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 their members. Thought some of the rest of you might
find it interesting. 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! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Combat exercise showcasing proposed uniform, By Airman 1st Class Terri Barriere | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | June 11th 04 01:47 AM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
Proposed new flightseeing rule | C J Campbell | Home Built | 56 | November 10th 03 05:40 PM |
Does the 3-1 rule apply to air combat? | BUFDRVR | Military Aviation | 15 | October 30th 03 12:22 AM |
Hei polish moron also britain is going to breach eu deficit 3% rule | AIA | Military Aviation | 0 | October 24th 03 11:06 PM |