FAR FAQ's

Jim Burns

Jim Burns

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
169
Location
WI
Display Name
Display name:
Jim Burns
Many years ago, there was a set of unofficial FAQ's and unofficial responses from a FSDO Inspector kind enough to answer student and instructor questions regarding the minutia of the FAR's, logging PIC time, and dozens of other questions. I believe there was one version for VFR and another for IFR.

I've long lost my file and I can't remember the author's name.

Anyone remember the document or have a copy?
 
I believe the name you're looking for is john Lynch.

From what I'm told, the documents disappeared from the FAA website maybe 10 years ago and at the same time he was instructed to cease providing answers.
This predates my time flying so that's all second or third hand information.

You can probably find copies of the documents by searching for the guy's name. Given that there have been numerous regulation changes and legal interpretations in the past 10 years I'd be somewhat hesitant to rely on answers in there.
 
They were written by John Lynch after the big rewrite of Parts 61 & 141. They were removed from public review in part because some of the answers were wrong and led to conflicts between Flight Standards and FAA Legal. The removal was, coincidentally or not, related temporally to a certificate action started against a CFI that was dropped in last because of its contents.
 
Thats what POA is for. Frequently answering frequently asked questions. And ya get to have a little fun along the way.
 
Lynch, by the way, wasn't an FSDO inspector. He was a worker in the DC office that actually writes the regulation. His big problem is that he was a pigheaded son of a ***** and refused to honor the regulatory practice. He in fact, did a lot of the crafting of the Part 61 rewrite, but when his idea of how the regs should work were changed by others in the regulatory process, he refused to follow. His FAQ was wrong because it reflected his opinion of the way he wanted the regs to be rather than how they were actually legally enacted.

I found what I regarded to be a editing error in the regs as well. When they changed the SIC rules, they renumbered/rearranged some of the paragraphs which created a change in the rules that previously was exempted (safety pilots in simulated instrument flight). This change was not mentioned in the rule making (nor observed by NBAA or AOPA in their response). The completely assinine response Lynch issued to my petition had me and Ron Levy shaking our heads for a long time. My discussions with John pretty much went along the lines of "the way it reads now was the way it was intended to work before" which is entirely without foundation. Fortunately, Lynch retired not too long afterwards. The only reason I didn't pursue this again was that a legal counsel opinion issued shortly thereafter proclaimed that safety pilots that aren't required as second in command for some other reason (two pilot aircraft, part 131/121) aren't really second in commands under the regs so none of this rule applies to them. (That's still kind of hokey, but it's the OFFICIAL FAA interpretation).
 
Federal Aviation Regulation 0 prevents an FAQ for the regs:

0.A No pilot or pilots, or person or persons acting on the direction or suggestion or supervision of the pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to try or make or make attempt to try to comprehend or understand any or all, in whole or in part of the herein mentioned Federal Aviation Regulations, except as authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed by, or inspected by the Administrator.

0.B If the pilot, or group of associated pilots becomes aware of, or realizes, or detects, or discovers or finds that he, or she, or they, are or have been beginning to understand the Federal Aviation Regulations, they must immediately, within three (3) days notify, in writing, the Administrator.

0.C Upon receipt of the above mentioned notice of impending comprehension, the Administrator will immediately rewrite the Federal Aviation Regulations in such a manner as to eliminate any further comprehension hazards.

0.D The Administrator may, at his or her option, require the offending pilot, or pilots, to attend remedial instruction in Federal Aviation Regulations until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable of understanding anything.

*Some version of this has been reposted so many times on so many sites, I'm taking it as fair public use at this point. I suspect some version of this was started by Wilbur or Orville.
 
That's a necrojoke, but maybe there are a FEW people who haven't seen it before! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top