"Guilty" of Flying the Wrong Pattern?

Marty Shapiro wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
Newps wrote:
Government agencies are not required to abide by the FAR's. Many do
to make it easier on themselves but they are not required to.

That can't be right. At least not such a blanket exemption. All I can
find is some exemptions for certain operations mention in 5-6-3 of
the AIM.

Do you have a cite?

From the FAR 1.1 definitions:

Civil aircraft means aircraft other than public aircraft.
....
Look carefully at the start of FAR 61.3. Note that it only requires a
pilot certificate for a civil aircraft. It does NOT require a
certificate for a public aircraft.

§ 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
....
As a mater of regulation, pilots of public aircraft do not have to
have a pilot's certificate. As a mater of policy, most governmental
agencies do require their pilots to have one or their own equivalent
(eg. the military).

Thanks for the cite. HOWEVER....

The some of the Flight Rules in part 91 appears to make _no_ distinction
between civil and public aircraft. Once airborne, the pilot of a public
aircraft still appears to be required to abide by some of the Flight Rules
under part 91. This seems to be the case because 91.1(a) specifically says
the part 91 Flight Rules apply to "aircraft" - note it has _no_ qualifiers.

So I still don't think that government agencies are not required to abide
by _all_ the FARs. Government agencies, including the military, are
presumably still rerquired to abide by all the FARs that use the
unqualified "aircraft" or "person" terminology. (It's a mixed-bag under
part 91; some FARs definitely refer to civil aircraft, others to all
aircraft.)