Originally Posted by Island-Flyer
Really you seriously just told me FAR means "Federal Acquisition Regulation" and then proceed to lecture me on the difference between 121 and 135?
I hope you're fully aware that FAR the common industry term in the United States for "Federal Aviation Regulation" in reference to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The fact that I have to tell you this indicates that you have no clue about US regulations pertaining to aviation…………………………….(et al)
Whoa … slow down parder… I wasn’t trying to kick over your rice bowl – (and no, there isn’t any preconceived ethnic slander hidden in those words) – I was merely pointing out something because I didn’t have much else to do yesterday ……..
However … now that I’ve received such a response let me say that YES, I did REALLY and SERIOUSLY, just tell you that FAR means "Federal Acquisition Regulations." Why did I do that? Because “FAR” is the shortened reference to the Federal Acquisition Regulations. Don’t believe me? I’d suggest you look it up. Simply type “F” “A” “R” into your Google Search Engine and hit the “enter” key. I’d be interested to know what comes up at the top of the list that appears.
I am fully aware that a lot of folks mean the rules that govern the operation of airplanes when they use the term “FAR” … but that doesn’t mean that because it’s used that way that it is correctly used. How many times have you seen/heard someone on television or radio talk about “AXING” someone a question. AXING is what Lizzie Borden did to her parents – she didn’t have a long interrogatory with them. If you stood in front of me and told me that you AXED your business partner … I would likely smile – and ASK you if he got mad … or if he bled all over you … or some other form of “you’ve-got-to-be-kidding” sort of response to such a verbal error. Also, I think you’ll find that in my history on this forum I’ve rarely, if ever, lectured anyone on anything – although I have been tempted to do so - on more than one occasion. I have pointed out, and I’ll probably continue to point out, errors – both in word and deed – but for whatever its worth, I’ve always attempted to do it in a civil manner … sometimes reaching for a humorous twist … (I’ll leave comments on the success of those endeavors to others…). If I came across as less than civil in your mind – perhaps you would consider an apology from me for that indiscretion.
I am fully aware that a lot of folks have used “FAR” as a reference to the combination of regulations dealing with aviation … and it’s probably a carry-over from when the Civil Air Regulations were re-codified. The simple fact is that all regulations in the US are part of a code of regulations – and those that deal with aviation come under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (hence the shortened reference “14CFR”). Of course there are few “hold-overs” that don’t deal with regulatory issues all the time and that are likely not all that interested in the correct references for those rules and regulations. OK. Fine. Their choice … as it is yours.
So, when you explained that your airline and a number of other US commuter airlines converted to FAR 121, the fact is that you all “obtained operations specifications” under 14CFR part 121, and you did so in compliance with §135.2(b), which states “A certificate holder described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section may not, after March 20, 1997, operate an airplane described in paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii) or (a)(1)(iii) of this section in scheduled passenger-carrying operations, unless it obtains operations specifications to conduct its scheduled operations under part 121 of this chapter on or before March 20, 1997.” For your information the reference to “this chapter” in this quote, means Chapter I, Subchapter G – Air Carriers and Operators for Compensation or Hire: Certification and Operations.
The regulations that I was “quoting” are 14CFR part 121, (for its title), part 135 (for its title), and specifically §135.2(a)(1) for the references regarding the “groupings” of airplanes I listed as being applicable to all persons who applied for, applies for, or obtains an initial air carrier or operating certificate and operations specifications to conduct scheduled passenger carrying operations, and uses or expects to use an airplane belonging to one of the following groupings for scheduled passenger-carrying operations.
As to your reference to 8900.1, Volume 2, Chapter 2, Paragraph 2-129F … I’m not interested in sparring with you about what may or may not be included in an FAA Order (Flight Standards Information Management System – FSIMS) that is written to provide direction for the activities of aviation safety inspectors working for FAA Flight Standards. If those contents were to be applied as regulatory requirements to the industry, they would appear in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) just like all the other regulatory requirements. I was referring to regulations – things that are required by governmental law.
Again, my intent is not to generate a horrendous argument about what are and are not regulations – nor was I intending to besmirch your reputation or your professional acumen … I was merely pointing out – not very successfully it would appear – that the reference to FAR was not correct. It wasn’t correct the other day … it is not correct today … it wouldn’t be correct tomorrow. However, this IS America, and you can feel free to use its language any way you choose.