Originally Posted by HotDog, “The Reverend”
My Google says thus:The Federal Aviation Regulations, or FARs, are rules prescribed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) governing all aviation activities in the United States. A wide variety of activities are regulated, such as airplane design, typical airline flights, pilot training activities, hot-air ballooning, lighter-than-air aircraft, man-made structure heights, obstruction lighting and marking, and even model rocket launches and model aircraft operation. The rules are designed to promote safe aviation, protecting pilots, flight attendants, passengers and the general public from unnecessary risk.
Have a good day sir.
Hi Rev. Dog … Thank you for your comments and for the civil manner in which you expressed them. I guess that the service provided by “Google” is largely dependent on what part of the globe the user is occupying at the time. From where I am sitting now, entering “FAR” into Google gets me a list, the top entry of which is the following:
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)
https://www.acquisition.gov/far/
"Link to Reissued FAR in PDF printing purposes only ... Includes amendments thru FAC 2005-56, effective April 2, 2012 (Note: FAR amendments are updated on ..."
I’m not sure why so much “heat” is being generated over this, but … not ever having been one to cower in some empty corner when someone begins to wag his or her finger in my face, and to maintain the reputation I’ve gained on this forum over the last 7 years for desiring to be sure that the person (or persons) really do understand what it is I am saying, I’ll give this another try.
I am fully aware that there won’t be many airplanes that crash due the pilots referring to the FARs … but, the fact remains, despite all the nay-sayers and all the quotes provided from various publication sources other than the “horse's mouth,” the correct reference to the regulations we deal with on a daily basis is Title 14 of the US Code of Federal Regulations, followed by the specific “part” of that title, e.g., part 121, part 61, part 135, etc. It’s not critical nor is it even necessary to get that right … but consistent use of either an incorrect term or an outdated or archaic term, at least in most circles, does little to support the position of the person speaking.
As I indicated in my response to Mr. Island-Flyer, I am fully aware that a lot of folks used “FAR” as a reference to the combination of regulations dealing with US aviation issues – it would appear that some (many?) still do. OK. Fine. I also said that it was probably a carry-over from when the Civil Air Regulations – for which the shortened acronym, “CAR,” was used – and when these regulations were re-codified into the Code of Federal Regulations, it was an easy exchange to substitute “Federal” for “Civil” (i.e., Federal Aviation Regulations vs. Civil Air Regulations) and the acronym FAR followed quite nicely behind CAR. Completely understandable – and quite logical. However, the fact that there were already a set of regulations in use at that time, regulations that addressed the requirements that had to be met when the US government purchased items, the Federal Acquisition Regulations, commonly referred to as “FAR,” was completely overlooked. It has only been in the last couple of decades that the Federal Aviation Administration has made a concerted effort to correct this oversight … and the correction was to refer to any of the regulations published under the various “titles” of the US Code with the number of the title followed by the initials “CFR,” standing for Code of Federal Regulations, and then referencing the specifically applicable part of that title. Today, the emphasis is on publishing information with the corrected references. There are fewer and fewer publications from the Federal Aviation Administration that incorrectly use “FAR.” Of course, there hasn’t been a sweeping effort to make changes to ALL such documents, because it isn’t terribly important. But, it would appear that the requirement is when a particular document is published by the US government for update or modification, that publication will not include the acronym “FAR” for anything other than the Federal Acquisition Regulations … and when the term used to refer to rules or regulations applicable to aviation, the term “CFR” (or more correctly “14CFR” – or the appropriate title number preceding the “CFR”) will be used to properly refer to the regulation being cited.
Again Rev. Dog, thank you for your comments and I hope my response is taken in the spirit in which it is legitimately offered – as explanation – not argument.
Originally Posted by le Pingouin
...appears in AIM several times if you'd care to download the PDF and search...... FAR 91 is mentioned on the flight planning form examples, FAR Part 135 is also mentioned. Stop being a pillock.
The copy of the AIM I already have downloaded – and, by the way, here is a link for the
Aeronautical Information Manual that I use - this one includes absolutely no references to the term “FAR” … but, then, this is the “official” downloadable version of the FAA published copy of that manual (you’ll note that the link takes you to the official FAA web site) and, indeed, I suspect there very well may be numerous other publishers offering their versions of the same document … and “good on them” for doing so. It’s just that the “source” I’d rather rely on is the FAA itself.
Additionally, I will offer a tip of my hat, in that I have to acknowledge that, while I usually try to keep abreast of most of the vernacular slights and verbal digs that float around, I’m afraid I’m unfamiliar with the term “pillock,” even though I’m reasonably sure it isn’t intended to convey a staunch level of professional respect. But, rest assured, I will give your comments all the consideration, thought, and attention they are due.