Per the thread below it is correct to say that public use aircraft meaning like a police department are not required to have pilot certificates and medicals to fly their aircraft.   The caveat is that public use aircraft do not have airworthiness certificates but they do have registrations.  

Most police departments take it up on themselves to get pilot certificates but it's not required. I remember at one time when the entire Maryland State police and New Jersey state police department didn't have a pilot certificate in the entire group and they had one of the worst safety records in the country but the safety record was not related to having or not having a certificate.    

It's no different than all the military pilots buzzing around the country in the national airspace with no pilot certificate.  

The big caveat is if you are operating public use and or military when you're in the NAS you must follow the FAA rules and regulations or contrary to belief or what you might think you can be violated it's just a different chain of command and path to receive the violation but it can still be quite severe.   

I'm sorry bro, but "according to what I said below" does not make it fact. The rest of your post is ridiculous nonsense as well. You also don't know what the word caveat means. 

was correct regarding certificate requirements. His last paragraph though was pretty much bs.

 It's OK to have disagreements with somebody why would you make it into a personal attack.  Hate to say it but I see it all the time with Army Warren officers.  

Public_Aircraft_Training_Flights - 2021 Legal Interpretation.pdf

...and there is no 8 hour bottle to throttle rule.... I'll Drunk to that !

(a) Required pilot certificate for operating a civil aircraft of the United States. No person may serve as a required pilot flight  crewmember> of a civil aircraft of the  United States, unless that person:........

If a police department is flying an Astar, 407 etc it has an airworthiness certificate.

so how do you violate somebody flying a helicopter with no pilot certificate or medical. 

FAA: "you busted the bravo, Frank"

Frank: "yeah, what are going to do about it"

FAA: "we're going to suspend your pilot certificate"

Frank: "hell, I don't even have a medical"

FAA: "the punishment will be severe"

Frank" "lol. pound sand"

If no certificate, it can cost you money...

you didn't need one

The FAA can still impose civil penalties as well as restrictions from getting your FAA certificates at a later date

If that a star or bell 407 is in public use category they have to surrender the airworthiness certificate. 

From AC 00-1.1B:

Will I Have to Surrender My Aircraft’s Civil Airworthiness Certificate to Conduct a Public Aircraft Operation? No; an airworthiness certificate itself does not indicate that an aircraft Is airworthy.

If it has an AW cert it is a civil aircraft if it doesnt it something other than a civil aircraft.   Public use.   Cant be both.   

And airworthiness certificate has absolutely nothing to do about an aircraft being airworthy you guys need to go back to Basic flight school.   

Correct, these dimwits don't know what the'yre blabbing about. A government entity can operate however they choose, the Airworthiness Certificate has nothing to do with it if they want to operate as a Public Aircraft.

You can switch back and forth between types of ops but you must be compliant with all regs when operating as a civil aircraft

Government owned aircraft are public aircraft. An aircraft with an airworthiness certificate (such as an H125 or B407) owned by a government are public aircraft. Any civil aircraft contracted exclusively (Exclusive Use) to a government greater than 90 days become public aircraft for the length of time dictated by the contract. 

RJ McReady finally making sense to these dolts. YES!! The FDLE cops can fly around a standard catagory, completely registered aircraft without a pilot certificate. 

seems like a dumb idea. no insurance company would insure you or pay a claim after an accident with a non rated pilot. seems like you would want well trained people operating incredibly expensive equipment where even an incident can run into the millions. it's not worth arguing about because it's not a thing.

 Even the smaller county I worked for in California was self insured for everything from public works backhoes to aircraft.

 Large corporations and even citizens can post a bond and never have to buy regular insurance.

Yes, that is correct, but the determination as to whether the OPERATION is public, or civil is a differrent matter and that is what determines whether an airman certificate is needed. A public entity can own an aircraft that meets the criteria for a civil aircraft and they can choose to operate it as a civil aircraft for one flight (airman certificates required) and also choose to operate it as a public aircraft on another flight (no airman certificates required)  As others stated, regardless of the strict legal requirments, operation of any type without the relevant airman certificates is foolish

On the other hand, it the aircraft did not meet the requirement for a civil aircraft, then all operations would have to be conducted as a public aircraft.

I don't care about the legality and nobody else does either.

Correct as well. In that same vain, most legit government operators will have policies keeping aircraft and pilots within the regulations. In fact, ours state: "shall follow all applicable FAA regulations"...... "Applicable" being the oprative word......

It is kind of odd that there are some that don't know you can operate government aircraft without an FAA pilot certificate. But none of us know everything so it is a good learning point. However, it is a bit funny to see some note that nobody would do that because of insurance reasons. Additionally for those who say those pilots must comply with regs when in the NAS, that is not exactly true as RJ Macready pointed out.

The truth is that public use and military flight operations comply with FAA regulations because somewhere in their regulations is says they have to. If the military decided tomorrow that they don't have to follow FAA regulations there is nothing the FAA could do about it. However, it makes sense that this is the rule so everyone is on the same page.

With that said, they all have allowances for deviations somewhere in their regulations that boil down to as previously noted: Follow FAA rules and regulations until you can't. When you can't there is probably a rule that tells you what you can do. 

You have already beaten to death the discussion about not needing an FAA pilot certification but there iare more allowed deviations.

An easy example is the potential need to hover directly over a house, at night, in a populated area to catch a bad guy. It is against FAA rules but your boss won't punish you even if the FAA whines that you are in the NAS and that is not allowed. As long as you followed the organizational rules once you couldn't follow FAA regs, you have nothing to fear.

Another one is the need to fly in weather that would be less than what is allowed. A Coast Guard pilot can fly VMC in nearly zero-zero weather if the need exists. It is all in their regs. The FAA can't violate them for following Coast Guard regulations. 

What else is there? Flight with no position or anti collision lights, being on ready duty longer than 14 hours, Oh, you can even fly really, really fast if you are chasing a bad guy in your jet. We even flew when the rest of the world was grounded after 9/11. The FAA was very nice helping us violate that rule. Not one pilot had their certificate threatened. 

I have dealt with the FAA being upset at a military pilot on a few occassions. We told the FAA we would take care of it and we did. Everyone was happy. The truth is, the FAA doesn't want to deal with a military or state operated aircraft or pilot if they don't need to. Most don't know what exemptions those pilots are authorized anyway. If there is a clear and obvious violation, the FAA will contact the organization and the organization will take care of it. The FAA isn't going to do anything to the pilot's certificate. There would be too much red tape to do it.  

the "need" to hover over a house to catch a bad guy would be the stupidest thing ever so of course that's what the cops think they should do and I encourage them to do this lol

in your jet to catch a bad guy! I'm sure that happens all the time too lol

"the FAA let law enforcement fly after 911, we violated the rules and we never got in trouble!" 

lol are you for real bro

used to fly without lights at night. I guess they though they could sneak up on somebody. 

this idiot was a flying cop as the dumbf**kery of the post oozes from my computer screen.

I'm sure there are a few agencies that operate as Public Use but very few do. Most operate as if they are a private company following all rules and regulations. Nearly impossible to get insurance. Those insurance agencies that self insure will also require following the regs. Name a few that operate under PU.