|
Originally Posted by tom11011
(Post 1741441)
I think the spirit of the rule is that a pilot needs to have 1000 hours of 121 time (PIC or SIC) in order to meet the requirement 121.436 after July 31st to be PIC. The rule probably should have said either SIC or PIC time. Since the date has now come and gone, the spirit of the rule is probably that they want you to have 1000 hours of experience as an SIC in a 121 operation before upgrading to Captain if you have no other 121 flight time.
Further, technically speaking, one could argue that if the pilot had the day off on July 31st, 2013 that he is not excepted from the 1,000 hour air carrier operations experience requirement because he did not serve as PIC on that date. |
Originally Posted by Xdashdriver
(Post 1740196)
Don't expect any real answers from FSDOs and ASIs, this stuff is all done in DC. I am in your shoes and have applied for an exemption already.
|
All,
What is the consensus for a situation like this... 2000+ 121 SIC from ten years ago & 2000+ 121 PIC from ten years ago. Does the old 121 SIC time carry more weight than the 121 PIC time? |
Originally Posted by jetavdk
(Post 1824702)
All,
What is the consensus for a situation like this... 2000+ 121 SIC from ten years ago & 2000+ 121 PIC from ten years ago. Does the old 121 SIC time carry more weight than the 121 PIC time? |
1000 hours pic in a 135 pax and cargo operations... So requiring an ATP. Does this time count towards the 121.436 requierment..
|
Originally Posted by coronafly
(Post 1854512)
1000 hours pic in a 135 pax and cargo operations... So requiring an ATP. Does this time count towards the 121.436 requierment..
|
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1739946)
seems to me that they "legalized" discrimination with pax carrying being held to a higher esteem than freight hauling doesn't it?
Question: how is a 1000 hr TPIC part 135 Brasilia CA flying cargo not good enough to head over to PIC a Brasilia or a Q400 flying 121 pax? |
Yes its in a Saab so 30 pax. Is the FAa going to say only the time you flew in the pax configuration is the time that counts of the pic.. Little odd even though the company certificate is certified under 135 pax/cargo
|
Originally Posted by aTomatoFlames
(Post 1854525)
Pax only in an aircraft with 10+ seats. Legal Interpretation here!
|
Originally Posted by aTomatoFlames
(Post 1854525)
Pax only in an aircraft with 10+ seats. Legal Interpretation here!
135.243 (a)(1) Of a turbojet airplane, of an airplane having a passenger-seat configuration, excluding each crewmember seat, of 10 seats or more, or of a multiengine airplane in a commuter operation as defined in part 119 of this chapter, unless that person holds an airline transport pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings and, if required, an appropriate type rating for that airplane. So I'm curious as to how people are interpreting 135.243(a)(1). When I read it I see reference to 3 distinct categories: 1. Turbojet airplane 2. Airplane with 10 or more pax seats 3. Multiengine airplane in a commuter operation under part 119 However, this interpretation letter from the Assistant Chief Counsel seems to think of it as only referencing 2 distinct categories: 1. Turbojet airplane with 10 or more pax seats 2. Multiengine airplane in a commuter operation under part 119 With this in consideration, if 135.243 (a)(1) is being officially interpreted as only referencing 2 distinct categories then they are saying that you DON'T need an ATP to operate a turbojet part 135 for aircraft with less than 10 pax seats! This is contrary to everything I have understood about 135 turbojet PIC requirements. I called the office and left a message and am waiting to hear back. Even if you look at 91.1053(a)(2)(i) you will see that it makes NO reference to pax seating number requirements. Only the requirement for an ATP and Type Rating. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:56 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands