|
|
||
|
||
| Author: That’s Date: 10/26/2021 7:11:44 PM +0/-0 Show Orig. Msg (this window) Or In New Window | ||
the problem. It is duty, but some employers say it is not - they interpret to their benefit, rather than apply as required. They know they're wrong, just pushing the envelope, which on review can be very steeply expensive in FAA fines. |
||
| Reply Return-To-Index Display Full Msg Thread Rules of Engagement Terms of Use | ||
|
|
||
|
||
 One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+0/-2 to 99% of HAA operations! 10/11/2021 11:48:03 AM
 One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+3/-0 Hmmm.... 10/11/2021 12:13:36 PM
One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+0/-2 To 99% Of HAA Operations 10/11/2021 12:21:59 PM
One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+0/-5 You nerds 10/11/2021 1:10:08 PM
Four Weeks!! If your schedule changes day to night inside of a 4 week
+0/-4 period, you CANNOT use 135.267(c) 10/11/2021 1:56:40 PM
FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+0/-0 GetReal 10/11/2021 2:13:37 PM
FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+0/-0 (b) Just limits The Amount Of 10/11/2021 2:28:39 PM
not quite right.
+0/-0 Anonymous 10/11/2021 3:53:12 PM
Youi realize that (b) is the foundation for (d).
+0/-0 (b) and (d) are paired together 10/11/2021 3:14:05 PM
There is absolutely no reason for an HAA operator to use (c) anyway
+0/-0 None at all! 10/11/2021 3:32:16 PM
I incorrectly said increases from 8 hrs to 10rs, but I meant
+1/-0 from 8 hrs to 16 hrs. 10/11/2021 4:19:54 PM
I incorrectly said increases from 8 hrs to 10rs, but I meant
+0/-0 You Can Amass 8 Hours Of Flying 10/11/2021 4:54:31 PM
correct, but under (c), you can exceed it in the (NT)
+0/-0 24 hour window 10/11/2021 6:31:18 PM
correct, but under (c), you can exceed it in the
+0/-0 You Cannot Exceed It Without 10/11/2021 7:04:48 PM
One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+0/-0 cheap 10/11/2021 8:01:09 PM
One more time: FAR 135.267(c) is NOT applicable
+2/-0 In other 10/11/2021 9:07:51 PM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c) (NT)
+1/-1 Anonymous 10/12/2021 6:03:40 AM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+1/-1 True 10/12/2021 10:45:22 PM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+2/-0 Anonymous 10/13/2021 2:37:17 PM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+0/-0 Yeup 10/13/2021 4:18:25 PM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+0/-0 Duh! 10/13/2021 9:33:34 AM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+0/-0 That’s 10/26/2021 7:11:12 PM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+0/-0 That’s 10/26/2021 7:11:44 PM
On-call is duty, so itncan be regularly assigned under (c)
+0/-0 That Is Why The Letters From 10/26/2021 7:26:12 PM
|
