You're really not getting it.

The FAA would have to be aware that the illegal charters were happening, you see. That's really the point.

People tend to fly below the radar until they do something that garners attention. Something like, say, crashing a Falcon 50 without brakes with two unqualified pilots at the controls on an illegal charter...

The POI at my old shop endorsed illegal rolling rest because "that's the way it's always been done here." No hard days off, rest not known in advance, and a 24/7 on-call status to the company making all rest not valid (as it involved an obligation to the company at all times). Granted, the shop was the dirtbag operator but doing so with the POI's blessing is still a major issue.

Seriously hope to see more stringent oversight of 135 operators in the future. Even though this flight may have been operated under Part 91 (still unsure on this), I have no reason to believe the company was not willing to send the same illegal crew on a 135 charter.

This "crew" wasn't a crew, and wasn't able to operate under 135, because neither one was legal to do so. There was no possibility of operating under the certificate, because to do so would have been a violation. The "captain" had no type rating and wasn't qualified to act as PIC under Part 91 or 135. The "first officer" had no type rating and no instrument rating, and was only a private pilot (with those privileges granted on the basis of his Canadian license). Regardless of the operating rule, the flight was illegal.

It was conducted as as a revenue charter, off the books, like many of the flights. The "first officer," and owner/operator of the certificate, had been making illegal charter flights in other aircraft such as the King Air for a long time, and involving others in taking charter flights off the books, too.

It was an illegal 135 flight. Not done under the certificate because nobody was qualified (neither was the aircraft airworthy), yet none the less a charter. The company routinely did that off the books with pilots who had no 135 training and no 135 certificate, but were willing to take flights.

It's ironic that the owner/operator was killed on this particular flight that crashed.

Ironic or Instant Karma?

GF

Well, not just "aware of", but have "evidence of" that would stand up in court. That can be a pretty tall order at times. Sure, one may know of or have a pretty good idea of certain things going on, but bound by the legal field and rules, you have to "drop and forget" what you can't prove. Anything else is an over-reach and staying up at night over it doesn't do any good.

In any case, this is getting plenty of visibility outside of internal FAA. Depends on what newsletters and services you subscribe to.

A bit of both, it seems.

Far better that karma might return to the bearer, rather than dragging passengers into the crash, though.

Aaah...no. This has been occurring with this operator for years, with multiple pilots. Very simple observation, surveillance, would have garnered ample data.

The FAA has a long history of taking action without a leg to stand on, so lack of "evidence" has never stopped the Administrator's minions before. Evidence only comes into play in the appeal process, after the action has already begun. It is, after all, the airman's first opportunity to defend. It's the nature of administrative law.

In this case, the airman had long operated outside the certificate. Again, these events do not happen in a vacuum, and this certainly wasn't the first time the operator had elected to work off the reservation.

I don't subscribe to any.

God forbid you omit something on your medical from 30 years ago yet Capt Fearless over here is flying passagiers wearing a pilots uniform in a C206 and he’s not on anybodies 135 certificate.

Sorry JnB, please don’t mention FAA and the need for evidence in the same sentence.

But but but, they were Argus and Wyvern.

actually I think they just cut and pasted the logos onto their site and had no such endorsements

Or they just paid for them like everyone else does.


Oh, I'm sorry. Did I let a cat out of the bag?