CALL TO ACTION: Support a rewrite of Part 135 duty and rest rules

Maybe trim some of the duty times, but please please for the love of God do not make us deal with the confusing disaster that is 117.
 
Roger Roger said:
Maybe trim some of the duty times, but please please for the love of God do not make us deal with the confusing disaster that is 117.
Click to expand...

If you vote with your feet as some have said, and you don't get involved, .117 could become a reality for 135 and maybe make things worse. This is just to get the line of communication open and a dialog on what needs to be done to make it better for crews on the road.

I will add that .117 isn't a disaster, it WAS a disaster when it was introduced.
 
Roger Roger said:
To fly scheduled pax flights in a multi engine aircraft (VFR or IFR) one must hold a multi atp. Ergo, unless you hire only guys who got their ATP prior to the new rules, your VFR Navajo pilot has to go through jet sim school. It's freaking retarded.
Click to expand...

You can't just do the ATP in the Navajo with a DPE?
 
Inverted said:
I will say something else. Getting congress to vote in approval for a committee is a helluva lot more than anyone else has done for part 135, anybody who is sitting here reading this and not willing to show support to have a committee REVIEW part 135 duty and rest rules is quite frankly a fool.
Click to expand...

Your logical fallacy is "ad hominem."
 
Inverted said:
You can't just do the ATP in the Navajo with a DPE?
Click to expand...

You can see how this would make us a bit mistrustful of regulations created ostensibly to increase "safety." Any time congress touches anything it mostly turns to garbage.

Frankly, I'd like to see if there's any NTSB data out there supporting the idea that regulatory changes like part 117 would make flight operations under 135 appreciably safer before they get rammed down our throats.
 
Inverted said:
If you vote with your feet as some have said, and you don't get involved, .117 could become a reality for 135 and maybe make things worse. This is just to get the line of communication open and a dialog on what needs to be done to make it better for crews on the road.

I will add that .117 isn't a disaster, it WAS a disaster when it was introduced.
Click to expand...
For anyone without an army of admin folks able to help with tracking it (i.e., any 135 smaller than an AMF/Era) it would be an unqualified •show until eternity. I get that 117 is super scientific and all that but in the case of say a 5 pilot operation without the admin support simple is better.
 
ppragman said:
I'd rather "vote with my feet" if the company is abusing me too much than try to get laws that no one abides by anyway passed.
Click to expand...

This is the way. The world has changed for 135 operators: they need to compete for your talents. It's on us as a pilot community to inform the other members of our community about scum operators. Scum operators, as a result, will face higher turn-over and increased training costs.

The market economy for pilots and our ability to communicate with each other is far more likely to yield results than legislative solutions.
 
Inverted said:
Instead of taking 30 seconds to show support to have this stuff get noticed on Capitol Hill, you would rather trash the union and remark about how they can spend money elsewhere?.
Click to expand...
Easy there Captain butt hurt - 1) I didn't trash your union, that is simply how you took it 2) You are the one making the assumptions. I sent an email to my senator as soon as I saw the thread. I fly part 135 as well, and I will support any logical piece of legislation that has the chance to improve safety. I was simply stating my opinion on the subject - that they should fix the underlying issue before trying to comb over another reg.
 
Since when has any company provided assistance to getting the ATP written? I get that it might be unnecessary to fly a Navajo with pax, but companies have to figure it out and comply, the regionals did.
 
FlyByWire22 said:
Easy there Captain butt hurt - 1) I didn't trash your union, that is simply how you took it 2) You are the one making the assumptions. I sent an email to my senator as soon as I saw the thread. I fly part 135 as well, and I will support any logical piece of legislation that has the chance to improve safety. I was simply stating my opinion on the subject - that they should fix the underlying issue before trying to comb over another reg.
Click to expand...

Certainly not butthurt. More confused at your comments.
 
Roger Roger said:
Maybe trim some of the duty times, but please please for the love of God do not make us deal with the confusing disaster that is 117.
Click to expand...
Domestic 117 rules are easier to read than the current 135 rules. Anyone that bumbled through high school should be able to read a table with only 2 axis.

Inverted said:
Since when has any company provided assistance to getting the ATP written? I get that it might be unnecessary to fly a Navajo with pax, but companies have to figure it out and comply, the regionals did.
Click to expand...
Since the cost of the written went from ~$100 to $10,000.
 
exneophyte said:
Is Inhofe really the guy you want introducing this one? I recall something about him knowingly landing on a closed runway littered with construction personnel...
Click to expand...

oops.gif


Itchy said:
Meh. 135 and cargo pilots do not get tired like their 121 brethren. Isn't that obvious?
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHA! I completely agree.

ppragman said:
It's not really "run ragged" if you take the entire winter off to do whatever the hell you want. A good friend of mine used to work 5 months in the summer then spend the rest of the year sitting on beaches in SE Asia and trekking around Patagonia. A coworker of mine here did something similar before he came here.
Click to expand...

I just spent the last week chilling in a 5 star hotel. Tomorrow I'll go fly 3 legs across east Asia in a 747 for probably 16 hours of duty time and about 10.5 block. I doubt I'll be fatigued at any point because I'm so well rested right now.:rolleyes:

Roger Roger said:
Maybe trim some of the duty times, but please please for the love of God do not make us deal with the confusing disaster that is 117.
Click to expand...

Meh, it's not that bad. It could be a LOT simpler for sure, but it's not as bad as doing taxes.
 
Only 16 hours on duty? What is this amatuer freight hour. A real freight god... er dog spends at least 22 hours on duty per assignment.
 
FlyByWire22 said:
A re-write does what exactly? You get a set of new regs so the 135 shops have something new to BS their way around and the Feds continue to ignore? It surprises me that your union doesn't have better things to spend money on. I wish the bill the best, but why not get at the root of the problem before putting another band aid on it?
Click to expand...
What do you see as the "root of the problem"?
 
Inverted said:
It's a perfect, absolutely perfect example of what's wrong with this industry. Instead of invoking change for the better, it's met with bitching and moaning about how awesome 135 rest rules are.

It literally takes longer to come in here and bitch than it does to send a simple, ALREADY FORMED EMAIL to your local government.
Click to expand...
C'mon man, get with the 'geist... They tūk r jerbs!!!! ;)
 
z987k said:
Domestic 117 rules are easier to read than the current 135 rules. Anyone that bumbled through high school should be able to read a table with only 2 axis.


Since the cost of the written went from ~$100 to $10,000.
Click to expand...
Uh, ok, maybe it's just because I'm used to it but 10 hours rest and 8 hours of flying seems pretty dang simple to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top