Rotary Wing Forum  

Go Back   Rotary Wing Forum > Rotorcraft > Rules and Regulations

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-30-2016, 10:55 AM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,490
Default False Marketing

There is an ad on Barnstormers for Primary Category certified Calidus as follows:

"FAA CERTIFIED AUTOGYRO CALIDUS • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • 2016 FAA CERTIFIED! This is NOT an Experimental. Ready to fly out of the factroy. These aircraft can used for business and rented, legally. You can use this aircraft to survey pipelines, power lines, properties, ranches, farming, security and much more and at a third cost of helicopters or fixed wing aircraft. All Mandatory FAA required insturmentations included. $100,640.00 (euro). Get your quotes and then call us. AUTOGYRO HONDO TEXAS"

Everyone should note that you CANNOT use a Primary Category aircraft for anything except private flights and training. You cannot do commercial operations under that category. Those are reserved in rotary wing for Part 27 certification.

Update:
I am sending in a clarification request to FAA Washington DC
I will hold this post and see what they say

Last edited by fara; 12-30-2016 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-30-2016, 11:24 AM
WaspAir's Avatar
WaspAir WaspAir is offline
Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,906
Default

I think there is a need for some precision in language when talking about such things.

A primary aircraft is subject to 91.325(a), which says:
No person may operate a primary category aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

An EAB is subject to 91.319(e), which says:
No person may operate an aircraft that is issued an experimental certificate under ß 21.191(i) of this chapter for compensation or hire.

These are different in wording, and in legal effect.
The restriction on EAB aircraft is much tighter. The original Primary aircraft NPRM included the same language, but it was changed before the regulations became final, and that change broadens the possible uses.


To see the difference, consider that a solo flight to examine pipelines, as a commercial service, can be an operation "for compensation or hire", but it is not "carrying persons or property for hire", because there are no passengers or cargo on board (no transportation of persons or things). Thus, the EAB language prohibits it but the Primary language does not.

Last edited by WaspAir; 12-30-2016 at 11:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-30-2016, 11:36 AM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,490
Default

That is interesting but have you actually gotten a clarification on it from Washington from FAA lawyers on this. Is this clarified in an AC that you know about?
There have been only 2 primary category aircraft in the past. GT-500 from QuickSilver and one from Rans. My understanding is based on talking to the QuickSilver guys who had done the primary category but later they lost the PC because they moved though they technically held on to the TC. AutotGyro does not have the PC yet, just the TC but PC is expected sometime in the future.
I would be surprised that FAA changed their interpretation from QuickSilver to now. It has been a long time but things like that do not change usually without an AC release etc.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-30-2016, 11:52 AM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,490
Default

I am sending in a clarification request to FAA Washington DC
I will delete this post and see what they say
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-30-2016, 11:55 AM
WaspAir's Avatar
WaspAir WaspAir is offline
Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,906
Default

AC 21-37 sets out some of the history in the Background section.
It describes the original NPRM from March 1989, saying:
The notice proposed to allow the use of primary category aircraft for pilot training and to prohibit the use of all primary category aircraft for compensation or hire.

It next mentions a string of supplemental notices and amendments, and then says about the final rule (December 1992):
Although a primary category aircraft may be available for rental and flight instruction under certain conditions, the carrying of persons or property for hire is prohibited.

That last piece reflects the different language that actually made it into the FARs, amended during the notice/comment process. Since the original proposal used the same restriction as for EABs and the final rule does not, a court would typically read that as a meaningful intentional change and not a slip of the pen.

Because the language was explicitly changed and broadened during the public comment period, it's hard to argue that there's no effect.

Last edited by WaspAir; 12-30-2016 at 12:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-30-2016, 11:57 AM
WaspAir's Avatar
WaspAir WaspAir is offline
Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fara View Post
I am sending in a clarification request to FAA Washington DC
I will delete this post and see what they say
Leave it up for now, and we can see what the FAA says. This is a good topic for discussion, and I think it should stay where we can all see it and talk about it.

By the way, I don't know what the FAA is likely to say, but I would predict a competent attorney could get the courts to agree with me even if the in-house lawyers at the FAA take a different view.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-30-2016, 12:19 PM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,490
Default

True. May be what the people I was referring to who held the certificate were pointing to was with a second observer/person and did not consider single pilot operation. Its possible. Let see what they will state at FAA. I think its actually safer if you are doing an observation mission to have an observer who observes and a pilot who just concentrates on actual flying but wordsmithing by FAA does not always create logical safety situations.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-30-2016, 12:20 PM
WaspAir's Avatar
WaspAir WaspAir is offline
Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,906
Default

Here's an additional thought, which shows that the FAA considers operation for compensation versus carrying persons or property for hire as different things. Take a look at this bit from part 61, private pilot privileges, and it's clear that there is a distinction. In the first part, they state both restrictions (and wouldn't need to if they meant the same thing). In the second part, they say you can do one in connection with your job so long as you are not doing the other.

ß 61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.


I would hope that the FAA is consistent in applying the same definitions for EAB and Primary aircraft. This opens up the market for Primary gyros and I see that as a good thing.

Last edited by WaspAir; 12-30-2016 at 12:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-30-2016, 12:35 PM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,490
Default

The funny thing is the use of both persons and "property". What safety is lost if one is carrying property like a LIDAR sensing equipment for hire. Persons may be one thing that someone can say FAA is not wanting a second person put in jeopardy for this lower category certification but property, who cares about inanimate objects.

Last edited by fara; 12-30-2016 at 03:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-30-2016, 05:13 PM
DennisFetters's Avatar
DennisFetters DennisFetters is offline
Gold Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Changsha, China
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fara View Post
The funny thing is the use of both persons and "property". What safety is lost if one is carrying property like a LIDAR sensing equipment for hire. Persons may be one thing that someone can say FAA is not wanting a second person put in jeopardy for this lower category certification but property, who cares about inanimate objects.
In my opinion, if the LIDAR is attached and operating on the aircraft, it is equipment. If it is in the back with an address label on it for delivery, it is property, and then you are competing with the US post office, FedEx and UPS, and they won't stand for that!
__________________
The truth is not for all men, but only for those who seek it.

People who are crazy enough to think that they can change
the world, are the ones who do.

For people thatís never tried to do something remarkable,
anyone that can do something remarkable is a freakÖ
to be scorned and shunned.

The difference between the impossible and the possible is the
measure of a manís will.

Itís easy to have all the answers;... after the fact or while
your ass is planted in your lazy-boy, and you
won't be the one responsible for the consequences.

Genius is not just how much you know.....
Genius is what you can do with what you know.

Personal insults are the preferred language of
people that are helpless in face of intelligent debate.

I would rather fight and drowned in blood, than
to concede and live in $hit.

Good designers borrow ideas from others....
Great designers steel them outright.

In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies,
but the silence of our friends
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-30-2016, 05:55 PM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DennisFetters View Post
In my opinion, if the LIDAR is attached and operating on the aircraft, it is equipment. If it is in the back with an address label on it for delivery, it is property, and then you are competing with the US post office, FedEx and UPS, and they won't stand for that!
I don't know about that if what you say is turns out to be true. I'll start working on putting in primary category application tomorrow and work on getting some investors soon.
Otherwise EASA does not accept gyroplanes in primary category because European national clubs lobbied them not to do a European wide CS-LSA like standard for gyroplanes, Canada does not recognize primary category through BASA with the US so its usefulness is limited.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-30-2016, 05:58 PM
WaspAir's Avatar
WaspAir WaspAir is offline
Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,906
Default

I agree that there is a distinction between installed equipment and cargo being transported. If you are carrying a LIDAR set in your "hold" or baggage compartment, or strapped into an empty seat to take it somewhere, it's cargo; if its installation is recorded in the aircraft maintenance logs, it's not.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger