commercial requirements

C

carolina flyer

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
5
Display Name
Display name:
carolina flyer
I heard the faa was thinking about a change not requiring any complex time in order to obtain a commercial ticket.Anybody know this to be a fact?
 
I have not heard this but even if they are the change will take a while to get into the regs. So if your hope is to avoid the complex requirments you may be waiting a couple of years.
 
carolina flyer said:
I heard the faa was thinking about a change not requiring any complex time in order to obtain a commercial ticket.Anybody know this to be a fact?
Click to expand...

Have you heard about something called a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking? When a change to a regulation is being considered, an NPRM is issued (with accompanying coverage in the aviation press) and there is a public comment period. After the public comment period has elapsed and the Feds have gone over the responses, a Final Rule is published with an effective date some time in the future. This too is covered in the aviation press. I might note that it is not unusual for comments from the public to cause some changes between what has been proposed and the end product.

Go to www.faa.gov and look for such notices. That works better than "I heard."

Bob Gardner
 
There was nothing like that in the Part 61 rewrite NPRM sent out last year, and I've heard nothing from inside AFS-800 to suggest they're even considering such a change.
 
bobmrg said:
Have you heard about something called a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking? When a change to a regulation is being considered, an NPRM is issued (with accompanying coverage in the aviation press) and there is a public comment period. After the public comment period has elapsed and the Feds have gone over the responses, a Final Rule is published with an effective date some time in the future. This too is covered in the aviation press. I might note that it is not unusual for comments from the public to cause some changes between what has been proposed and the end product.

Go to www.faa.gov and look for such notices. That works better than "I heard."

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
There was nothing like that in the Part 61 rewrite NPRM sent out last year, and I've heard nothing from inside AFS-800 to suggest they're even considering such a change.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Obviously, a lot of work goes into these changes even before the NPRM is published, so it wouldn't be unlikely to have word of an impending change leak out before the NPRM is published. OTOH, if an NPRM is published and addresses the question, well, there's your answer! :yes:
 
Perhaps the misperception stems from the recent determination that the DA 42 counts as a complex airplane despite not having a manual prop control.
 
Ken Ibold said:
Perhaps the misperception stems from the recent determination that the DA 42 counts as a complex airplane despite not having a manual prop control.
Click to expand...
Flight Standards has issued an exemption for the DA-42, allowing it to be used to meet the complex airplane requirements for initial commercial and initial CFI. However, it is not defined as a "complex airplane," and I'm not sure if the FAA said you can get a 61.31 complex endorsement in it. Likewise, I'm not sure you need a 61.31 complex endorsement to fly it. You'd have to read the exemption from AFS-800 to find out, and I'm not sure where it's posted.
 
Ron Levy said:
Flight Standards has issued an exemption for the DA-42, allowing it to be used to meet the complex airplane requirements for initial commercial and initial CFI. However, it is not defined as a "complex airplane," and I'm not sure if the FAA said you can get a 61.31 complex endorsement in it. Likewise, I'm not sure you need a 61.31 complex endorsement to fly it. You'd have to read the exemption from AFS-800 to find out, and I'm not sure where it's posted.
Click to expand...

Nope - It is NOT an exemption, and it IS defined as a complex airplane. The notice states that retractable gear, flaps, and FADEC counts as complex so it is also not limited to the DA42 in principle.

I can't find the notice on the FAA's site any more (it expired on 11/2/07). It says something about incorporating it into "FSIMS" before the notice expires. (Flight Standards Information Management System or something?)

Anyway, here's the relevant part of the original notice:

FAA Notice 8000.331 said:
4. GUIDANCE.
a. This notice provides a determination that airplanes equipped with a retractable landing gear, flaps, and FADEC meet the definition of being a complex airplane.
Click to expand...
 
Just got my renewed medical today. The form still needs to be typed. You think the FAA is moving forward into the new millennium yet?:no:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Nope - It is NOT an exemption, and it IS defined as a complex airplane. The notice states that retractable gear, flaps, and FADEC counts as complex so it is also not limited to the DA42 in principle.

I can't find the notice on the FAA's site any more (it expired on 11/2/07). It says something about incorporating it into "FSIMS" before the notice expires. (Flight Standards Information Management System or something?)

Anyway, here's the relevant part of the original notice:
Click to expand...
What DA 42? In a few months there won't be any. They'll all be grounded by lack of gearboxes.....
 
bbchien said:
What DA 42? In a few months there won't be any. They'll all be grounded by lack of gearboxes.....
Click to expand...
Hey, if you pay IN ADVANCE for parts, the trustee will ship you some. I'd order a few gear boxes and some of those hi pressure fuel thingies, and then cross my fingers that Diamond's own diesel program (based on the same Mercedes core) will bear fruit.

Jeez, one expensive lawn ornament. And it's a damn shame because they are a joy to fly.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I can't find the notice on the FAA's site any more (it expired on 11/2/07). It says something about incorporating it into "FSIMS" before the notice expires. (Flight Standards Information Management System or something?)
Click to expand...
Checked FSIMS this morning -- it's not there. And AFS-800 briefed us last fall at the UAA conference that it was an "exemption." I suspect that's because only the FAA Chief Counsel, not AFS-810 (which wrote the notice Kent quoted) can re-interpret 14 CFR 61.31, but Flight Standards can issue exemptions to PTS requirements.
 
flyersfan31 said:
Just got my renewed medical today. The form still needs to be typed. You think the FAA is moving forward into the new millennium yet?:no:
Click to expand...
My AME says they keep a typewriter in the office ONLY for FAA forms. When someone comes in for a medical, they haul the typewriter out of a closet. But then, I asked if next time I should do MedXpress or TurboMedical, and got, "Huh? Whazzat?"
 
Ron Levy said:
Checked FSIMS this morning -- it's not there. And AFS-800 briefed us last fall at the UAA conference that it was an "exemption." I suspect that's because only the FAA Chief Counsel, not AFS-810 (which wrote the notice Kent quoted) can re-interpret 14 CFR 61.31, but Flight Standards can issue exemptions to PTS requirements.
Click to expand...

I've been digging through FSIMS looking for it too, and I haven't found it either. I don't really know where to look.

I think I did find out why Flight "Standards" vary so much from FSDO to FSDO though! :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top