Pilot Counsel

Items per page   10 | 25 | 50 | 100
31 to 40 of 285 results

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Apr 01, 2012

There is nothing unusual about a fatal air crash resulting in litigation, with charges and countercharges alleging negligence on the part of pilots, air traffic controllers, manufacturers, and others. It's a sign of the litigious society in which we live.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Mar 01, 2012

A recent legal interpretation of FAR 91.130, "Operations in Class C airspace," by the FAA chief counsel answers a question about the two-way radio communications requirement for an aircraft departing a satellite airport in Class C airspace. (As a reminder, a satellite airport is any airport that exists within Class C or D controlled airspace, but is not the so-called "primary" airport on which the airspace is based. The satellite airport may or may not have an operating control tower.) This provides an opportunity to review the communications requirements for airports in controlled airspace (different controlled airspaces are depicted or coded on aeronautical charts), and helps us to better understand the interpretation.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Feb 01, 2012

I try to offer guidance to pilots on how to deal with the many different FAA enforcement matters that I see in the administration of the AOPA Legal Services Plan. That's not because most pilots will experience some trouble with the FAA - most won't. However, some significant number will, and we can't tell in advance which ones will.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Jan 01, 2012

The airspace in which we fly is finite. There will be no more. So what we have needs preserving. The FAA is charged

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Nov 01, 2011

At AOPA's Aviation Summit in Hartford, Connecticut, I was reminded that general aviation pilots still wrestle with who and what they can legally carry in their aircraft without running afoul of the commercial regulations. The question that caused the most consternation was whether a pilot flying incidental to his/her business or employment could legally carry other employees, customers, or passengers in connection with that business or employment.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Nov 01, 2011

General aviation pilots are interested to know, or be refreshed, about who and what they may legally carry on their personal and business flights, where "compensation" could arguably be involved. The FAA very broadly applies the term. To mention an extreme, the FAA has long held that transporting someone to where he/she wants to go, for the purpose of logging flight time, is compensation.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Oct 01, 2011

Rule FAR 91.211 requires supplemental oxygen for general aviation (noncommercial) operations (airliners and some other commercial operations and aircraft have stricter requirements).

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Sep 01, 2011

If an aircraft is equipped with an "anticollision light system," as most modern aircraft are, a pilot must not "operate" that aircraft unless the system is lighted, or in other words, the anticollision lights are "on." That's the basic rule of FAR 91,209(b). Yet, there are two questions raised by the rule that we oftentimes hear debated in spirited hangar flying sessions. Now we have a recent interpretation of the FAA chief counsel that authoritatively answers these debates within the strict terms of the rule, but with important safety precautions.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Aug 01, 2011

In the many columns in which I review the rules that govern our flying I have tried to include an important secondary message. These are the rules that have associated logging requirements.

Pilot Counsel:

Pilot Magazine | Jul 01, 2011

For a long time, it has been my opinion that FAR 91.175 (formerly FAR 91.116) allows a pilot shooting a standard instrument approach in a noncommercial IFR operation to take a “look see” that the flight visibility is at or above the minimum prescribed for the approach—regardless of the officially reported visibility. This opinion has recently been reaffirmed by FAA Chief Counsel Interpretation No.