| Msg ID: 2689802 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +0/-6
|
| Author:Do they limit GA to 14 hrs?
5/22/2021 8:16:15 AM |
Is the FAA considering banning or prohibiting all Part 91 commercial flying to 14 hrs of duty? Can a Commercial Pilot flying a Part 91 ferry flight for a customer fly past 14 hours of "duty" without showing 10 hours of rest at the planned completion of the flight?
|
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689804 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +7/-1
|
| Author:Go
5/22/2021 9:03:07 AM Reply to: 2689802 |
away |
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689807 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? (NT) +1/-1
|
| Author:FNGs
5/22/2021 10:23:10 AM Reply to: 2689804 |
|
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689809 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +1/-1
|
| Author:Have fun
5/22/2021 10:42:21 AM Reply to: 2689802 |
FAA.GOV for you |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689819 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +0/-0
|
| Author:Doo Tee Guy
5/22/2021 11:03:45 AM Reply to: 2689809 |
He's not wrong. At least half of the replies on this forum prove that there is no agreement on what crew rest is and isn't. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689826 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +2/-1
|
| Author:Haapilot
5/22/2021 12:30:27 PM Reply to: 2689802 |
There is no duty limit for part 91. If done while on a part 135 operation you cannot count it as rest. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689837 |
FALSE! That repo leg is NOT rest and is still part of your (NT) +2/-0
|
| Author:Duty Time
5/22/2021 1:53:24 PM Reply to: 2689826 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689886 |
If you are operating under 135.267(c) maybe (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:Not for 135.267(d)
5/22/2021 7:02:09 PM Reply to: 2689837 |
|
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689833 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +0/-0
|
| Author:Septuigent
5/22/2021 1:39:09 PM Reply to: 2689802 |
Last thread went to 72 replies with no agreement. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689840 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +1/-0
|
| Author:Burp
5/22/2021 1:56:07 PM Reply to: 2689833 |
I logged just over 12 hours of flight time in one day once. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689851 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +2/-0
|
| Author:Ore Gasmatron
5/22/2021 3:54:02 PM Reply to: 2689840 |
Perfectly fine if it's part 91. Are you including sim time? |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689854 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of +0/-1
|
| Author:Part 91/133 powerliner
5/22/2021 4:29:24 PM Reply to: 2689802 |
Clearly the FAA doesn’t consider duty days in excess of 14 hours duty unsafe. They allow it after all. In the summer months with long days it is a regular day for utility and ag guys to not only have a duty day over 14 hours but actually spent 14+ in the seat! My longest flight time day to date is 15.7 actual flight time. I’m just like dozens of other guys doing this work. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689857 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of +0/-0
|
| Author:15 hrs flight time
5/22/2021 4:43:13 PM Reply to: 2689854 |
you fool. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689872 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:simple answer = YES
5/22/2021 6:19:47 PM Reply to: 2689857 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689883 |
So are they going to ban all flying over 14 hrs regardless +0/-0
|
| Author:of who? 91, 135, 121, 133, etc
5/22/2021 6:58:46 PM Reply to: 2689872 |
It's either safe, or it's not |
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689954 |
So are they going to ban all flying over 14 hrs regardless (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:simple answer = YES
5/23/2021 1:37:27 PM Reply to: 2689883 |
|
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689980 |
Pipe dream! (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:Anonymous
5/23/2021 4:42:04 PM Reply to: 2689954 |
|
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689855 |
It’s only dangerous for HAA pilots apparently (NT) +0/-1
|
| Author:Anonymous
5/22/2021 4:36:18 PM Reply to: 2689802 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689959 |
I love the new utility guy who comes here talk of how tough and hard it is +1/-0
|
| Author:Utility easiest flying I ever did
5/23/2021 1:55:08 PM Reply to: 2689855 |
They are the real insecure bunch..... |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689991 |
I love the new utility guy who comes here talk of how tough and hard it is +1/-0
|
| Author:hahaha,
5/23/2021 5:27:35 PM Reply to: 2689959 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689982 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of +1/-0
|
| Author:Old utility guy
5/23/2021 5:08:23 PM Reply to: 2689802 |
Utility is easy enough since we rarely have passengers. JH is mostly for HAA types that fly point to point 3 hours a day and whine about duty day fatigue at least once a week. Look at the threads, just always looking to find some authoritative info to avoid a little overtime. Personally, I make a great deal of my income when that machine is running! 8,10, 12 hours is MONEY, |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689992 |
Yep, +0/-0
|
| Author:money curve....
5/23/2021 5:41:07 PM Reply to: 2689982 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2689997 |
Looksike a breast in a skimpy blue bikini top (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:Anonymous
5/23/2021 6:09:21 PM Reply to: 2689992 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690010 |
Get your pilot to explain it to you. (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:"the more you know"
5/23/2021 8:33:15 PM Reply to: 2689997 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690040 |
the more I know, the more I can use against you (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:Anonymous
5/24/2021 7:34:08 AM Reply to: 2690010 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690072 |
Work performance and safety deteriorate after 8 hours according to (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:The studies and science.
5/24/2021 12:29:10 PM Reply to: 2690040 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690153 |
Work performance and safety deteriorate after 8 hours according to (NT) +1/-0
|
| Author:Utility slug
5/24/2021 8:56:06 PM Reply to: 2690072 |
Studies by whom? Personally I can say my ability doesn’t fade after 10 hours in the seat. My ability to give a damn does however. 1 hour or 10 hours, if I need to make a long line move where people are at risk or HEC I WILL. Concentrate as if it’s my most important lift ever; because it is !, |
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690165 |
Notice he never gives you actual references, just (NT) +0/-0
|
| Author:generalized fictitious mentions
5/24/2021 10:16:30 PM Reply to: 2690153 |
|
 |
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690713 |
Does FAA consider all flying past 14 hours of "duty" unsafe? +0/-0
|
| Author:They
5/30/2021 12:46:23 PM Reply to: 2689802 |
can call it careless and reckless. Depends. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690771 |
So, all flying (piloting) by ANYONE, is careless & reckless? +0/-0
|
| Author:That's your premises!
5/30/2021 10:27:03 PM Reply to: 2690713 |
|
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
| Msg ID: 2690772 |
So, all flying (piloting) by ANYONE, is careless & reckless? +0/-0
|
| Author:Deviant
5/30/2021 10:38:04 PM Reply to: 2690771 |
After 14 hours of part 135. Yes. That could easily result in a violation if fatigue was found to be a causal factor. Everything is on the table after an accident or incident. You don't want to try to explain otherwise if you put yourself in that position. |
|
|
Reply Return-To-Index |
