SR22

You may be right, sir. I certainly do not claim to be an expert in economics. My thinking is it would likely depend upon the market that each operator caters to. As I do not have access to all 135 clients' balance sheets, I can only offer my guess as to the financial viability of a night shift. My guess is that most people/companies that can already afford to charter planes can and probably will spring for it. Also, salary is not my highest priority, other QOL issues are more important to me. So if implementation resulted in two 50k positions with work-life balance versus one 100k position for one poor soul, then that would suit me fine.

I am afraid I must disagree with you here. I have done a fairly thorough search on this topic. The First Circuit opinion is the only one I have come across that specifically addresses 135 rest, my interest. I do not recall seeing any contradictory 121 rulings, though I cannot say for certain.

I did find many interpretations issued by the Chief Counsel's office that define rest, both 135 and 121. If I recall correctly there was even one that went back to the time of the CAA (FAA's predecessor, I believe). Every one of those interpretations defined rest in terms similar to those in my previous posts.

If you know of an opinion/interpretation that defines rest differently, perhaps you could direct me to a particular case. If I have missed something (due to lack of access or whatever), I am not afraid to admit I'm wrong. It was not my intent to be persuasive by selecting only certain cases.

Even assuming a contradictory 121 supplemental opinion, how do you see that affecting this opinion? It is my understanding that 121 and 135 rest regs have historically been treated differently. From what I've read, there were years of interpretations defining rest for 121 purposes before a single 135 interpretation came along.

Ah, that sincerely sounds nice! Glad you liked the post, and thank you for the reasoned discussion.

SR22

Below is RedGuy considering leaving his job to fly for Pinnacle, not three months ago (link following):

See, to me that even doesn't sound that bad. I don't mind working at all. What I absolutely hate is getting called out at 2200 or so after you've been awake all day and getting sent on a 14+ hour duty day. The you fly home, and sleep all day, get up for a while, force yourself to go back to sleep that night, then be up all day the next day and get called out late again that night. Just the fact that I don't have to answer the phone after my 12 hours is up would be a huge relief.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...4&postcount=49


Geez, I don't understand why some guys can't just say thanks!

RedGuy

Actually after talking to some people that work at the regionals, it turns out what I do isn't all that bad. Ever hear of a high speed? I won't lie to you being on call sucks, but it's far from unsafe.

I don't know where you work, but most of the on call pilots I know don't make 100K, and it wouldn't be dividing 100K up twice, it'd be more like dividing $50-60K up 4 or 5 times. So if you can live off of something like $12k so you can sleep at night, go right ahead, but personally I need to make more than that to live on, and demand more than that as a professional. Many of these on demand 135's aren't running with a huge profit margin, so increasing staff would come with a decrease in pay. Also many 135 on demand companies don't really pay a salary, so if you don't fly, you don't make any money.

This isn't anything new pilots have been flying on call for decades, and as long as there's manufacturing industry and people still need emergency medical flights pilots will be on call. Now there are jobs out there where you have a set 9-5 schedule, but generally those are flight instructing. BTW You can make about $50k flight instructing if your any good, so why not try that.

Oh, and you never did divulge what your interest in this is, did you get fired from an on demand operator?

bustinmins

Whatever you want to call it, the burden is on you to make sure you're safe, legal and rested.

Don't depend on the company to tell you what to do because they will sell your soul to make a dollar. They will push you to do things you shouldn't do and then self-disclose to the FAA when your incident comes to light.

You'll be the only one in the room without a chair when the music stops.

Don't be that guy or gal!

bustinmins

"Don't make me use the "F"-word (Fatigue)."

Here is something you can say to just about anyone.

Company: Are you refusing to fly?
Pilot: No, I'm not. However, I am "unable to accept" the trip/pairing the way you have it built.

Company: Are you refusing to fly?
Pilot: Of course not. Are YOU asking me to operate the aircraft in an unsafe manner?

Company: Are you refusing to fly?
Pilot: Of course not, I'm telling you that I'm fatigued and thus "unable to accept" the pairing without legal period prior to the trip. I'm your guy but I need some rest prior to block out.

The company can usually fire you for insubordination or refusing a trip. Thus, never refuse a trip and never act unprofessional. In each of these examples, you are cordial, professional and to the point. You never refuse a trip and even better, you offer up a solution.

SR22

Thanks for the good advice, bustinmins.

Jetcap37

We operate 14CFR Part 135, like most here do.
We abide by the applicable FAR's and OpSpecs, they are literally our law and rules we have live by.

1. At the end of an assigned flight you get asked to reposition the airplane back to your home base, but this is going to make you go over 14 hours duty and 10 hours of flight time. Is this legal?
2. Are there such things as "Part91" legs since are we doing all our flying Part135?
3. In example 1, when you accept the trip and fly 11 hours, do you need 16 hours of rest? Even though last flight is Part 91?
4. Can you even go over 14 hours of duty time?

Ask these questions around different FSDO's and you will as many different answers as you asked FSDO's.
The reason why the FAA has not changed the FAR's is because the really can't, it is to Grey of an area and legal does not want to touch it. If they would set it in stone, there is no way around it and it would kill probably the biggest industry in the USA. The unscheduled Part 135 industry.

For years I have been hearing they want to start using ICAO, JAR rules for Unscheduled 135. They still haven't
http://eu-ops.luftfartstilsynet.no/w...ing-8-2008.pdf
Starts at page 191, Subpart Q.

And just a side remark, Part 135 has been operating like this for many many many years and there is always certain types of people that can't handle 135 Unscheduled and generally as it turns out they just can't handle 121 either and tend to drop out of commercial aviation all together. In my years of doing 135, and yes which I am still doing and will be till I retire, I have seen quite a few and I am fairly sure I just recognized one more

DylanFan

I've done a little research and the simplest explanation I can come up with is outlined in a couple of Chief Counsel Opinions from 2007 and 2005 (links below).

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...07/schwarz.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...ill135267f.DOC

They both state that in order for time to be counted as "rest," it has to have three criteria. Rest must be 1) continuous, 2) determined prospectively, (i.e. known in advance) and 3) free from all restraint by the certificate holder, including freedom from present responsibility from work should the occasion arise. Nowhere does it say that "on call" time is considered duty time, but it's also not considered rest time. The book "Everything Explained For The Professional Pilot" by Richie Lengel seems to agree with this.

One of the most interesting things I came across is that if you look at the rest time requirements laid out for flight attendants in 135.273 (by flipping the page after looking at the pilot duty time regs) you'll see that it begins with definitions for calendar day, duty period, and rest period. If those same definitions were copied word for word into the beginning of 135.267 (the flight crew rest time requirements) there wouldn't be any question about it.

At my company we're almost definitely in violation because we're on call 24/7 and are paid on salary. Therefore we are more or less required to take any trips that come up. (Obviously we don't do anything crazy or unsafe, but pop up trips are fairly common.)

I still have a few questions that I haven't been able to figure out:

1. Does anyone know of a company (or pilot for that matter) that's ever been violated because of this? I'm guessing you can't look this up on the FAA website, but obviously someone got in trouble back in 1999 to prompt that appeal to the first circuit court.

2. How would a company successfully operate a non-scheduled operation without being in violation of the law? As far as I can tell, you can either operate on a ten hour callout so you can get your rest time in, or you can count your on call time as duty time and only be on call for 14 hours at a time. Of course when the average trip (in my case anyway) lasts about 12 hours you can only really be useful for the first two of your 14 hours. Any ideas? By the way, apparently the NATA wants to change the rules. I found a proposal for it here:

http://www.nata.aero/filedownload?da..._ID&rowId=3590

That's all I got.

VTcharter

Duty time and rest time is such a ridiculous mess which is purposefully set up in such a way that it leaves the FAA option to violate should the need arise. I doubt that a violation would ever come about unless something happened to bring it on, such as an accident or incident, but it could. Get on the wrong side of your POI and you may have some issues if you are operating based on principles located in the "grey areas".

At our company, we make every attempt to follow the guidleines to the "t" and err to the conservative side in the grey areas. For example we are only assigned to be on-call for 10 hour periods thoughout the day, after which we are assigned rest for at least nine hours so that we are legal for another full duty period the next day. (10 hours rest for ops under 135.267) That on-call period is "duty time" as we are not free from the constraints of the company and it is not prospectively identified as rest. If I get a call on hour nine of my on-call period, then I can fly, however I only have six hours of duty remaining unless I am on reduced from the rest period before...in which case I would have less.

DylanFan

If you are on call for 10 hours and then get 10 hours rest (under 135.267) it seems like a company would need twice as many pilots to operate. Even then, I can't see how you would keep a plane covered (always ready to go within an hour or two) without even more than that. How exactly does your crew scheduling work? I also wonder how air ambulance operators do it without breaking the regs.