If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Proposed new flightseeing rule
NAFI sent this alert to its members. Note the EAA concern about charity
flights with vintage aircraft such as Aluminum Overcast: Instructional News FAA Proposes Flight-seeing Rule The FAA published on Oct. 22 a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that it claims will improve national air tour safety. Among other things, the proposal would raise the minimum number of hours required for pilots conducting charity fundraising flights from 200 to 500 and remove an exemption that allows Part 91 sightseeing flights within 25 nm of an airport. Commercial sightseeing flights will fall under a new FAR Part 136, and some current Part 91 operations may require either Part 121 or 135 certification. Only eligible charity/community events will remain under Part 91. NAFI is reviewing the rule and developing its response as to how the rule will affect flight instructors' and flight schools' ability to provide general aviation flight experiences to people in their communities. "This proposed rule is a real slap in the face to Part 91 pilots who contribute their time and services to worthy causes, and to small businesspeople just trying to earn an income," said AOPA Senior Vice President of Government and Technical Affairs Andy Cebula. "The FAA claims the change is for safety reasons, but they provide no safety data or statistics to justify the jump in flight hours required to conduct charitable fundraising flights." The proposed rule is modeled on Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 71, which governs the Hawaiian commercial air tour industry. FAA credits this SFAR with lowering the air tour accident rate in that state from a high of 3.46 per 100,000 flight miles (1989-1994) to 1.48 (1995-2000). FAA now seeks to apply the regulations throughout the country. The data used to justify lifting the sightseeing exemption and require the operators to be certified as Part 135 are a jumble of Part 135 and Part 91 accident reports, according to AOPA. But of the 11 accidents cited in the NPRM, eight occurred in Hawaii, and most were apparently already operating as Part 135 flights, AOPA says. According to EAA, the NPRM would adversely affect the operations of these vintage aircraft used in flight-seeing operations. That could force grounding of the association's Ford Tri-Motor and B-17 Aluminum Overcast, because income derived from flights provides the resources with which owners preserve and maintain them. To comment on the NPRM, visit the Federal Docket Management System at http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm. The NPRM is Docket No. 4521. The comment period ends on January 20, 2004. -- Christopher J. Campbell World Famous Flight Instructor Port Orchard, WA For the Homeland! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote
NAFI sent this alert to its members. Note the EAA concern about charity flights with vintage aircraft such as Aluminum Overcast: Instructional News FAA Proposes Flight-seeing Rule The FAA published on Oct. 22 a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that it claims will improve national air tour safety. Among other things, the proposal would raise the minimum number of hours required for pilots conducting charity fundraising flights from 200 to 500 and remove an exemption that allows Part 91 sightseeing flights within 25 nm of an airport. I'd like to see a map of what *isn't* within 25 nm of an airport, especially East of the Mississippi! For the Homeland! The more I hear the word "homeland" lately, the less this is a land I wanna call home. Eric |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Eric Miller wrote: "C J Campbell" wrote NAFI sent this alert to its members. Note the EAA concern about charity flights with vintage aircraft such as Aluminum Overcast: Instructional News FAA Proposes Flight-seeing Rule The FAA published on Oct. 22 a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that it claims will improve national air tour safety. Among other things, the proposal would raise the minimum number of hours required for pilots conducting charity fundraising flights from 200 to 500 and remove an exemption that allows Part 91 sightseeing flights within 25 nm of an airport. I'd like to see a map of what *isn't* within 25 nm of an airport, especially East of the Mississippi! There's a _whole_lot_ of Lake Michigan, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, and Lake Huron that meets _that_ requirement. *snicker* Of course, I'm not sure how you'd get a flight off the ground, without coming within 25nm of an airport. A compliant *landing*, OTOH, _is_ possible -- but *not* recommended. snort |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Just a Thought but do not most of all "flight-seeing" operations originate and terminate at an airport ? hmmmnnnn. Sean |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Eric Miller" wrote in message . .. I'd like to see a map of what *isn't* within 25 nm of an airport, especially East of the Mississippi! Not "an airport" the "airport of departure". The exemption is for non-stop sightseeing flights that stay with 25 miles of their departure point. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"sean trost" wrote in message ... Just a Thought but do not most of all "flight-seeing" operations originate and terminate at an airport ? They must originate and terminate at the same airport and not go beyond 25 miles of that airport. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message m... | | "sean trost" wrote in message ... | | Just a Thought but do not most of all "flight-seeing" operations | originate and terminate at an airport ? | | They must originate and terminate at the same airport and not go beyond | 25 miles of that airport. They must also not land at any other airport. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message m... | | "Eric Miller" wrote in message . .. | | I'd like to see a map of what *isn't* within 25 nm of an airport, especially | East of the Mississippi! | | Not "an airport" the "airport of departure". The exemption is for non-stop | sightseeing flights that stay with 25 miles of their departure point. At first I was astonished that any pilots would not know this, but as a flight instructor I should have known better. I did not know it myself until I began to study for my commercial certificate. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
... "Ron Natalie" wrote in message m... | | "sean trost" wrote in message ... | | Just a Thought but do not most of all "flight-seeing" operations | originate and terminate at an airport ? | | They must originate and terminate at the same airport and not go beyond | 25 miles of that airport. They must also not land at any other airport. Oh, well that's different, that just sounds like regular "you can't fly someone from point A to point B for recompense on just a Private certificate" Eric |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Eric Miller" wrote in message t... Oh, well that's different, that just sounds like regular "you can't fly someone from point A to point B for recompense on just a Private certificate" It's got nothing to do with that. You can't even fly someone from point A to Point A for recompense on a private certificate. You can't fly sightseeing (other than this local exception) with a comercial pilot certificate either UNLESS you have a comercial operators certificate issued under one of the Part 119-related sections. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New proposed electronics merger | Jerry Wass | Home Built | 4 | August 26th 03 01:25 PM |
51% rule | Robert Bates | Home Built | 12 | August 1st 03 09:06 PM |