "FAA Aid to Operators for the Expanded Use of Passenger PEDS", dated 6/9/14). Worthless to the conversation, but thanks for wasting our time with that.

Your next link was to CFR 14 121.542. Here you were getting warm, but you incorrectly focused on paragraphs (a)-(c) and that note about the definition of taxi which you said was important, but actually means nothing for this conversation. What you need to do is keep reading down to paragraph (d) which was the new paragraph added in Feb 2014 to address pilots using PEDs while operating the aircraft.

FAA-2012-0929 Final Rule (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-02-12/pdf/2014-02991.pdf)

Social media is irrelevant.I agree. Except for the fact that social media was what the FAA was using to find these pilots in violation. What is irrelevant are your anecdotes about you snapping pictures with the FAA in your jumpseat or the FAA leaning forward to take pictures. Also irrelevant is the fact that your company EFB transmits data to the company before takeoff and after landing. None of these things are germane to the conversation. I don't know why you added them, but it's fine. I can separate the wheat from the chaff.

I didn't make the statement that pilots can't take pictures.Nor did I.

That was another poster, who has been wholly unable to support his own statement, and who has posted partial quotes of material without citation, and without link, and who has misunderstood that which he attempted to quote.Pot, meet kettle...

You too, it seems.I believe I have wholly backed up my side of the argument.

Maybe it got lost in all the replies, but here is what I'm saying. You may not use a Personal Electronic Device for non-company business while you are sitting at your duty station any time from when you block out until you block in. That includes, cell phones, tablets, or any other device that is capable of transmitting a signal (whether or not the cellular capability is turned on or off). So, if you have blocked out, and are sitting on a taxiway, with the brake set and you want to take a picture with your iPhone, that is a violation. If you want to take a picture with a non-transmitting capable camera, you are fine, depending on your individual airline's rules.

You seem to be conflating the "Sterile Cockpit Rule" {121.542 (a)-(c)} with the new "Prohibition on Personal Use of Electronic Devices on the Flight Deck" {121.542 (d)}.

JohnBurke
07-30-2018, 08:23 AM
What is irrelevant are your anecdotes about you snapping pictures with the FAA in your jumpseat or the FAA leaning forward to take pictures. Also irrelevant is the fact that your company EFB transmits data to the company before takeoff and after landing. None of these things are germane to the conversation. I don't know why you added them, but it's fine. I can separate the wheat from the chaff.


You really can't because apparently you still haven't read the damn thread, kiddo.

They're relevant because they were introduced only in response to other posters, who raised the issues. The initial introduction was irrelevant, as is most of your commentary, in light of the original post.

Did you figure out that we're not talking about sending pictures in flight, yet?

bravo24
08-02-2018, 08:08 AM
These delivery flights are operated under Part 91. Would that make a difference?

dynap09
08-02-2018, 09:16 AM
I believe I have wholly backed up my side of the argument.

Maybe it got lost in all the replies, but here is what I'm saying. You may not use a Personal Electronic Device for non-company business while you are sitting at your duty station any time from when you block out until you block in. That includes, cell phones, tablets, or any other device that is capable of transmitting a signal (whether or not the cellular capability is turned on or off). So, if you have blocked out, and are sitting on a taxiway, with the brake set and you want to take a picture with your iPhone, that is a violation. If you want to take a picture with a non-transmitting capable camera, you are fine, depending on your individual airline's rules.



I thought PED rules were simple under part 91, you can use it if operator has determined it won't interfere. If this is a company issued device - what more do people want? This is a Fedex ferry flight right?

Hard to see an issue, despite the loud noises from Sluggo

91.21 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.21)

If this is banned, the FAA has a MUCH bigger issue with LOTS of other part 91 flying out there (full videos etc etc on cell phones and more).

Sluggo, you might want to speak to someone offline about your part 91 theories on PED's to make sure you are on the right track.

Sluggo_63
08-03-2018, 12:17 AM
I thought PED rules were simple under part 91, you can use it if operator has determined it won't interfere. If this is a company issued device - what more do people want? This is a Fedex ferry flight right?
Ugh... Once JohnBurke started with the ad hominem I told myself I wasn't going to wade back into this. That old saw about wrestling with a pig...

We don't know if it was Part 91 or Part 121. Since I fly for the operator in question, I'll tell you that there is a better than even chance that this was dispatched under Part 121.

Hard to see an issue, despite the loud noises from Sluggo

91.21 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.21)

If this is banned, the FAA has a MUCH bigger issue with LOTS of other part 91 flying out there (full videos etc etc on cell phones and more).

Sluggo, you might want to speak to someone offline about your part 91 theories on PED's to make sure you are on the right track.
I never said this wouldn't be allowed under Part 91. In fact in an earlier post I said:
Of course, if it's Part 91, all that 121 stuff may not apply.

But you did fail to mention Part 91.21(c)
In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft.In this case, FedEx (through its FOM), not the PIC makes the determination on what PEDs can be used while operating the aircraft.

What I was addressing was the fact that JohnBurke was totally incorrect when he consistently told people that it was okay to use a cell phone or PED to take photos after block-out as long as the brakes are set.

Given that most operators have allowance for portable electronic devices today, to include cell phones operated in "airplane mode," that have capability of taking a photo, and most all operators utilize electronic flight bags, many of which are iPads with camera capability, and given that any of those may be used to take a picture, particularly when sitting in the parking space, brake set, holding short, you're on bloody stumps there, mate.

The 767 above is parked. It's not going anywhere. It's got four aircraft and a fuel truck immediately in front of it. There is no regulatory restriction to the crew on that aircraft from taking a picture with a camera, their phones, or their electronic flight bags, and there is absolutely NO regulatory restriction against sharing that picture as they see fit.

The bolded above is absolutely incorrect according to CFR 14 121.542(d). I think it's silly. I'm sure most other people think it's silly, too. Pilots probably don't follow it much, and they don't get caught. But for him to read 121.542(d) and tell everyone that a pilot can take photos with their cellphone or EFB if they are holding short of a runway with the engines running and parking brake set is incorrect.

METO Guido
08-03-2018, 06:59 AM
Doesn't really matter if it's framing a snapshot, typing on a iPad, squeezing a mayo package onto dry turkey or daydreaming about the flirty conversation you had at the pub last night, the issue (for me anyway) is one of distraction. At an active RW threshold, in tight proximity to moving traffic. Nearly everyone recalls aviation's worst nightmare at Tenerife. Remember what the PIC was so preoccupied with?

The comment with respect to photos was; "Airline pilots can't…" Well at least they know they're not supposed to. As far as dispatching under Pt. 91 while operating an airliner, done my share. Was never a shortcut for the crew.

dynap09
08-03-2018, 07:39 AM
But you did fail to mention Part 91.21(c)
In this case, FedEx (through its FOM), not the PIC makes the determination on what PEDs can be used while operating the aircraft.



The point here is this was a company provided item I thought. Don't your ipads take photos? Those are used after block out for company stuff. So company has presumably determined it won't interfere.

That is the requirement FAA side. If operator says it won't interfere, FAA doesn't layer on any particular use restrictions under part 91.

If you are claiming FEDEX is flying devices (company provided) that interfere that is a very strong claim - you'd need to support that.

For personal camera, FOM would guide - so I don't have a clue there.

dera
08-03-2018, 08:00 AM
The point here is this was a company provided item I thought. Don't your ipads take photos? Those are used after block out for company stuff. So company has presumably determined it won't interfere.

That is the requirement FAA side. If operator says it won't interfere, FAA doesn't layer on any particular use restrictions under part 91.

If you are claiming FEDEX is flying devices (company provided) that interfere that is a very strong claim - you'd need to support that.

For personal camera, FOM would guide - so I don't have a clue there.

EFBs are items that go through conformance checks, they are allowed only after that process. At our shop, we can't take pictures on our EFB iPads. Not sure how it is at FDX.
So your company iPads are legal, but your personal iPad isn't. That's FAA logic for you.

dynap09
08-03-2018, 11:05 AM
Fair enough - a conformance check seems reasonable, though I would be curious at the noncomformance rates. If low enough (ie zero) it might indicate apple is consistent in mfg. or has its own conformance testing

Sluggo_63
08-03-2018, 09:55 PM
The point here is this was a company provided item I thought. Don't your ipads take photos? Those are used after block out for company stuff. So company has presumably determined it won't interfere.

That is the requirement FAA side. If operator says it won't interfere, FAA doesn't layer on any particular use restrictions under part 91.

If you are claiming FEDEX is flying devices (company provided) that interfere that is a very strong claim - you'd need to support that.

For personal camera, FOM would guide - so I don't have a clue there.
Respectfully, the point isn't about being a company item or interference at all.

METOGuido got it exactly right when he said:
Doesn't really matter if it's framing a snapshot, typing on a iPad, squeezing a mayo package onto dry turkey or daydreaming about the flirty conversation you had at the pub last night, the issue (for me anyway) is one of distraction.
If you read the final rule (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-02-12/pdf/2014-02991.pdf) creating 121.542(d) you'll see that the FAA says:
Several incidents involving a breakdown of cockpit discipline prompted Congress to address this issue via legislation. In one instance, two pilots were using their personal laptop computers during cruise flight and lost situational awareness, leading to a 150 mile fly-by of their destination. In another instance, a pilot sent a text message on her personal cell phone during the taxi phase of the flight after the aircraft pushed back from the gate and before the take-off sequence. These incidents illustrate the potential for such devices to create a hazardous distraction during critical phases of flight.
This rule will ensure that certain nonessential activities do not contribute to the challenge of task management on the flight deck and do not contribute to a loss of situational awareness due to attention to non-essential activities, as highlighted by these incidents.
You see, 121.542(d) wasn't about anything but reducing distractions related to PEDs. That's why they stuck it in 121.542 in the first place. That was the "sterile cockpit" paragraph.
In fact, the FAA actually addresses interference in the final rule.
The FAA notes that the potential for electromagnetic interference on the flight deck is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. This rulemaking is intended to ensure that certain non-essential activities do not contribute to the challenge of task management on the flight deck or a loss of situational awareness due to attention
to non-essential tasks.

And it doesn't matter if the device is company issued or personal. It's all about its use. You are allowed to use your personal cellphone to call dispatch or maintenance if it's required or related to the flight. You are not allowed to use a company iPad to take a picture of a plane taxiing by in front of you.

And I agree the rule is dumb. It is very broad in what it bans (personal wireless communications devices). This includes everything basically that can transmit a signal. Cell phone, smart phone, e-readers, gaming systems, etc. But the FAA actually says "The provisions of the final rule do not prohibit the use of devices that
do not meet the definition of personal wireless communications devices." So, if it doesn't transmit, it's okay. So a newspaper, a book, a point and shoot camera (without wireless) are all okay. Am I any less distracted taking a picture with a Canon SureShot than I am with my iPhone? Probably not. Am I less engaged when I do a crossword puzzle with pen and paper rather than on a tablet? No. But one is banned and not the other. Go figure.



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1