And if you look here
Explosion was hyperbole - point is that oil is more dangerous than a can of paint from Lowe’s.
It must mean something other than what it says? What says you can’t transport it?
No, I didn’t say you couldn’t carry it. I merely pointed out the way “commerce” is defined. You simply chose not to read far enough into the HMR to get to the exceptions.
I assert that the definition means what it says.
But it’s not irrelevant because it can’t mean what it says. It’s irrelevant because the it specifically states that it is.
But I also remember that nobody found it to be illegal to carry 2 - 5 gallons cans of Mogas in the back of an airplane to refuel at an airport without and gas. If you can carry large amounts of highly explosive fuel, how can you not carry basically any other flammable liquid?
So you’re going with @bflynn ’s argument that it’s legal because “it can’t be illegal”, rather than because the HMRs say so?
Is there a different law up in Alaska? Because otherwise nobody would do any flying or hunting if they can’t carry cans of gas in the aircraft. Even outside of part 91, nearly every aircraft carries cans and barrels of Mogas and Avgas all the time.
I didn’t say it was illegal. Your argument that it can’t be illegal because everyone does it is as ridiculous here as it would be in court.
Better in the front seat so you don't have to land.
No, I was bringing up an old post (can't find it right now) where it was argued here on POA, and it was determined that it was legal to carry gas in can inside the aircraft. If you have new information that you would like to share, showing that it is, in fact, illegal to carry cans of gas in the aircraft, please share it with us.
Again, I am not saying that it’s illegal. And the 121 and 135 operators could have hazmat authorizations. But if all of your friends jump off a bridge, feel free to follow.
So what is your point? You didn’t mention part 91. Are you trying to be cryptic and say it is illegal for part 91 in a round about manner?
I didn’t mention Part 91 because that’s different than Parts 121 and 135, and could very well not need an authorization.
Why would you bother with a personal attack on me?
It wasn’t a resonant attack, it was a direct answer to a direct question.
Whatever. You are the only one that thinks you are right. Argue the details and semantics with @Bell206 again. Everyone else will keep breaking the law and apparently nobody cares because there does not seem to be any documented enforcement or punishment over the issue for private part 91 flights.
Kinda scary that I’m the only one who thinks determinations of legality should be based on the regulations involved.
Personally I would sweat those 80 gallons of highly explosive liquid in my wings and engine compartment more. But you could also put the can in a large plastic bag.
But on my last flight I didn't because I had to shed all weight to make weight and balance.