135 checkrides failed

[Pilot27usa]

hi,

A buddy of mine called me asking a question in regards to his failed 135 checkride. After a year working as SIC for this 135 operator he was sent to sim for upgrade to PIC and failed the oral.
He was sent home and told he could still do contract flights if he pay out of his pocket ($10k)for the type and passed. Long history short, he was terminated and received an email from his cp saying he could not exercise his pilot's privilege till he passes some type of proficiency check or a type.

His question was: can he still exercise his pilot's privilege under part 91? Can he fly contract flights as a sic at a part 91 ops? Can he still flies his c172 around ?

Ps. He understand he needs a proficiency check or a checkride to fly 135, but how about part 91?

Thanks.

 

[gotWXdagain]

Part 91 on his own is fine. But if he can't hack part 135 PIC he shouldn't be operating in any capacity for any business until he can pass proficiency.

And making him pay for the second attempt is stupid. Sounds like a real bang up shop.

 

[Pilot27usa]

Part 91 on his own is fine. But if he can't hack part 135 PIC he shouldn't be operating in any capacity for any business until he can pass proficiency.

And making him pay for the second attempt is stupid. Sounds like a real bang up shop.

Let's just say it's a South Florida based 135 operation.........anyway, he failed a oral, never got to the sim ride itself. It's just unclear from what he was told and researched if he would still be legal to fly a private jet as sic at a part 91 environment until he pass some type of proficiency check (biannual, ipc, type rating etc)

 

[pilotmec]

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org.../agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/Interpretations/

Have him search the legal interpretations and see if anything is in there.
If not, write a letter to legal and ask them. Then sit back and wait 3-6 months for an answer.



Found this.......

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...ale-netjets - (2007) legal interpretation.pdf



Since the pilot failed the PIC line check in the new aircraft, the certificate holder may not use that person as a PIC, nor may that person serve as a flight crewmember, in operations under Part 135 until that person has satisfactorily completed a PIC line check in an aircraft designated by the Part 135 operator.

 

[Itchy]

^^^This. It only pertains to that operator. He can go to a different 135 operator (and perhaps study harder) or fly 91.

 

[Pilot27usa]

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org.../agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/Interpretations/

Have him search the legal interpretations and see if anything is in there.
If not, write a letter to legal and ask them. Then sit back and wait 3-6 months for an answer.



Found this.......

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2007/beale-netjets - (2007) legal interpretation.pdf



Since the pilot failed the PIC line check in the new aircraft, the certificate holder may not use that person as a PIC, nor may that person serve as a flight crewmember, in operations under Part 135 until that person has satisfactorily completed a PIC line check in an aircraft designated by the Part 135 operator.

Thanks

 

[pilotmec]

^^^This. It only pertains to that operator. He can go to a different 135 operator (and perhaps study harder) or fly 91.

I disagree, 135.301(b) If the pilot being checked is unable to demonstrate satisfactory performance to the person conducting the check, the certificate holder may not use the pilot, nor may the pilot serve, as a flight crewmember in operations under this part until the pilot has satisfactorily completed the check.
The pilot can't fly for that certificate holder or any 135 operator until they retake and successfully pass the failed check.
I don't think it applies to 91 but that is only my opinion.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

I disagree, 135.301(b) If the pilot being checked is unable to demonstrate satisfactory performance to the person conducting the check, the certificate holder may not use the pilot, nor may the pilot serve, as a flight crewmember in operations under this part until the pilot has satisfactorily completed the check.
The pilot can't fly for that certificate holder or any 135 operator until they retake and successfully pass the failed check.
I don't think it applies to 91 but that is only my opinion.

Of course, they couldn't fly for another 135 operator without passing the training there, which would then require the same check.

 

[z987k]

Of course, they couldn't fly for another 135 operator without passing the training there, which would then require the same check.

Say someone is a PIC at two different certificate holders, if they fail a ride on Monday with operator #1, they cannot go fly on Tuesday with operator #2 without passing a checkride.

 

[RRPower]

Say someone is a PIC at two different certificate holders, if they fail a ride on Monday with operator #1, they cannot go fly on Tuesday with operator #2 without passing a checkride.

I think it also applies to 121 too. There was some discussion about guys doing 135 ops on the side and they were advised against it because if they busted a 135 ride, then they were automatically dequalled from their 121 ops too. I think that is the case still.

 

[Itchy]

[Qdisagree with your"pilotmec, post: 2558868, member: 16431"]I disagree, 135.301(b) If the pilot being checked is unable to demonstrate satisfactory performance to the person conducting the check, the certificate holder may not use the pilot, nor may the pilot serve, as a flight crewmember in operations under this part until the pilot has satisfactorily completed the check.
The pilot can't fly for that certificate holder or any 135 operator until they retake and successfully pass the failed check.
I don't think it applies to 91 but that is only my opinion.[/QUOTE]
I disagree with your disagree. You simply get hired somewhere else, go through training, and have to get a checkride. End of story. A blown checkride is not the end of the world. Just maybe your current job.

 

[SFLAX]

hi,

A buddy of mine called me asking a question in regards to his failed 135 checkride. After a year working as SIC for this 135 operator he was sent to sim for upgrade to PIC and failed the oral.
He was sent home and told he could still do contract flights if he pay out of his pocket ($10k)for the type and passed. Long history short, he was terminated and received an email from his cp saying he could not exercise his pilot's privilege till he passes some type of proficiency check or a type.

His question was: can he still exercise his pilot's privilege under part 91? Can he fly contract flights as a sic at a part 91 ops? Can he still flies his c172 around ?

Ps. He understand he needs a proficiency check or a checkride to fly 135, but how about part 91?

Thanks.

Only the FAA can take your privlaedeges away, the CP is wrong. He just can't fly with the 135 operator he just failed or anyother 135, until he passes. But any other 135 has to do training. I would be more concerned about is who did the training and who did the ride, because if it was FSI or CAE, your friend should probably not drive home.

 

[Pilot27usa]

Only the FAA can take your privlaedeges away, the CP is wrong. He just can't fly with the 135 operator he just failed or anyother 135, until he passes. But any other 135 has to do training. I would be more concerned about is who did the training and who did the ride, because if it was FSI or CAE, your friend should probably not drive home.

Thanks for the reply. It was at CAE. I was surprise myself when he told he busted the oral, I guess he got comfortable after flying a year and didn't prepare himself enough for the oral. Anyhow, I had the same opinion as you did as far only the FAA being able to remove his airmen privilege. As far as flying for a 135 ops, he would have to go thru their training and checkride anyway whenever he finds a new job. By the way, he never got to the the point to do the sim ride, since new required him to have more ground before he hit the sim.
Thanks for your thoughts tho.