Part 135 VFR allowed with Flight Following

[Monk 0]

I was flying Part 135 IFR around the state today and coming back home ATIS reported confirmed by ATC that Part 135 VFR was allowed with Flight Following. Most DZ's do that in coordination with Center anyhow every jump run. So possibility of being back up this week looks good.
Ciao
Monk

[outthere 0]

I would like to believe this is true, but at the moment the FAA, USPA and AOPA all still say VFR traffic is grounded with the exception of agricultural activities. That said I hope what you report is true and that the updates on the websites are old.
Hey maybe the DZs out in the farmlands could start picking up some side income and get us back in the air at the same time;)
e

[freaksister 0]

well I for one am getting worried...and losing my patience! why can't they let VFR go? because you don't have to file flight plans or something??
I want to jump this weekend dammit! I am so close to my 100th I can feel it...and this weekend is cheap (16 dollar) jump ticket weekend!! arggggg
Sis
I lust for the ultimate rush...

[ERICCONNELLY 0]

I can see it now...
Yep, I saw this mean infestation of bugs and so I had Bubba apply a bunch o' belly fliers on my feild to squash 'em.

[Monk 0]

I just confirmed it with Flight Service. They file IFR but they proceed VFR with a squak code and they can keep that code all day long and just come back on with Center or Approach as the case may be. This way Center ( or Approach ) has a (shuttle) or "tag" for that flight and can monitor easily. So made a couple more calls the DZ and I hope I got the ball rolling. Keep fingers crossed all.
Ciao
Monk

[outthere 0]

I believe this is what you are referring to - from the NOTAM posted @ uspa.org
3. PART 135 IFR AND VFR OPERATIONS ARE AUTHORIZED TO OPERATE WITH AN ASSIGNED DISCRETE BEACON CODE. PART 135 AIRCRAFT THAT DO NOT HAVE A COMPANY CALL SIGN MUST FILE A "T" PRIOR TO THE AIRCRAFT TAIL NUMBER (FOR EXAMPLE, "TN552Q").
It at least makes me feel optimistic that we might get off the ground this weekend - Personally I can't quite remember what is covered under part 135 vs 91 (Part 91 is still grounded unless you live in Alaska)
e

[quade 3]

Part 135 ops are commuters, air taxis and some "sight seeing" aircraft.
Now, before y'all get too excited about seeing the sights from 12,500, your DZO, his aircraft and his pilots are probably not certificated for Part 135 ops. With the Part 135 certification comes a whole long list of requirements that isn't really required for skydiving but is sort of expensive; flight recorders, voice recorders, flight time limitations on crew, record keeping and other such stuff that makes absolutely no sense for a skydiving op.
Although I would like to see the flight attendant on flights with more than 19 passengers!
So, we'll still need to wait for Part 91 VFR.
Paul
futurecam.com/skydive.html

[PhreeZone 15]

Hey... that would be nice! Thers sometimes where going up through 6000 feet a nice cold soda and a bag of peanuts would be great.
Be safe, be smooth, be fast..... and most importantly.... be phree

• Quote

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

I was flying Part 135 IFR around the state today and coming back home ATIS reported confirmed by ATC that Part 135 VFR was allowed with Flight Following. Most DZ's do that in coordination with Center anyhow every jump run. So possibility of being back up this week looks good.

I don't really agree with that.. Part 135 VFR is allowed, yes - but allowing Part 91 VFR would allow many thousands more aircraft in the air....I just don't think they're gonna do it anytime soon.. Honestly - I expect another week, maybe two, before they allow all Part 91 VFR flights to resume...and then probably under severe restrictions.. I wouldn't be suprised to see Centers turning jump planes away for a while, too, if their workload is high..
Who do you fly for out there? You based out of PHX? I spent a while flying out of PHX there for a 135 freight operator flying UPS contracts..
Mike

[Monk 0]

Then what are they flying under? Part 119? They have to be some kind of air taxi. They just don't fall under part 91. It's been a LONG time since I have delved that deeply into the regs.
Monk

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

Then what are they flying under? Part 119? They have to be some kind of air taxi. They just don't fall under part 91. It's been a LONG time since I have delved that deeply into the regs.

Skydiving ops are governed by Part 91 and Part 105.. Aircraft operations are conducted under Part 91 - but there are requirements in Part 105 that must be complied with as well...such as communication, cloud clearance(basic VFR stuff, though), airspace requirements, etc.. Remember - flights that do not go more than 25NM from the point of departure, and do not land at any other point, are Part 91, commonly referred to as sightseeing flights.. They are not any form of air taxi..
Mike

[quade 3]

Actually, some sight seeing flights are Part 135.
The key is that *everybody* (including the military) has to follow Part 91 (at least in theory).
Part 91 is the *minimum* requirements. Parts 125, 135 ect simply add to the complexity/cost/hassles.
Paul
futurecam.com/skydive.html

[freaksister 0]

the whole thing is driving me crazy, i'll tell you that!
i mean come ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and all this talk about part 91 and 135 and all that....great...but let's just SKYDIVE! arghhh
I am with freeflyplaymate...I say renegade jumps all around! We SHOULD join forces with the BASE jumpers...they are the coolest anyway! I'll go illegal...I don't give a flying monkey's ass!!
GRRRRRR
Sis is pissed but that's ok
Hugs
Ape
I lust for the ultimate rush...

[des 2]

somebody is panicking bigtime.a bit of commonsense would be nice,but that's usually too much to ask from bureaucrats.
none of this shit makes any sense.i'm really pissed,and broke,so better shut up now,or i'll post something i regret.

[wildblue 4]

"Photo Missions" are also now free to fly VFR to circle.
"Uhh.. ya... we have a couple cameras on board. We need to circle to about 13,000 feet for the wide area shot. I know we did this 20 minutes ago, the shots didn't come out well"
Then, I saw these two guys swoopin across the pond, and I was like 'weeeeeee!!!!'

[Jumperpaula 0]

Im glad they released crop dusters. Not jumping sucks, but bugs in my food would suck worse.
Fly Your Slot !

[Craig 0]

Updated: 9/19/2001 11:45:34 AM
Photo missions, or other such activities that require circling in a localized
area, may be exempt from the IFR requirement only for that portion of the
flight that the aircraft is actively engaged in the mission activity, provided
they remain clear of Class B airspace area, temporary flight restrictions,
and other restricted airspace. A discrete beacon code is required for the
entire flight.

[wildblue 4]

I just saw that update... don't know what it means for us. Looks promising though.
Then, I saw these two guys swoopin across the pond, and I was like 'weeeeeee!!!!'

[riggerrob 558]

The FAA giveth and the FAA taketh away.
In July they finally made tandems legal, then in September they make every skydive illegal.
When will I ever understand bureaucrats?

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

Actually, some sight seeing flights are Part 135.

Yes, some sightseeing flights are governed under 135 - but those are usually the ones that go more than 25NM from the point of departure, or land at a point other than the departure point.. There are even some sightseeing companies(Grand Canyon tour operators) that operate Part 121.. The point that I was trying to make is that most, if not all, skydiving operations do not do anything that would make them have to operate under Part 135..
Mike

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

Photo missions, or other such activities that require circling in a localized
area, may be exempt from the IFR requirement only for that portion of the
flight that the aircraft is actively engaged in the mission activity, provided
they remain clear of Class B airspace area, temporary flight restrictions,
and other restricted airspace. A discrete beacon code is required for the
entire flight.

Well, this looks good for us.. I've emailed USPA to get their take on this, and to see whether they have gotten an official ruling on whether skydiving ops are included in this or not.. Hopefully I get a response soon..
Mike

[PhreeZone 15]

New info from www.aopa.com
FAA to issue notam permitting some VFR operations today
9/19/01 1:30:03 PM, ET — AOPA has learned that FAA will issue a notam today between 4 and 6 p.m. ET that will permit the resumption of some VFR operations. AOPA President Phil Boyer has talked at length with FAA Administrator Jane Garvey and the head of FAA's Air Traffic Services. They had just come from a meeting with Department of Defense and national security officials.
"We made some progress towards more VFR flight," Garvey told Boyer. But she said that VFR privileges would not be restored all at once. "As Secretary of Transportation Mineta has already said, there will be a series of phase-ins, with operations restored incrementally."
Garvey said that FAA will continue daily meetings with national security officials, and that the agency will continue work to free up more types of VFR operations.
"If you don't like what you hear today, just stay tuned," said Boyer. "More privileges will be restored as time goes on. And AOPA will be there to make sure that the needs of all pilots are addressed, if not today, then tomorrow."
The notam will not be issued until this afternoon in order to give FAA time to brief all Flight Service Stations on exactly what flight operations will be permitted. AOPA had criticized FAA for not keeping FSS personnel completely informed. FAA is now sending twice-daily faxes to all FSSs so the briefers can provide accurate information, not rumors, to pilots.
AOPA has installed its Vice President of Air Traffic Services, Melissa Bailey, at FAA headquarters to ensure that FAA understands the operational needs of general aviation pilots and that the notams are clear and consider all possible circumstances.
"We also now have a better idea of what national security officials are trying to protect," said Boyer. "All of us can easily understand that they want to protect the major U.S. urban areas which contain our nation's financial and government centers. They are also concerned about hub airports and commercial airline passengers.
"They also have a continuing concern about civilian flight training, which frankly, we have a little more difficulty understanding," said Boyer.
AOPA will update this web site with the specifics of the VFR notam as soon as it is released.

Be safe, be smooth, be fast..... and most importantly.... be phree

• Quote