"Don Poitras" wrote in message
...
Regulations are written to get the maximum meaning in the fewest words.

You base that assertion on what? The FARs certainly don't bear that out.
There's plenty of verbiage there, much of it excess if one takes the
position that one must make inferences with respect to definitions of words
in the regulations.

Sometimes that requires one to make some common sense interpretation of
the words.

One does need to occasionally use "common sense" definitions, yes. However,
when the FAA has provided a definition (as they have here), that is not
required.

You seem to want "operation" to mean "when the wheels turn" or
perhaps "when the wheels leave the ground". Most of us think it means
"when the engine starts" (for planes with engines).

YOU seem to want "operation" to mean "when the engine starts". This isn't
how the FAA defines it, nor does it make any sense that the FAA would write
a regulation that applies to all aircraft, but have some sort of implicit
exclusion for powered aircraft in which only "engine start" defines the
course of operation.

What happens with a motor glider? Is the aircraft not being operated when
the engine is shut down in flight? How about a regular powered airplane?
Does shutting the engine down in flight allow the pilot to stop using
anticollision lights? What about a balloon? Are lights required only when
the burner is operating?

Arguing over a
definition like this is a common, yet tiring, USENET exercise.

It's especially tiring when the FAA has already provided a definition, and
yet people insist that their definition is incomplete or that one should
infer additional meaning beyond that provided in the official definition.

It's
especially tiring when the entire thread is posted to multiple groups.
Followups set to RAS.

If you think that your comments and replies to them belong only in
r.a.student, then don't post your comments to another newsgroup in the first
place.

Pete