Duty Time 135

[Dugie8]

Depends on if you're 135 or 121. 135.267(d) says rest that precedes "the planned completion time of the assignment" while 121.471(b) says "the scheduled completion of any flight segment." Very different wording.

check out 135.263. 135.267(d) while does talk about duty is about flight time and what kind of rest you need if you exceed 8, 10, etc hours.

You cannot (under 135, non sched) be scheduled for a 14 hour duty day and at 13.5 hours block out for a 45 minute flight.

Also check out 135.267(c)

 

[msmspilot]

check out 135.263. 135.267(d) while does talk about duty is about flight time and what kind of rest you need if you exceed 8, 10, etc hours.

You cannot (under 135, non sched) be scheduled for a 14 hour duty day and at 13.5 hours block out for a 45 minute flight.

Also check out 135.267(c)

263 says "(d) A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the planned flight time." This doesn't help your argument.

267(c) talks about exceeding flight time limits, not duty time.

I'm not saying that at 13.5 hrs duty time you can get a new assignment for a 45 min flight and go. I am saying that if you were already assigned that flight, and due to circumstances beyond your control, you go over 14 hours, it's ok. And you haven't pointed me to a reg that makes me question that in the least.

 

[Dugie8]

I never said you couldn't go over 14 hours. However all the things that keep you from going over flight time limits also apply to duty limits. Legal to start legal to finish is leg by leg not by an entire duty day assignment. Duty limits are hard and fast, notice the specific reg concerning 14 hours of duty.

 

[Tommay85]

I guess we need to clarify or find interpretations from the FAA concerning "assignment". I don't have the training material handy at the moment, but there was an FAA interpretation source in there concerning my exact scenario and the way Flight Express does their assignments. To clarify, we(FLX) don't consider the connecting flight associated with ours to be the initiation of a flight assignment. The assignment always occurs at the time we duty on. A lot of things that happen after that are circumstances beyond the operators and my control. I do know that late cargo, late passengers, and maintenance issues do count as extenuating circumstances outside the realm of anyone's control.

Second page of this for that particular interpretation.
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...0/interpretations/data/interps/2011/Murat.pdf

BUT, honestly in doing some hunting around, Flight Express uses the rolling 24 hour 135.267(b) for assignments, and my scenario technically wouldn't be legal depending on how we define "assignment". So again, a clear interpretation of what constitutes an assignment is what is needed.

I apologize if I'm derailing the thread... You guys probably feel like the guy that did the inquiry regarding Bill Clinton's affair when Clinton asked to define the word "the". Or maybe that didn't really happen and I watch too much Lewis Black comedy routines

You do bring up a good point about 135.263. (d) is what I'm guessing you're referring to.

Since I didn't before, to cover my own butt here a bit for prying eyes, the days I went over 8 in 24 was while holding short for 20 minutes when the airport was down to one runway...

 

[Dugie8]

This is a good discussion, keep it coming. that interp leaves a few questions. How could late pax or freight lead to a pilot exceeding flight time limitations? Duty limits are set in stone, there is no relief for exceeding them when you know you will exceed them like there is for flight time limits, ie extra rest. You are sitting at the hold short line with 12 hours of duty on you already, with a 2.2 hour blocked ( or flight planned) flight. It doesn't matter if the freight was late, you are no go.

Iam operating a little in the dark as I assume you all cargo guys operate under 135.263 and not .265 via ops spec?

 

[Tommay85]

This is a good discussion, keep it coming. that interp leaves a few questions. How could late pax or freight lead to a pilot exceeding flight time limitations? Duty limits are set in stone, there is no relief for exceeding them when you know you will exceed them like there is for flight time limits, ie extra rest. You are sitting at the hold short line with 12 hours of duty on you already, with a 2.2 hour blocked ( or flight planned) flight. It doesn't matter if the freight was late, you are no go.

In my scenario, what about the matter of me receiving my flight assignment 12ish hours ago? Or in the .pdf I posted above, say that crew received their assignment and planned to initiate the flight with 12 hours of duty already used up, a proposed ETE time of 1.7 hours, but the pax were 45 minutes late?

 

[Dugie8]

In my scenario, what about the matter of me receiving my flight assignment 12ish hours ago? Or in the .pdf I posted above, say that crew received their assignment and planned to initiate the flight with 12 hours of duty already used up, a proposed ETE time of 1.7 hours, but the pax were 45 minutes late?

That is where this gets muddy and a good definition of assignment is needed. All the regs talk about "at the time of departure". I think it would be a fair argument to say departure could be block out and not wheels up BUT that still leaves the question of how late pax/cargo can contribute to exceeding FLIGHT TIME limits??

135.263(d) is the end all be all. 135.263 covers all 135 flying. .263(d) specifically says "at the time of departure". So you are 12 hours into a duty period and those pax are late by 45 minutes for a 1.5 hour flight, I read 135.263(d) as saying tuff nuggets.

Further your interp is referencing 135.267(b) which is flight time limits, ie 8 or 10 hours. Exceeding flight time limits is the only thing that gives you additional rest, which in my mind, leads me to believe there is no allowance for exceeding duty limits except after departure and by those things outside of your control.

 

[Tommay85]

I dunno, I've read .263(d) at least a half a dozen times and I'm reading it as *you already know you're going over at the time of departure*, but it's okay because of extenuating circumstances out the operator's and crew members control concerning the original planned assignment. It is midnight though, the 4th, and am indeed having some beers. It's the only way to keep from bleeding out of the eyes reading this stuff! So I may be taking that in incorrectly.

I'm still looking around for interpretations of assignment.

Regarding duty and additional rest when exceeded. Perhaps they feel that sitting around isn't actual work and therefore doesn't affect your performance the next time you work. Where as flying 12 hours, sleeping/resting for 10 and then working again would likely cause one to go insane. After doing aerial survey and doing this exact thing for 34 days straight, I almost did!

 

[msmspilot]

That is where this gets muddy and a good definition of assignment is needed. All the regs talk about "at the time of departure". I think it would be a fair argument to say departure could be block out and not wheels up BUT that still leaves the question of how late pax/cargo can contribute to exceeding FLIGHT TIME limits??

135.263(d) is the end all be all. 135.263 covers all 135 flying. .263(d) specifically says "at the time of departure". So you are 12 hours into a duty period and those pax are late by 45 minutes for a 1.5 hour flight, I read 135.263(d) as saying tuff nuggets.

Further your interp is referencing 135.267(b) which is flight time limits, ie 8 or 10 hours. Exceeding flight time limits is the only thing that gives you additional rest, which in my mind, leads me to believe there is no allowance for exceeding duty limits except after departure and by those things outside of your control.

You're reading .263 backwards. It says at the time of departure, "A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned normally terminate within the limitations." Now again, we're referencing flight time and not duty time.

.267 is the one that talks about duty time, and it says "assignment" NOT "flight segment."

Second, you've mentioned several times that the 14 hr duty day is "set in stone." Show me the regulation on that. There is no regulation, that I know of, that says anything like that. There's one that says you can't fly if you don't have 10 hours of rest in the 24 hours preceding the "planned completion time of the assignment."

 

[Dugie8]

You're reading .263 backwards. It says at the time of departure, "A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned normally terminate within the limitations." Now again, we're referencing flight time and not duty time.

.267 is the one that talks about duty time, and it says "assignment" NOT "flight segment."

Second, you've mentioned several times that the 14 hr duty day is "set in stone." Show me the regulation on that. There is no regulation, that I know of, that says anything like that. There's one that says you can't fly if you don't have 10 hours of rest in the 24 hours preceding the "planned completion time of the assignment."

that is interesting how you both read 135.263 as it being ok to exceed flight time limits knowingly BEFORE departure. So, trap question, if I have 3 legs today with planned flight times of 9 hours total and upon landing on my second leg I have 10 hours on me, can I complete the third leg? Assume 2 pilot crew, unscheduled ops.

135.267(d) sets 14 hours of duty in stone. Notice there is no provisions for going over duty and the reg reads 10 hours of rest in the24 hours preceding the PLANNED completion of the assignment. The plan comes from the operator at either the beginning of your day or leg by leg. I duty on at 8am I have to be done by 10pm, that is the planned completion of the assignment.

Everything else under 135.263 talks about flight time, not duty period. The way, If I understand you two correctly, you guys are reading this, is: the operator can hold you on duty indefinitely as long as it is something unforseeable? Also you appear to be saying you can knowingly exceed flight time limits as long as the reason was unforseeable? By knowingly exceeding flight time limits I mean, you have 8 hours reschon you, the last leg is blocked for 2.1 hours but because of weather you have that 8 hours when you should have only 7. You are saying it is legal to depart?

I am assuming you have block times (I don't we have only our flight plan times), also assuming no reschedules and such. Just straight up, here's your flight assignments for the day and because of weather, etc the last leg will put you over duty or flight time AS BLOCKED.

 

[msmspilot]

that is interesting how you both read 135.263 as it being ok to exceed flight time limits knowingly BEFORE departure. So, trap question, if I have 3 legs today with planned flight times of 9 hours total and upon landing on my second leg I have 10 hours on me, can I complete the third leg? Assume 2 pilot crew, unscheduled ops.

135.267(d) sets 14 hours of duty in stone. Notice there is no provisions for going over duty and the reg reads 10 hours of rest in the24 hours preceding the PLANNED completion of the assignment. The plan comes from the operator at either the beginning of your day or leg by leg. I duty on at 8am I have to be done by 10pm, that is the planned completion of the assignment.

Everything else under 135.263 talks about flight time, not duty period. The way, If I understand you two correctly, you guys are reading this, is: the operator can hold you on duty indefinitely as long as it is something unforseeable? Also you appear to be saying you can knowingly exceed flight time limits as long as the reason was unforseeable? By knowingly exceeding flight time limits I mean, you have 8 hours reschon you, the last leg is blocked for 2.1 hours but because of weather you have that 8 hours when you should have only 7. You are saying it is legal to depart?

I am assuming you have block times (I don't we have only our flight plan times), also assuming no reschedules and such. Just straight up, here's your flight assignments for the day and because of weather, etc the last leg will put you over duty or flight time AS BLOCKED.

You stressed "PLANNED completion of assignment" while I would stress "planned completion of the ASSIGNMENT."

.267(d) does not set a 14 hour duty day. It says you have to have a certain amount of rest before your planned completion time. If that plan goes to pot because of weather, late cargo, late pax, mechanical, whatever, that you had no control over, then yes, you can depart on that last 2 hour leg full well knowing that it's going to put you over your 14 hours. Because it was originally planned and dispatched to complete in 14. Under 121, I would fully agree with you that it's leg by leg. The 121 regulations say "flight segment." 135 doesn't say that.

 

[Boris Badenov]

This IS a good discussion, but let me just stick my head in the frame for a second and say that, as I pointed out above, what matters isn't our interpretation of the FARs. For my own part, I read it to mean that if you're on the ground, you've finished the "segment". What matters is A) Your POI's, or, failing that, your local FSDO's opinion on the matter. Our POI apparently feels that "legal to start, legal to finish" applies to an entire planned group of flights. And so that's how I apply it. You can't fight city hall.

 

[braunpilot]

I remember flying for FLX quite often on 14 hour duty days and going over because the courier, weather, mx issue and I would get a late check in time the next day. It's not uncommon that. In fact, the flight time limits are based upon planned route times. For instance, normally between CPS and MKC it was about 1.5 but I have taken up to 2.5 to get there and that way dealing with 70+ knot headwinds or thunderstorms where I had to go from STL area almost to SGF and then up. So If I had been planned at 8 hours of flying for the assignment then I would still be able to finish the day, I would require additional rest that night because I flew over the planned 8 hours of flying. Same thing applies to all duty times as well. So I have a planned assignment, once planned, your good to finish is how I was trained. So, it's not leg by leg, it's entire duty day, same with total flight time. There is no reg that stipulates how we should plan our flight times for that day. Only that it must be planned. So for instance, one route from ORL to TPA was 35 mins. Unless you take off to the southwest and land in TPA on runway 27 you will block more than 35 mins, every time. I think the common theme here is that it is all FSDO dependent.

 

[Dugie8]

Hmmm. I'm gonna do some digging. I would almost bet my first born that I've read intros that say no no to knowingly exceeding duty and flight limits. Gimme a couple days as I have some flying to get done over the next few days.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?culgn3

 

[Tommay85]

This is honestly the first time I've really picked these regs apart. In ground school it was stressed that the only things concerning the legality of a flight were the "assignment" and your rest before you start the next one. Many many arguments coming from the 121 guys that were in the class, no yelling, but it was awkward as it was apparent on the first day that when it comes to book things, our DoT is ridiculous at recalling things. But yes, as Boris points out, our POI and the Orlando FSDO interprets our assignments as being received when we duty on and going over is out of our control. Good discussion indeed, it has me questioning the way FLX and the Orlando FSDO do things. Me personally, I'm a machine, I go long time.

Regarding .263, I'm gonna have to type the whole thing out in word and see it as one string. I feel that the sentence structure of that particular reg may be badly punctuated and having it in that tight paragraph form in the ASA version isn't helping. It is interesting that we're interpreting that in different ways. Perhaps that comma shouldn't be there.

Regarding going over, it appears that it depends on if your company uses .267(b) or (c). In our case, we use the rolling 24 hours, (b). Was even instructed to cross (c) out.
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...0/interpretations/data/interps/2011/Murat.pdf

But the key thing still missing is what an "assignment" is. Yes, all this appears to be FSDO dependent. I like to see what the FAAs legal department thinks though. Especially concerning an accident or incident as at that point, the local FSDO's interpretation doesn't matter.

Oh, and braunpilot, seeing those airport identifiers just brought back memories of the most horrible night ever! Doing the first part of my line, a maintenance repo, a hazmat run to mkc, and then 91 back to msp. In the 210 after a week and a half of Baron flying too! SO SLOW!!! Well not really, but psychologically, I about lost it.

 

[Dugie8]

Ok, had some time to dig around. I was wrong. The FAA, in multiple letters, states that you can knowingly exceed your flight time limits.

This LETTER, while not on point, discusses exceeding 8 hours of flight time and thus triggering 16 hours of rest (Part 121 supp). I find the way the FAA views this interesting. You can be scheduled for up to 8 hours of flying, if you exceed that UPON LANDING the 16 hours of rest is triggered. SOOO, legal to start legal to finish doesn't apply IF you have already exceeded your flight time limits. BUUUT, and where I was wrong, if you are going to exceed your flight time limits enroute, that is fine under the "legal to start legal to finish" (clause). A little wishy washy, but it is what it is.

Here is a LETTER that discusses part 135 legal to start legal to finish. I can't find the 1987 letter they reference in this interp, I think the database only goes back to 1990. However, consistent with my being wrong (its been one of those weeks) you can knowingly exceed your flight time limits. However there is the caveat that your previous day's actual flying plus your SCHEDULED days flying must add up to less than 34 hours (34 hours in 7). So there is still that small "gotcha" in LTSLTF. The FAA is saying LTSLTF is on a day by day basis, as msmpilot has been saying, but LTSLTF doesn't apply if you land and have exceeded your flight time limits even if you have another segment scheduled.

So, beer is on me, I was for the most part wrong about LTSLTF.

Now, to find out about duty period.

 

[Dugie8]

Ok, on to duty. HEY! I was finally right!

This LETTER talks about exceeding 14 hours of duty, knowingly, along with the time beaten question of on call is rest, etc. The section I quoted below may seem taken out of context, I don't believe it to be. I think it is clear that knowingly taking a flight that would put you beyond 14 hours of duty is a no no.

Even if the crewmember received 10 consecutive hours of rest before the start of the duty period, taking
a flight that extended his duty period beyond 14 hours would not ensure that the
crewmember has been provided with a 10 hour rest period within the 24
hours preceding the
planned competition of the flight.

 

[Tommay85]

Hey, thanks for doing the leg work! Frankly, I was THIS close to bleeding from the eyes. Haha

Will read and post more in the morning. If the front going through Minnesota and Iowas doesn't kick up anything nasty at least, in which case it'll be beer:30 and I'll post on Sunday.

 

[msmspilot]

Ok, on to duty. HEY! I was finally right!

This LETTER talks about exceeding 14 hours of duty, knowingly, along with the time beaten question of on call is rest, etc. The section I quoted below may seem taken out of context, I don't believe it to be. I think it is clear that knowingly taking a flight that would put you beyond 14 hours of duty is a no no.

Ok, I understand what you're saying, but the letter does not address the scenario of "I was assigned a set of flights that would normally terminate in 13.5 hours of duty time. Due to unforeseen circumstances, the last leg is departing an hour late, and I won't land until 14.5 hours of duty time."

It does address something we've all agreed on. If you're assigned a flight at the last minute that would exceed your 14 hours, you can't take it.

 

[Dugie8]

Ok, I understand what you're saying, but the letter does not address the scenario of "I was assigned a set of flights that would normally terminate in 13.5 hours of duty time. Due to unforeseen circumstances, the last leg is departing an hour late, and I won't land until 14.5 hours of duty time."

It does address something we've all agreed on. If you're assigned a flight at the last minute that would exceed your 14 hours, you can't take it.

I couldn't find any interps that were on point, the reason I took that little snippet out of the one I did find was how the wording was done about being able to look back and not see that 10 hours of rest in 24 hours. Couple that with the Regs having no mention of duty periods, just flight times, I am of the opinino that the 14 hour duty day is unbreakable if you reasobably know that before departure.


I'd be throwing the fatigue flag long before that ever became issue though, I'm getting old.