86pilot

Boy, were getting the short end of the new rules stick aren't we?

TedStryker

I agree - what a crock. NATA (the lobbying arm of the 135 industry) just came out with an announcement that they're "pleased" that on-demand 135 operations were not included in the rulemaking.

They claim they're still "committed to the need for a revision of the Part 135 crewmember regulations related to flight hours, duty periods and rest requirements." Yeah, right. As soon as the FAA comes out with anything for the 135 world they'll be screaming bloody murder about how it's too constricting or will cost too much.

The "you're on call 24/7/365" parade continues.

WMUPilot

Are you talking about the nprn that came out for 121? My interpretation was it said, amongst other things, "Hey Part 135, you're next! So get ready!" I hope it's so for your sake. But the 121 on call guys must be squirmin!

deadstick35

That's what I got out of it, too. Also, there are many interpretations from the Chief Counsel's office that 24/7 call is a no-go.

captscott26

Take a deep breath dude! If you read the document it says 135 ops is next in line. Like it or not the rules need to be taylored to the 135 world. It wont work out for anyone if no company can operate under the new rules. Take a chill pill...and stay by your phone

nancy33

New rules are out, if we are fatigued then they can only work us an additional 8 hours.

86pilot

And how long do you think it will take for that phone call to come? Why don't you hold your breath and I'll call you when they call me.

TedStryker

That may be so but it has not made its way to the rank-and-file FSDO level. And it won't, because no FSDO inspector is going to stick his neck out by being the first one to violate a company for "on-call 24/7."

Our company's take on it is that if we do anything to compromise our 24/7 availability it puts us at a competitive disadvantage because there will always be plenty of other operators who are willing to take the trip. We would have to hire twice as many pilots to give everybody a "shift" with 10 hard hours off duty. Until all companies are held to the same standard, nothing is going to change. We put up with it because the only alternative is being unemployed. The threat of a violation is simply not realistic.

Walkeraviator

Our FSDO has stuck its neck out. We used to be on 12 hour shifts of being on a pager... if the pager went off your duty time started. Which was good because if a call came in at 4pm (6-6 schedule), and was a 5-6 hour medical trip.. you still had 14 hours to git'r'done, instead of timing out in 4 hours.

Well a helicopter guy in our company (not liking that we got to sit at home on a pager while he sat at work) asked teh FAA for clarification. A letter was sent straight to our corporate gus that if we were on a pager... we were on duty... period. So at our company (partially thanks to the Union)... i get 7 days on and 7 hard days off... and at 6am... i have to be at teh base on duty...

So there are a few FSDOs out there already crackin down on teh pager thing....


(and this is a HUGE problem... we have to delay and turn down time critical medical missions because of pilots timing out... and we go out of service wuite often to allow crew rest...but i am glad i do work for a company that isnt willing to risk my ticket so they can make money...)

fly-efi

The "you're on call 24/7/365" parade continues.[/quote]

If you work for a 135 company that requires you to be on call 24/7/365 then they are in violation of FAR 267 (f) which states:

"(f) The certificate holder must provide each flight crewmember at least 13 rest periods of at least 24 consecutive hours each in each calendar quarter".

This has to be scheduled as a day off in advance.