Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipsAhoya
I did, is Part 135 fine, then?
Yes, Part 135 carriers just operate under slightly less restrictive rules, which take into account the fact that air charter and on-demand air taxi operations are a different animal than scheduled airlines. For example, if you have a business offering flights to Martha's Vineyard in a six seat single-engine plane, you can't be expected to have the same level of system redundancy as the airlines.
Quote:
You said a millionaire forcing a private pilot to the limits was of course going to be more dangerous. If there's just some guy who owns a plane and employs a pilot to fly him around, what rules are they subject to?
They are subject to Part 91 rules, the same as a private pilot. Part 91 still has lots of safety rules included, but much less restrictive than 135 or 121. For example, a flight under 135 or 121 can't even
attempt to make an approach unless the reported weather is at or above the minimum visibility requirements for that approach. There is no such rule for Part 91, i.e. you can always "take a look" and see if you can make it in. Of course, you're still supposed to respect the minimum altitude for that approach, i.e. if you don't see the runway when you get down to the minimum altitude, you can't land.
And that's where it can sometimes get dicey for the pilot. His employer puts undue pressure on him to land and the result is the pilot busts minimums...a very unsafe practice that will ultimately have a tragic result. The pilot is the one breaking a reg here and it's up to him to say no to this pressure. But in the real world that might mean losing your job.
In the early days of flying the mail and even the very first passenger carrying airlines, this practice was not uncommon and many accidents resulted. This was a major impetus for a brave band of airline pilots to form the Air Line Pilot's Association. Up until then you either flew, despite bad weather or lack of rest, or you were replaced with someone else who would.