Commercial Privaleges under Part 91

[jjsemperfi]

Just wanted some people's opinions on how extensively you guys teach Comm Privaleges and Limitations regarding Part 91 Operations. IE... Part 119.1, Part 91.147, Part 136, Holding Out, Common and Private Carriage.... There is so much gray area in 119.1 as to what we can and can't do, it eventually turns into a speach on how you would present your case infront of a court if violated.

[avbug]

It's not grey. It's just people who don't know the regulation or its application.

[iChris]

There is so much gray area in 119.1 as to what we can and can't do, it eventually turns into a speach on how you would present your case infront of a court if violated.

 

It’s not that gray if you understand specifically what the actual purpose of the flight is and specifically how the flight will be conducted. Don’t read into the FARs that which is not written.

 

However, if you can understand and teach from the basics of the following interpretation, you can erase most of that gray.

 

Chief Counsel to Mr. Bonilla; § 119.1; Sep 2011

[jjsemperfi]

Yes it all comes down to the original intent of the flight. Of course an air tour with a disposable camera isn't a photo flight, it's an air tour. Question. Could I conduct a photo flight at night?

[iChris]

Yes it all comes down to the original intent of the flight. Of course an air tour with a disposable camera isn't a photo flight, it's an air tour.

 

Question. Could I conduct a photo flight at night?

 

Again, don’t read into the FARs that which is not written.

 

No such written restriction in §119.1[e][4], Do it day or night

[jjsemperfi]

Again, don’t read into the FARs that which is not written.

 

No such written restriction in §119.1[e][4], Do it day or night

Exactly, doesn't say you can't do it at night so it's implied that you can. See how this can get confusing for students.

[jjsemperfi]

All I'm curious about is how far you guys teach into this stuff. We never had an examiner ask about 119.1 and Part 136 and Common Carriage and Holding Out until fairly recently, so I'm curious on how far in depth most schools teach it.

[bqmassey]

Exactly, doesn't say you can't do it at night so it's implied that you can. See how this can get confusing for students.

 

No, not really.

[apiaguy]

most schools don't teach much because the instructors don't know much. As in most cases... it is up to the student to learn, study and comprehend regulations. If you never open the book... if you never try to understand what is being presented... if you have someone telling you that something is right or wrong but don't try to understand it yourself you haven't really tried. That is what I try to teach my students. I'm not an attorney... but I play one on the internet... haha. I like to think I can understand the regs because I continue to read and interpret them.

[Pohi]

All I'm curious about is how far you guys teach into this stuff. We never had an examiner ask about 119.1 and Part 136 and Common Carriage and Holding Out until fairly recently, so I'm curious on how far in depth most schools teach it.

I guess I depends on the examiner. Some go into it, some don't. The important thing (imho) to keep his mind is that the examiner doesn't and realistically can't ask everything that a CFI is required to teach. A person can't use "well my cfi and examiner didn't teach me that" as an excuse when getting busted by the FAA for breaking a rule in the FAR's.

 

Of course, you can't be expected to know everything from memory, but teaching the students where and how to look up things in the regs along with knowing that if they have a question to call the FSDO and ask, will go a long way.

 

Edit:

On a personal note, after having a few bumps in the road where students knew the right answer but couldn't prove to the examiner when asked, I started rephrasing questions to "show me in the regs where you can ....."

Edited April 24, 2014 by Pohi

[jjsemperfi]

 

No, not really.

 

Well it doesn't confuse you because you're an amazing, all knowing, CFII huh

 

Asked a Comm student the other day on a stage check if you could perform a photo flight at night, he said no. I asked him where it said he couldn't. He couldn't find anything that said he couldn't. But throughout his whole training, there are usually written limitations to what we can do. Part 61 Comm Privs and Limitations state... Fly for comensation or hire, and fly persons or property for compensation or hire. Great, what are your limiatations? Well I have none according to Part 61. True, but you have limitations depending on the types of operations you are conducting. Yes yes, to all of you very experienced CFI's and Comm Operators this is a no brainer, but to a new Comm student this is pretty hard to swallow.

[jjsemperfi]

 

No, not really.

 

Well it doesn't confuse you because you're an amazing, all knowing, CFII huh

 

Asked a Comm student the other day on a stage check if you could perform a photo flight at night, he said no. I asked him where it said he couldn't. He couldn't find anything that said he couldn't. But throughout his whole training, there are usually written limitations to what we can do. Part 61 Comm Privs and Limitations state... Fly for comensation or hire, and fly persons or property for compensation or hire. Great, what are your limiatations? Well I have none according to Part 61. True, but you have limitations depending on the types of operations you are conducting. Yes yes, to all of you very experienced CFI's and Comm Operators this is a no brainer, but to a new Comm student this is pretty hard to swallow.

[jjsemperfi]

most schools don't teach much because the instructors don't know much. As in most cases... it is up to the student to learn, study and comprehend regulations. If you never open the book... if you never try to understand what is being presented... if you have someone telling you that something is right or wrong but don't try to understand it yourself you haven't really tried. That is what I try to teach my students. I'm not an attorney... but I play one on the internet... haha. I like to think I can understand the regs because I continue to read and interpret them.

 

If that were the case we would have a lot students pass, because only 20% of them actually study on their own.

[jjsemperfi]

If that were the case we would have a lot students pass, because only 20% of them actually study on their own.

Let me rephrase that... Part 141 students barely study on their own because the ground school doesn't come out if their pocket. 61 students usually study their butt off because it saves them ground school money.

[avbug]

Of course, you can't be expected to know everything from memory, but teaching the students where and how to look up things in the regs along with knowing that if they have a question to call the FSDO and ask, will go a long way.

 

 

The FSDO is the wrong choice for a place to answer a question. Nothing the FSDO gives you in person or in writing is defensible.

 

The three sources for a regulatory understanding are the regulation itself, Federal Register preambles, and FAA Chief Legal Counsel letters of interpretation. The Administrator has never authorized the FSDO-level to interpret the regulation; that authority is delegated to the Chief Legal counsel, and where not contradictory, the Regional Legal Counsel.

 

If you or your students seek clarification at the FSDO and the answer is wrong, you can never fall back on the position that "the FSDO told me it was okay."

 

Far better that you teach the students how to read and understand the regulation, and if you don't know this yourself, learn.

[bqmassey]

Well it doesn't confuse you because you're an amazing, all knowing, CFII huh

 

Ha! I wish that was the case, but far from it.

Asked a Comm student the other day on a stage check if you could perform a photo flight at night, he said no. I asked him where it said he couldn't. He couldn't find anything that said he couldn't. But throughout his whole training, there are usually written limitations to what we can do. Part 61 Comm Privs and Limitations state... Fly for comensation or hire, and fly persons or property for compensation or hire. Great, what are your limiatations? Well I have none according to Part 61. True, but you have limitations depending on the types of operations you are conducting. Yes yes, to all of you very experienced CFI's and Comm Operators this is a no brainer, but to a new Comm student this is pretty hard to swallow.

 

Those written limitations are readily available as regulations. Read them, follow them. Don't make up imaginary ones out of thin air. If you have a private pilot that isn't comfortable reading the regulations, adhering to them, and distinguishing between company SOP and regulations, take advantage of the teaching moment. Fix his process, too, not just his knowledge. Read the regulation. Still confused? Ask someone who knows more. If you still have questions, there are FAA legal interpretations and chief counsel opinions you can search through (try this).

 

Yes, school tradition/culture/SOP, or simple CYA-induced paranoia, can give the impression that there are certain regulations in existence that aren't actually there. Some people over analyze regulations to the point that you can barely get any flight off the ground. There's a difference between being conservative and being paranoid. That doesn't sound like the issue in your students' case though, sounds like he just didn't know them.

 

So no, I don't get how it's confusing, per se. It sounds like you consider the regulations confusing because they're situational and because there's more than just a few you have to know.

[Pohi]

 

The FSDO is the wrong choice for a place to answer a question. Nothing the FSDO gives you in person or in writing is defensible.

 

The three sources for a regulatory understanding are the regulation itself, Federal Register preambles, and FAA Chief Legal Counsel letters of interpretation. The Administrator has never authorized the FSDO-level to interpret the regulation; that authority is delegated to the Chief Legal counsel, and where not contradictory, the Regional Legal Counsel.

 

If you or your students seek clarification at the FSDO and the answer is wrong, you can never fall back on the position that "the FSDO told me it was okay."

 

Far better that you teach the students how to read and understand the regulation, and if you don't know this yourself, learn.

Sometimes you guys crack me up. You caught me, I don't know how to read regs or teach them. I just handed out a business card for the local FSDO office and considered all of my ground school complete.

 

Try reading a whole post sometime instead of picking one part of a post, taking it out of context, then proving to the world how smart you are with your reply.

[jjsemperfi]

Ha! I wish that was the case, but far from it.

 

 

 

 

 

Those written limitations are readily available as regulations. Read them, follow them. Don't make up imaginary ones out of thin air. If you have a private pilot that isn't comfortable reading the regulations, adhering to them, and distinguishing between company SOP and regulations, take advantage of the teaching moment. Fix his process, too, not just his knowledge. Read the regulation. Still confused? Ask someone who knows more. If you still have questions, there are FAA legal interpretations and chief counsel opinions you can search through (try this).

 

Yes, school tradition/culture/SOP, or simple CYA-induced paranoia, can give the impression that there are certain regulations in existence that aren't actually there. Some people over analyze regulations to the point that you can barely get any flight off the ground. There's a difference between being conservative and being paranoid. That doesn't sound like the issue in your students' case though, sounds like he just didn't know them.

 

So no, I don't get how it's confusing, per se. It sounds like you consider the regulations confusing because they're situational and because there's more than just a few you have to know.

Not sure how I'm confused about the regs if I'm the one teaching them. Talking about students here. And if you tell me regs aren't confusing and hard to read as a student, maybe you've never met one.

[jjsemperfi]

If a reg says oxygen must be provided to pax above 15,000' MSL, people don't have a problem with it. But when regs get all "lawyered up" some can be challenging to interpret when learning them. I had my wife read one and try and tell me what it meant (she is a smart cookie) and she had to read it about 10 times before she figured it out. Some regs are not black and white. They are perceived differently by different people. Now an oxygen reg is very clear. If someone tried arguing that I wouldn't have any sympathy for them. But Com Privs and Limitations can be pretty challenging for some people to learn.

[jjsemperfi]

So what I'm learning from this post is that most schools don't teach this too far in depth. Is this correct? Still sorta waiting on an answer to my original posting.

[Spike]

So what I'm learning from this post is that most schools don't teach this too far in depth. Is this correct? Still sorta waiting on an answer to my original posting.

 

I find it kind-of funny you are asking about the regulations (now called Title-14 CFR’s) in a manner which is vague and ambiguous…….

 

KISS – Keep It Simple Silly…….

 

Pilots, including student pilots, are required to understand the regulations. We do so, by reading the regulations and by demonstrating the ability to appropriately interpret them through testing. Conservative application and not reading into the regulations should keep the most inexperienced pilot out of trouble. In short, it’s not a guessing game.....

 

The regulations basically provide us with limitations or, what we can’t do i.e. “no pilot may”….. Everything else is up for interpretation or defined in counsel letters..……

 

And, just to play along……

 

If I do my 61.57 currency requirement during the night, does it count for my “day” currency requirement as well?

 

To address your original post; historically, the examiners I’ve came across just want to confirm commercial applicants understand the difference between 135 and 91/119. Basically, the stuff commercial pilots can legally charge for without being employed by a helicopter company and, knowing how 91/119 flights can turn into an unauthorized 135 operation. Furthermore, “what is the purpose of the flight” is a simple question which helps the student determine which regulation the flight falls under or, it can it can assist them with figuring it out, -as iChris has already pointed out…..

 

In the end, there can be gray areas, but the goal is to prevent a violation or flat-out abuse of the rules….

 

I used to ask questions like this;

 

You work as a CFI at the local flight school. One day a customer comes in and wants to fly over his ranch property to determine some boundary lines……. Can you do that?

 

While prepping for the “ranch” flight, the customer goes to his truck and pulls out a box. When he returns to the helicopter for his briefing, you ask, what’s in the box? He tells you the box contains some tools which he’d like to drop off to his ranch-hand being the flight will be right over his location…. Can you do that?

 

During the ranch flight you burn though a tank of gas so you head to a nearby airport. While there, the customer says he’s seen all he needs to see and cuts you lose to return to your home base….. Can you do that?

 

Hopefully this helps and if not, please ignore….

Edited April 25, 2014 by Spike

[jjsemperfi]

All I'm saying is that some regs are very straight forward, while others take a bit of analysis and interpretation. What I'm wondering is how, and to what extent, other schools are teaching this material. Those are exactly the kinds of questions our students are getting asked on Comm check rides. And exactly the kinds of scenarios we ask during ground and stage checks. Thanks Spike

[avbug]

Try reading a whole post sometime instead of picking one part of a post, taking it out of context, then proving to the world how smart you are with your reply.

 

 

You stated that students should look to the FSDO for answers. Your statement is wrong. Perhaps you don't know that yourself. Now you do. You're welcome.

 

And if you tell me regs aren't confusing and hard to read as a student, maybe you've never met one.

 

 

I spent the winter largely working with foreign students, covering US Air law and regulation, among other things.

 

This subject may be hard for you to teach, but as yet you haven't provided enough information to determine whether it's because you aren't a good teacher, or if you simply don't know the regulation well enough to teach it. Presently it appears to be both.

 

Whether you instruct or not, you're expected to know the regulation. Based on your comments thus far, you do not.

 

But Com Privs and Limitations can be pretty challenging for some people to learn.

 

 

No, they're not.

 

If you expect to read one regulation and know everything, then you may find yourself challenged. Part 61 does not contain everything you need. Part 91 does not contain everything you need. Part 119 does not contain everything you need. Part 135 does not contain everything you need. And so on.

 

Have you spent time reading the Federal Register preambles? Have you spent time reading the FAA Chief Legal Counsel letters of interpretation?

 

If you haven't, then you haven't taken the time to learn the regulation. If you want to fly for a living, then you have an obligation to do so. Ignorance of the regulation is never a legitimate excuse.

[Pohi]

Your lack of reading comprehension is truly amazing avbug. It's not even worth the time to try and explain things to you, because you clearly think you know everything and that everybody else but yourself is retarded. I'll leave you to your delusions of grandeur.

[avbug]

Pohi has nothing to contribute, then.

 

Perhaps it would be better for the original poster to pose specific questions to enhance his or her understanding, rather than posting about what he (and apparently Pohi) doesn't know.