![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Now let's take 91.175. The USA mandates the use of a published IAP.
The UK does not. 91.1 says p91 does not apply outside the USA. Does this mean one can fly an unpublished IAP in the UK? I don't see anything in 91.1 saying that it does not apply outside the US. It says that it does apply within the US: "(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section and §§91.701 and 91.703, this part prescribes rules governing the operation of aircraft (...) within the United States ..." and 91.703 then extends the compliance requirement outside the US "so far as it is not inconsistent with applicable regulations of the foreign country where the aircraft is operated or annex 2 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation...". So unless flying an IAP in the UK would somehow violate some UK rule, it sounds to me like a US-registered plane in the UK must comply with 91.175 and use a standard IAP. I take back what I just said. My copy of Jeppesen's "FARs Explained" cites an FAA Chief Counsel opinion in which a US-registered plane operating in Italy was not required to comply with 91.521 (shoulder harness) because Italian rules did not require this. Similar decision concerning fuel reserves, where 30 minutes (Italian rule) was acceptable in a situation that would have required 45 minutes by US FARs. So the FAA interpretation of "inconsistent" is apparently more lenient than my own interpretation. Hard to believe! I could not find this opinion online, the date is 2-16-1983. A more recent (2006) Chief Council opinion (http://tinyurl.com/2h85xb) concerning common carriage rules makes this less clear. The FAA refused to say whether Part 91 was inconsistent with foreign law, and just said: "The same regulations prohibiting the proposed operations under part 91 in U.S. airspace, would also prohibit the proposed operations under part 91 in Saudi Arabia if: 1) Saudi law is consistent with U.S. law (e.g. the Saudi government has adopted the Federal Aviation Regulations); or 2) Saudi law is silent on the issues of common carriage and operations conducted for compensation or hire. The FAA offers no guidance on the Saudi requirements, but the U.S. regulations prohibiting the proposed operations under part 91 are more fully explained below." So it sounds like if UK regs say nothing about a requirement to fly an IAP, then 91.175 would apply, but if the UK regs state something different than 91.175, then it would not apply - and the FAA, if asked, would not give you a legal opinion. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Does part 91 apply outside the USA? | Barry | Piloting | 1 | February 5th 08 09:58 AM |
Does part 91 apply outside the USA? | Barry | Piloting | 1 | February 5th 08 01:48 AM |
Does part 91 apply outside the USA? | Barry | Owning | 1 | February 5th 08 01:48 AM |
apply insulation to S-II second stage 6403149.jpg | [email protected] | Aviation Photos | 0 | April 7th 07 04:50 PM |
Does the 3-1 rule apply to air combat? | BUFDRVR | Military Aviation | 15 | October 30th 03 12:22 AM |