In the on-demand charter biz, rest ain't a problem till it's a problem. It's up to you (the pilot) to be sure it does not become a problem. Clear as mud huh?

A couple of final (we'll see) thoughts on the subject.

The problem with leaving it up to pilots to call fatigue is that certain "go to" pilots and operators can end up with an unfair competitive advantage.

If an operator has a pilot that they can push to fly on three hours of sleep, how do you think they are going to view the guy that (unbelievably!) requires eight hours immediately prior to working a fourteen hour day?

Very specifically dictating what does and does not constitute rest, levels the playing field.

Regarding the scheduled vs. unscheduled issue, 91K ops also comply with this definition of rest. Those are not scheduled ops, and we all know how Netjets is just barely scraping by. :rolleyes:

excellent post SR22! There has been debate on this topic for as long as I can remember. As far as I can say, the debate is simply the result of an operators greed, and a pilots ignorance. There should be no debate on the topic, as the chief counsel has on numerous occasions defined the "gray area" to black and white conditions.

I would like to draw attention to one more counsel oppinion that was in response to a HEMES operation, but the language is identical to a regular on demand operation. Its the November 9, 1990 (#1) oppinion.

"Your first question asks whether FAR Section 135.271 allows an operator to schedule a pilot for 24 hours of standby duty where the pilot would have no other duties assigned except that he or she must be rested and ready to respond for duty when called.
Section 135.271(d) states:
"Each flight crewmember must receive at least 8 consecutive hours of rest during any 24 consecutive hour period of HEMES assignment. A flight crewmember must be relieved of the HEMES assignment if he or she has not or cannot receive at least 8 consecutive hours of rest during any 24 consecutive hour period of a HEMES assignment." A pilot on 24-hour standby duty in your scenario must be available for duty anytime during the
24-hour period. Even if the standby pilot is not called to duty during the 24-hour standby period, that 24-hour standby period cannot be considered rest. The FAA has consistently interpreted its "rest" requirements to be satisfied only if the rest time is determined prospectively, free from all
duty, and free from all present responsibility for work or duty. A standby pilot has a present responsibility to work if called; therefore he or she is on duty and must be assigned the required rest period in FAR Section 135.271(d)."

As far as I am concerned, this is an open and shut case. Just because your POI allows it, doesn't make it any more legal. Your POI may be the guy that determines to violate you, but if a notice of enforcement comes down from above and he is told to enforce this more stringently (like they have done in the past) then its your certificates.

As far as the economics of it are concerned...when all operators begin to follow the rules, the customers who use those operators will begin to learn and accept the changes. If it means hiring more crews, then it means raising prices on the aircraft to compensate, and the kinks will work themselvs out. Those operators that wont raise prices and reduce wages will get pilots from the bottom of the barrel and business will suffer as a result. Air ambulance margins are enormous and they can afford multiple crews.

Just my 1.5 cents. This is a great topic, and glad to see people arent responding like it were a youtube comment section...

Dear Flyboyjake,

Unfortunately, everyone who agrees with you has been terminated; (ref: Darwin, The Origin of Species)

Good Day, Good Night and best of luck in your battles.

Kindest Regards,
Coyote

Interestingly, in the 121 world, DOMESTIC reserves are required to have the 10 hours prospective rest, but INTERNATIONAL reserves are considered available for 24 hours a day for the entire number of days on call, with no stated rest periods.

Joe

Coyote,

I fail to see the relevance to darwin...Those who agree with me are far from the weak. interestingly, in a roundabout way, the FAA agrees. This doesn't mean I am going to be the first to go cry to the FSDO that they are breaking the rules. I have my own arse to look out for.

I guess I'm not sure what you mean

joepilot, I havent been in the 121 word, but is that a company expectation or is that coded in the 121 puzzle somewhere?

Flexibility, as opposed to intelligence or physical skills, determines the success of a species.

you can be flexible right into a 168hr work week if you wish. I have never read Chucks book, but the legitimacy of an operator requiring its pilots to contradict the overseeing government laws isn't remotely related to the flexibility of a pilot. On that note, are you saying that a pilot shouldn't turn down a trip in a plane with no seatbelts because he should be more flexible? Sure its an extreme, but its the same concept. Just because people have been getting away with it doesn't mean we should turn our heads and continue.

Coyote, do you disagree that it is illegal? and if no, what is your stake in it?

Fly safe :)

Glad to see you back, Capt'n! Generally I defer to the wisdom of my elders; but you're getting a little desperate, aren't you? Referencing a study of Blue-Footed Boobies and equatorial penguins to justify violating the FARs and unnecessarily risking your life/livelihood, come on.

I was happy to see the word 'Unfortunately' in your post. Maybe you really are a line pilot, and not a management troll. I'm still looking for that "other" rest definition you mentioned, Capt'n. ;)

Jake, thanks for the compliment! Oh, and I haven't been terminated.