Dave Riggs and Santa Monica Pier buzz update

If you are flying a two person airplane, then both pilots must be certificated for that airplane. You can't put a SE Comm in the right seat of a CitationX and be legal.

I thought L39's were single pilot
 
I thought L39's were single pilot
and there's no right seat either...

here is the context of my comment:
Willfully serving as a crew member without appropriate certificates is a crime. So, eventually...


Sent from Seat 3D

Got a reference? Or is that a "I heard it on the internets, so it's true. They can't put anything on the internets that isn't true."

If you are flying a two person airplane, then both pilots must be certificated for that airplane. You can't put a SE Comm in the right seat of a CitationX and be legal.

I think the L39 is single engine as well so you CAN put a SEComm in the pilots seat of that and take people for rides (just not for money since it's experimental)
 
I believe the correct title is an "Authorized Experimental Aircraft" rating, but it is essentially a type.
 
I believe the correct title is an "Authorized Experimental Aircraft" rating, but it is essentially a type.

I was about to comment on that after reading Bumblebees post. Aren't those called LOA's? How does all that work? OR, are LOA's different than the experimental type ratings? I think John Deakin has an LOA that basically says "Anything piston engined" or something to that effect.
 
Willfully serving as a crew member without appropriate certificates is a crime. So, eventually...


Sent from Seat 3D

Even if this is the case (I don't know, I would have to look it up), I seriously doubt the threat of being charged with a crime would be enough to make said person reconsider his actions.
 
What is the punishment for piloting without a license?

The requirement for a license generally is embodied in Federal air regulations (14 CFR 61.3, mainly), not U.S. Code. Flying an aircraft commercially without a license is prohibited by 49 USC § 44711, and this applies to private flight in some cases (49 USC § 40102).

For punishment, 49 USC § 46301 prescribes a maximum fine of $25,000 (imposable directly by the FAA's administrative process). And 49 USC § 46317 prescribes fines and imprisonment of up to 3 years under Title 18 of USC for flying an aircraft without the required airmen's certificate(s), although this appears to apply to commercial air transportation (the definitions are not clear on this).

So for flying illegally, you'll get at least a fine, and in some cases a prison sentence (after being convicted of the violation in court).
 
here ya go...thanks for the clarification.
In the United States, an L-39 requires an Authorized Experimental Aircraft rating (AEA, similar in concept to type rating). This is accomplished by performing a checkride with an authorized check pilot. Upon successful completion of the check ride, the check pilot issues AEA.
 
If you are flying a two person airplane, then both pilots must be certificated for that airplane. You can't put a SE Comm in the right seat of a CitationX and be legal.
Just to be clear, both pilots don't need to "certified" in a multi crew airplane. One needs a type to act as pic. The other, to act as sic in a multi crew A/C you need a multi/inst and the proper review of emergency procedures, three bounces etc. for that particular type. There's no "certification" required, on paper that is. (If that's the training you're referring to Bee then my apologies) but to operate within US airspace there's no "SIC Type" needed. You would need a Comm if you want to get paid, if not a Private is fine. Getting the insurance by off on it? That's a totally different ball game. :)
 
Just to be clear, both pilots don't need to "certified" in a multi crew airplane. One needs a type to act as pic. The other, to act as sic in a multi crew A/C you need a multi/inst and the proper review of emergency procedures, three bounces etc. for that particular type. There's no "certification" required, on paper that is. (If that's the training you're referring to Bee then my apologies) but to operate within US airspace there's no "SIC Type" needed. You would need a Comm if you want to get paid, if not a Private is fine. Getting the insurance by off on it? That's a totally different ball game. :)
Huh, I thought that if you are flying as a required crew member (for passengers) you need a commercial multi certificate (along with the training you refer to) in the right seat...I didn't think a private would work. (still don't, but I have to review now to be certain).
 
Huh, I thought that if you are flying as a required crew member (for passengers) you need a commercial multi certificate (along with the training you refer to) in the right seat...I didn't think a private would work. (still don't, but I have to review now to be certain).
What I was referring to was your quote about being certified for "that" airplane. Meaning a certain type. So that's what I was talking about. A multi crew jet needs a "type rated" captain and a PVT or Comm rated with a Multi/Inst. If the operation is for hire (is getting paid to be in the seat) then yes one needs the Comm. The "SIC Type" is an ICAO requirement to fly out the United States. All that basically is the same training that is required to act as SIC, but you have to take an 8710 over to the FISDO to get it put on your certificate. There's no check ride involved or any thing, just a sign off from a company representative. :)
 
I was about to comment on that after reading Bumblebees post. Aren't those called LOA's? How does all that work? OR, are LOA's different than the experimental type ratings? I think John Deakin has an LOA that basically says "Anything piston engined" or something to that effect.

They used to be LOAs (Letter of Authorization)....and then they became ETRs (Experimental Type Rating).....and now they are AEAs (Authorized Experimental Aircraft).

All mean the same thing: a type rating in a high performance experimental aircraft.

I believe the "all piston" LOAs went away when they went to the ETR system. The guys with those LOAs are grandfathered in, but they're no longer issued like that so far as I know.
 
Even if this is the case (I don't know, I would have to look it up), I seriously doubt the threat of being charged with a crime would be enough to make said person reconsider his actions.
Maybe not, but this system has a way of eventually catching up with you.

The requirement for a license generally is embodied in Federal air regulations (14 CFR 61.3, mainly), not U.S. Code. Flying an aircraft commercially without a license is prohibited by 49 USC § 44711, and this applies to private flight in some cases (49 USC § 40102).

For punishment, 49 USC § 46301 prescribes a maximum fine of $25,000 (imposable directly by the FAA's administrative process). And 49 USC § 46317 prescribes fines and imprisonment of up to 3 years under Title 18 of USC for flying an aircraft without the required airmen's certificate(s), although this appears to apply to commercial air transportation (the definitions are not clear on this).

So for flying illegally, you'll get at least a fine, and in some cases a prison sentence (after being convicted of the violation in court).
That was what I was looking for, yes.
 
He is, needless to say, a serious problem child given his complete disregard of any semblance of flight discipline. His actions are a stain on the civilian warbird jet community, and have put that community under the FAA's microscope (some of which is deserved).

His company produced this stirring image:

babe3.jpg


who did what again?
 
Back
Top