PPRuNe Forums


Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27th Feb 2017, 10:57   #1 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: ireland
Posts: 13
Cit V / Ultra Single Pilot Operators

Does anyone have info or direction on the latest requirements for flying single pilot private ops on Cit V / Ultra in Europe ?
swisstony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th Feb 2017, 17:04   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Around FL380
Age: 31
Posts: 91
You can not
imriozer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd Mar 2017, 12:49   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Hague
Age: 50
Posts: 3,977
You can always check the TCDS:https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/fi...2-05032009.pdf

Quote:
The Cessna Citation Ultra is a pressurized, low-wing monoplane
that is certified for up to thirteen persons including a minimum crew
of two.
Quote:
18. Minimum Flight Crew For all flights: 2 persons (pilot and co-pilot)
212man is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Mar 2017, 02:32   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,186
In the US it is possible to get a single pilot waiver however it is only valid within the US.


later And, I should add, only applies to an FAA licence.

Last edited by Tinstaafl; 6th Mar 2017 at 04:17.
Tinstaafl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Mar 2017, 14:56   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 6,011
Tony

You cannot do it as others have expressed
The only Citstions of the older models you can fly single pilot are both below 12500 ibs
The 501 SP and the 551 SP

Within USA yes but not here
The CJs a different matter
Pace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th Mar 2017, 16:47   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 34
Good god there is some real rubbish on here sometimes.

Pace is wrong.

Phenom 100 is Single Pilot
Citation Mustang is Single Pilot
Citation CJ Series are Single Pilot
C501/551 are Single Pilot

to name a few.

Provided the aircraft are not EASA-based, then you may operate on other registries such as the N.

For those aircraft which are TCDS'd as Single Pilot, and are based in EASA-land, they may be operated as such under Part-NCC.

Tinstaafl; provided you are insured and not based in EASA land, then you can use your single pilot waiver.

In answering the OP (finally), on the N-reg the waiver is fine, however you cannot be based in EASA land, only fly through it on the way to none-EASA-land. Otherwise its only approved as MPA.

Last edited by Albus_Dumbledore; 7th Mar 2017 at 16:49. Reason: Forgot to mention the OP!
Albus_Dumbledore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 02:54   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,186
Albus, I must disagree.

The FAA has no authority to dictate another country's rules. The FAA's single pilot waiver is a waiver against *only* 14 CFR. It is *not* a waiver against any other jurisdiction's regulations. Once you step outside US territory you must also comply with that foreign country's rules as well. If that country's regulations requires two crew then you must comply. If you don't then you are not only in breach of that country's rules, but also 14 CFR Part 91.703 (which specifies that foreign regulations must be followed too):

" 91.703 Operations of civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the United States.
(a) Each person operating a civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the United States shall -
(1) When over the high seas, comply with annex 2 (Rules of the Air) to the Convention on International Civil Aviation and with 91.117(c), 91.127, 91.129, and 91.131;
(2) When within a foreign country, comply with the regulations relating to the flight and maneuver of aircraft there in force;
(3) Except for 91.117(a), 91.307(b), 91.309, 91.323, and 91.711, comply with this part 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; and .....

<snip>"

Last edited by Tinstaafl; 21st Mar 2017 at 14:56.
Tinstaafl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 06:37   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Brentwood, CA
Posts: 16
What a joke. So I can fly my single seat, single engine fighter in all weather, in combat, but not a slow ass Citation single pilot? Ridiculous
Marty33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 07:10   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Age: 97
Posts: 887
You can fly Single Pilot Aircraft in EASA , if EASA recognizes these as such, and they are labelled High Performance Aircraft. Usually the rating comes in two versions SPO and MPO.
The aircrafts listed above can be flown single pilot in Europe, since they are ticking the box of both regulations. A C560 (Citation 5) is not eligible in EASA for Single Pilot operations since this rating in EASA is only multi-pilot.
14 CFR requires ( like all regulations) to comply with countries overflown regs ( age limit, etc..) as a consequence, coming S/P across the pond in a C560 is not possible.

I will see some jumping, saying that the main base is in connecticut, and blablabla... If you operate from Europe on a daily basis, you aircraft is hangared at the same place, not only you will need a shit load of LOA's put also a part NCC authorization ( which includes a MEL, LOA 095 is not enough, except on some grandfather's rights for some operators, the other one's will need LOA 195)...
CL300 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 08:00   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: FL060
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty33 View Post
What a joke. So I can fly my single seat, single engine fighter in all weather, in combat, but not a slow ass Citation single pilot? Ridiculous
Did anybody tell you that kind of flying in a single seat jet is safe?
cavok_flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 08:26   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: london, UK
Age: 50
Posts: 540
I have flown CJ's and Phenoms single pilot and as far as I am aware, EASA do not recognise a multi-pilot rating for either of those aircraft. I had a short discussion with the UK CAA when I first had the CJ rating and the way that the single pilot vs multi pilot flying of those aircraft was being controlled was via the IR. During the rating or the renewal you were issued a single pilot or multi pilot IR and that allowed you to operate the aircraft in the appropriate capacity.

Just an observation, if I'm wrong, sorry...

cheers all

By the way Marty, you are allowed to fly your fighter because you are expendable... I, on the other hand, am not.
tommoutrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 10:55   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 89
Marty, single engine fighters also have a very nice bang seat, if things go wrong. The FAA are more liberal with pilots/aircraft operations. Just to put things into perspective we are only just allowing single engine turboprops to operate commercially with passengers (TBM 900) in day and night. Having said that I suspect the aircraft in question will still need two crew.

The US have allowed this for years....
zero1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:49   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,999
In Marty's defense, if it needed one, the FAA only cares about its exposure to the public's safety, in the air and on the ground. If you are private single-pilot, the FAA is pretty hands off as far as the "air part". But, wreckage raining down on the public is a major concern for them. If you doubt this, try working a regulatory change involving private ops and the conversation rapidly moves to "impact on public safety". The reason you can fly an F-15 around in all weather is because the military assumes the responsibility for the damage to the public.

zero1,. To be pedantic, twin-engine fighters, four-engine and even eight-engine bombers have bang seats to solve the pilots' aerial problems and hand it off the problem to the first responders.

GF
galaxy flyer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th Mar 2017, 06:28   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 34
Here we go again. It says you must follow the rules of "flight and manoeuvre" in relation to an aircraft, NOT the licensing. If it has an N on it, my statement still stands. DO NOT CONFUSE the EASA dual licence bollocks for "based" aircraft.

" 91.703 Operations of civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the United States.
(a) Each person operating a civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the United States shall
(1) When over the high seas, comply with annex 2 (Rules of the Air) to the Convention on International Civil Aviation and with 91.117(c), 91.127, 91.129, and 91.131;
(2) When within a foreign country, comply with the regulations relating to the flight and maneuver of aircraft there in force;
(3) Except for 91.117(a), 91.307(b), 91.309, 91.323, and 91.711, comply with this part 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; and .....
Albus_Dumbledore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th Mar 2017, 10:26   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 482
From where I'm sitting, the minimum crew requirements seem to be a regulation relating to the flight of an aircraft; how do you figure they are not?
Regardless of your opinion, though, several people have been grounded in the past when SAFA checks or their predecessors have found them operating single pilot. Is it really worth the hassle?
BizJetJock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Mar 2017, 17:06   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by BizJetJock View Post
From where I'm sitting, the minimum crew requirements seem to be a regulation relating to the flight of an aircraft; how do you figure they are not?
I give up. If I need to explain what you have to follow when you fly to another country and you consider the licensing an issue, then we might as well ground all aircraft now.

You have to follow the rules of the air of the appropriate country, which is what the FARs refer to. Never seen any country's documentation that stops you flying a single pilot aircraft when you are licensed to do it in the country of registration. Feel free to correct me.

Otherwise my years of flying single pilot, including being SAFA'd when doing so, must be in my vivid imagination.
Albus_Dumbledore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Mar 2017, 22:08   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,186
EASA regulates the flight of aircraft within its jurisdiction. One of those regulations is that C500 series (excluding the single pilot certified versions) require the crew i.a.w. its TCDS. Are you suggesting that the number of crew required to be on board does not pertain to the flight of an aircraft? And is only to do with controlling/maneuvering the plane?

Because if so, then that would also mean that any EASA rule that doesn't specifically concern control/manoeuvering and is different from 14CFR may also be ignored. How about alternate requirements? Or fuel requirements? When going to Europe do you plan your fuel based on just FAA or just EASA rules? Or, more correctly, the most restrictive of the two?

What about M/MELs? Under Pt91 you can have an LOA authorising the use of the MMEL as the MEL. Not so under EASA. It must be an MEL for that airframe. Doesn't matter that the FAA authorised an MEL. For use in EASA-land it must be an MEL, not an MMEL.

These sorts of situations are exactly what "...relating to the flight..." addresses.

Last edited by Tinstaafl; 26th Mar 2017 at 22:39.
Tinstaafl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th Mar 2017, 11:58   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Age: 97
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinstaafl View Post

What about M/MELs? Under Pt91 you can have an LOA authorising the use of the MMEL as the MEL. Not so under EASA. It must be an MEL for that airframe. Doesn't matter that the FAA authorised an MEL. For use in EASA-land it must be an MEL, not an MMEL.

These sorts of situations are exactly what "...relating to the flight..." addresses.
This last part is not completely exact, If you had an LOA 095 BEFORE NCC, THEN you can use this LOA in-lieu of a MEL.
However, the very second you amend this LOA, you need NOW an LOA 195 hence a MEL.
CL300 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 18:38.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1