Source: http://originalforum.justhelicopters.com/DisplayMsgJH.asp?ForumID=23&Msgid=2565300&page=1&Title=STOP%20confusing%20flight%20time%20and%20going%20over%2014&Return=DisplayMsgJH.asp&D83jsd=True
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 08:42:29
Document Index: 421607107

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 91', 'art 135', 'art 135', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 135', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 135', 'art 91', 'art 135', 'art 91']

STOP confusing flight time and going over 14
Author: With duty period PLANNING Date: 4/11/2019 3:09:39 AM +6/-1
There is no need for part 91 reposition flights and the FAA has already said that it is a violation to bounce attenpt to circumvent between the two with the sole intent of avoiding the 14 hour rule.
it is clear that once you can legally accept a flight under part 135, you can legally complete it (crew members on board or not) for circumstances outside the control of the pic or certificate holder. You can take the out to 15, 16, or 20 hours if you want; but you will get minimum rest prior to reporting for the next part 135 duty assignment.
this issue is about legally planning and accepting a flight, period. What’s included in the planning and who determines the amount of time to plan for. FAA says the pic base on experience and knowledge. They also say that ALL time (regardless of part 91 or 135 “flight” assignment) from the moment you report for the “duty period assignment” until relieved of ALL direction and responsibility (meaning driving to a hotel, back to base, post flight,etc) WILL be used for the purposes of preflight acceptance of a “flight assignment” during the “duty period assignment.” Black and white with no room for confusion or selective interpretations.
for the business owner this makes part 91 useless and costly, just as getting a hotel or rental car. It takes the crew and aircraft out of service for a significant period of time. Yes, if the crew is tired then by all means get a hotel, but once the flight is legally accepted it can be legally completed; not just the patient leg, the ENTIRE flight!
This is what amc learned and why they back pedaled and confirmed to the unions class action grievance and the FAA legal interpretations.
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +6/-1 With duty period PLANNING 4/11/2019 3:09:39 AM
STOP ctrying to impose Part 135 rules on a (NT) +0/-0 Part 91 operation! 4/11/2019 6:04:52 AM
You are eliminating the planning to an away +1/-0 location within 14 hrs and Part 91 back! 4/11/2019 6:07:42 AM
You are eliminating the planning to an away +0/-0 Bottom 4/11/2019 5:42:04 PM
FAA and Regs say to be finished with medical +1/-0 crew & pax by the 14th duty hour 4/11/2019 5:52:34 PM
Sounds good until another FSDO... (NT) +1/-0 ...thinks otherwise. 4/11/2019 7:51:42 AM
Yes there is often need for Part 91 planning! +1/-1 Anonymous 4/11/2019 10:07:33 AM
Yes there is often need for Part 91 planning! +1/-0 FAA already answered with NO 4/11/2019 10:51:15 AM
I did start and finish Part 135. Then, as planned! (NT) +0/-0 I flew a Part 91 leg back alone! 4/11/2019 3:42:39 PM
I did start and finish Part 135. Then, as planned! +0/-0 Aaaarghhhhhh.......... 4/12/2019 7:09:40 PM
ignore it then! (NT) +0/-0 Anonymous 4/13/2019 10:47:17 AM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +2/-0 PHI 135 4/11/2019 10:32:23 AM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 (NT) +0/-0 METRO is same 4/11/2019 10:52:10 AM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +2/-0 If only every HEMS operator would agree 4/11/2019 11:05:18 AM
They have said that: +0/-1 Anonymous 4/11/2019 3:46:00 PM
Don't you HAAPS have an HR department? (NT) +0/-0 STOP WHINING ON JH! 4/11/2019 10:50:15 AM
Don't you HAAPS have an HR department? (NT) +0/-0 STOP replying on JH 4/11/2019 10:52:44 AM
Don't you HAAPS have an HR department? (NT) +0/-0 NO! STOP WHINING ON JH! 4/11/2019 2:10:52 PM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +0/-0 Anonymous 4/11/2019 11:11:05 AM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +1/-1 Now get out the Jason Kidd 2017 ruling 4/11/2019 11:38:17 AM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +0/-0 Anonymous 4/11/2019 3:54:41 PM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +0/-0 Flingwing 4/11/2019 11:47:58 AM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +0/-0 This example is clearly laid out in 4/11/2019 11:59:50 AM
Kidd (2017) is not applicable to the question (NT) +1/-0 "can you operate Part 91 afterwards"? 4/11/2019 12:53:49 PM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +2/-1 Caru Wrester 4/11/2019 1:22:11 PM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 (NT) +0/-0 snowflake 4/11/2019 12:51:47 PM
Moody-SevenBar avaition ruling from +0/-0 2017 4/12/2019 7:43:22 AM
OK, once again, this is not germane to the +0/-0 question! 4/12/2019 9:48:12 AM
Also: +0/-0 Anonymous 4/12/2019 10:30:32 AM
Stop confusing me, with someone who (NT) +1/-0 gives a crap. 4/12/2019 3:54:47 PM
STOP confusing flight time and going over 14 +1/-0 Well, 4/13/2019 7:09:15 PM