An Article on Privatising Aviation

This would work fantastically as long as you have enough consumers that are willing to die while the market finds the proper equilibrium point for how safe things need to be.

I'm not one of those people, but you might find some people stupid enough to bet their lives on the market finding a quick solution.
 
It sounds like it described Pt 91 corporate aviation to a T.

The FAA is virtually hands off with corporate jets, but the insurance companies keep everything safe. They have as good a safety record as 121 airlines, but without nearly as much paperwork.
 
USMCmech said:
It sounds like it described Pt 91 corporate aviation to a T.

The FAA is virtually hands off with corporate jets, but the insurance companies keep everything safe. They have as good a safety record as 121 airlines, but without nearly as much paperwork.
Click to expand...
A two sentence synopsis of the article...
 
USMCmech said:
It sounds like it described Pt 91 corporate aviation to a T.

The FAA is virtually hands off with corporate jets, but the insurance companies keep everything safe. They have as good a safety record as 121 airlines, but without nearly as much paperwork.
Click to expand...

Part 91 has zero rest rules.

You think that's safe?

And BTW, turning up the ATIS at your destination airport really loud doesn't count as safe.
 
JaceTheAce'sDad said:
Thanks for the input. Your assumption is that safety would go backwards before going forwards, interesting.
Click to expand...

I think it's the way the market works in finding an equilibrium point, and you'll see it in every industry. It's just that with our industry, lives are on the line.
 
jtrain609 said:
Part 91 has zero rest rules.

You think that's safe?

And BTW, turning up the ATIS at your destination airport really loud doesn't count as safe.
Click to expand...
I'll let USMC answer most of this. And I know this is not about flight instructing, but Part 91 has a maximum of 8 hours for instruction given in a day which is not a "rest" rule exactly, but something. And, where did anyone mention turning up ATIS?

Also, I've never met a airline or corporate pilot yet that was not extremely concerned with safety, so we are all on the same page with that. What is being debated is the best method of regulating the industry. It has been my experience that it is insurance companies already that really rule on who flies what, where.
 
JaceTheAce'sDad said:
I'll let USMC answer most of this. And I know this is not about flight instructing, but Part 91 has a maximum of 8 hours for instruction given in a day which is not a "rest" rule exactly, but something. And, where did anyone mention turning up ATIS?

Also, I've never met a airline or corporate pilot yet that was not extremely concerned with safety, so we are all on the same page with that. What is being debated is the best method of regulating the industry. It has been my experience that it is insurance companies already that really rule on who flies what, where.
Click to expand...

Turning up the ATIS is a common technique among freight drivers for when they inevitably fall asleep late at night while working under horrid rest rules.

It happens.
 
jtrain609 said:
Turning up the ATIS is a common technique among freight drivers for when they inevitably fall asleep late at night while working under horrid rest rules.

It happens.
Click to expand...
I'm just naive then, sorry. We've become a nation of people who won't reject a flight if we are tired or the equipment is about to fail or if we want the seat belt fastened in the car or the helmet worn on the motorcycle because of our own survival instinct. We need Big Brother to watch out for us from cradle to grave and tell us what to do to save us from ourselves. Wow, I almost forgot.
 
This isn't about libertarian ideals, it's about the fact that part 91 operations have no rest rules.

Even looking at part 135 rest rules, pilots fall asleep on a nightly basis.

As I said, if you believe that's an acceptable outcome, then by all means this system will work. There will always be a cowboy willing to fly the flight no matter how tired they are, that much should be obvious. Whether it's safe, and whether it's a good idea is the question.

Which is why we went from an unregulated system at the beginning of aviation to the system we have today; because people screwed it up so many times that they killed a lot of innocent members of the public who WHERE naive about these issues.
 
jtrain609 said:
Turning up the ATIS is a common technique among freight drivers for when they inevitably fall asleep late at night while working under horrid rest rules.

It happens.
Click to expand...

Lol, its just a joke for the most part.

By the way, 135 freight rules limit you to 14hrs in a 24hr duty period, 121 is 16 iirc.
 
jtrain609 said:
You sure?
Click to expand...

Pretty damned positive. In my experience in 135 freight (2 pilots) and 135 Alaska (single pilot) I've been fatigued as all hell, and exhausted, but I've always heard it as a joke, with maybe a few people doing it once or twice. The only technique I've seen used is holding onto the v-brace so that when you fall asleep your hand falls off and wakes up up. Fatigue is definitely an issue, but I think 135 is a little better than 121 work rules from what I've read and heard.
 
I'll bite. I think, as with most industries, that private "control" of aviation, focused on profits, brings about pros and cons. While it's certainly true that insurance companies want to mitigate liability, and thus hypothetically want to do things "right" in order to avoid it, all one has to do is look back at the Ford Pinto fiasco, where the court was made aware of the fact that Ford knew the car has a significant defect with horrendous safety concerns, yet their legal department had figured that the risk of a huge lawsuit was low, so the accounting department decided that it was cheaper to take the risk (assumed to be small) of being sued over doing the "right" thing of recalling the cars (very expensive) and fixing the defect. This small detail was the impetus for the significant punitive damages awarded in the case, but, in my opinion, you're an idiot if you think similar thought practices don't go on today.

While I agree that in Pt 91 ops, which are largely untouched by the FAA, things are very safe, one must realize that it is not just the insurance companies ensuring so. The companies themselves recognize the caliber of employees that are put on those aircraft, and they are very concerned with pilot qualifications, maintenance standards, informal rest "rules," and the like. Going back to the Ford Pinto parallel, I'm not sure that the airlines would see things the same way (one just has to look at current management, especially at the regional level, to see this).
 
Pt 91 aviation serves a different market than the mass people moving the airlines do. A richer market. A market that doesn't mind paying more so they won't die. I'm not sure if comparing pt 91 corporate aviation with 121 is appropriate. The reason insurance is usually an issue in pt 91 is usually because they're smaller shops -- the larger your operation is the more clout you have with your insurance underwriters so again airlines have the advantage there.
 
ppragman said:
Pretty damned positive. In my experience in 135 freight (2 pilots) and 135 Alaska (single pilot) I've been fatigued as all hell, and exhausted, but I've always heard it as a joke, with maybe a few people doing it once or twice. The only technique I've seen used is holding onto the v-brace so that when you fall asleep your hand falls off and wakes up up. Fatigue is definitely an issue, but I think 135 is a little better than 121 work rules from what I've read and heard.
Click to expand...

You may consider looking up 135.265 at some point.

Page 266 of Everything Explained if you have a copy.

There isn't an appreciable difference between scheduled part 135 and scheduled part 121.

EDIT: Did you really just admit that you've operated multiple times while fatigued oh, as you say "exhausted?" The FAA reads this forum, dude.
 
SpiraMirabilis said:
Pt 91 aviation serves a different market than the mass people moving the airlines do. A richer market. A market that doesn't mind paying more so they won't die. I'm not sure if comparing pt 91 corporate aviation with 121 is appropriate. The reason insurance is usually an issue in pt 91 is usually because they're smaller shops -- the larger your operation is the more clout you have with your insurance underwriters so again airlines have the advantage there.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the fact that many 121 carriers partly or wholly self insure their aircraft hulls, and only carry liability insurance.
 
jtrain609 said:
You may consider looking up 135.265 at some point.

Page 266 of Everything Explained if you have a copy.

There isn't an appreciable difference between scheduled part 135 and scheduled part 121.

EDIT: Did you really just admit that you've operated multiple times while fatigued oh, as you say "exhausted?" The FAA reads this forum, dude.
Click to expand...

Lol, whatever dude. 121 guys seem to get way more abuse than I ever got working 135, and 16hrs for a duty period is pretty long. 121.471c seems kinda jacked up to me, but hey, what do I know.

Part of life, you live and you learn. We've all flown too tired and learned that that was a bad idea, I did it, then learned from my mistakes. I won't do it again. I was inside my flight and duty regulations, I was totally "legal," but in retrospect I was too fatigued. Its only looking back that you can make those judgments, at the time I thought I was fine.
 
jtrain609 said:
Part 91 has zero rest rules.

You think that's safe?
Click to expand...

You'll have to dig up the stats from NBAA yourself, but pt 91 corporate aviation has a the same if not better safety record compared to 121 airlines. They are regulated by their insurance carrier instead of the FAA. In many respects the FAA rules are more lax and LESS safe than the insurance underwriters.

Most pt 91 crews I've spoken to have duty day and flight time rules that are better than the FAA rules for 121 or 135.


It's the difference between having the local police vs private security.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top