Guppy
I brought it up and then admitted it wasn't relevant and moved on. You must have been typing for over an hour on that last diatribe about 61.55!!
You then accuse me of irrelavance -
classic!
Try sticking to the thread title instead of turning each thread into the guppy show
Another guppy classic....
Well, there you go. Who needs an authoritative source such as a magazine like Flight International to which to refer, when you can simply hark back to "long-standing policy,' and that "it's been like that for donkeys." Very authoritative donkey's, those. Of curiosity, what revision number are the donkeys up to, these days?
You mean long standing policy like this
This has been standard practice among airlines, corporate flight departments, some fractional providers, and many private owners, for many years, to say nothing of government agencies, and others.
Domestically in the US, and for a very long time internationally, one not acting as SIC had no requirement to hold a type rating for the aircraft
Both quotes from the same post
You've been doing it for ages - must be right then!! Oh no hang on a minute the CAA GROUNDED your countrymen's aircraft just all of a sudden cos they felt like it that day -
but you've been doing it for YEARS.....
Didn't you wag on about how you'd read the thread? The references have been posted...and discussed in detail. You just missed that part, didn't you?
Dunno maybe....I could easily have been forgiven for falling asleep half way through, try and be a bit more concise old chap, you're typing lots but saying little
Off topic
PS flew around for many years pt 91 on a US PPL internationally with a 61.55 rating in a FAR25 2 crew aircraft. So dont kid a kidder it does happen. You mention all the best examples - the rules are open to misuse and abuse, dont think AA or Delta think lear25 charters inc. from buttf**k alabama with no training budget to speak off