I overflew my 8 hours... twice.

J

JC M

Guest
So I overflew my 8 hours of flight instruction twice in one week. I did a night xc and the next day I did two flights. First time was 8.4, second time was 8.2. I already filled out a NASA report and talked to my bosses since I'm 141. Think I'll get a call from the FSDO? I wouldn't be surprised if I did. On another note, it's so easy to overfly. You don't fly at all during the day, night XC at night, then the next day you do two day local flights and you're over...
 
What is this 8hrs stuff?

Sent from my LG-TP260 using Tapatalk
 
You’ve just incriminated yourself more than anyone else ever would’ve, because this sounds so superficial that you’re creating a problem when there isn’t one. Log 8hrs one day and let the hours you went over spill into the following day. Problem solved!
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
Did you log the TIME OF DAY, if not, who is to say the night flight wasn't pre-sunrise on day one, and the flights on day 2 were after sun up.

The box is not just for aerobatics. It's for thinking outside of it.
Click to expand...

I mean there are definitely ways to say I didn't fly 8 within 24, but our scheduling systems and such keep track of times so there's no way out of it. One of my assistant chiefs caught the first one so then I dug through my logbook and found the second. They "require" me to submit a NASA report as well as a company SMS so there's not really a way to change the numbers to make it work. At this point, I'm just going to be honest with the FSDO if they ask questions, but I'm not sure if they will or not.

At the end of the day, I just don't want it to turn into a long process where I need to meet with them, they look through my logbook, etc. but I'm not sure cause I've never dealt with them regarding stuff like this.
 
I have done a few charters where I went over 8 hours. 4.5 hours to get there, then I wait in a hotel 12 hours, then 4.5 to get back.
 
TommyG said:
I don’t get filling out a nasa for this.
Click to expand...

My thought process was, "I broke a reg, I should do everything I can to make sure I don't get in trouble for it." Which, to me, is self-disclosing to the FAA via ASRS. Is there a better way to go about this? And if it is ever found in an airline interview, I can at least say I self-disclosed it.
 
Better to fill out a NASA form and CYA than get bit by it for any reason. It will also give you a good TMAAT story when you have an airline interview. Chances are you won't hear a peep about it.
 
EdFred said:
Did you log the TIME OF DAY, if not, who is to say the night flight wasn't pre-sunrise on day one, and the flights on day 2 were after sun up.

The box is not just for aerobatics. It's for thinking outside of it.
Click to expand...

If he logs OOOI times, then it will be very easy to see if he flew more than 8 in 24.
 
JC M said:
A flight instructor can only give 8 hours of flight instruction within ANY rolling 24 hour period. I think it's 61.195.a
Click to expand...

Ah, ok. Did not know that. I wonder why? Seems kinda dumb to have such a low number. Especially when you consider people mentoring pilots, easy to go over 8 hours.

Tim
 
You’re making issues where there are none.


Where these intentional exceedances?

I mean if it was just you were on a dual x/c, based on normal planning shouldn’t have blown through you 8hrs but caught a wicked headwind on the way back home and ended up at 8.4, BFD.


You’re making a mountain of a mole hill.
 
JC M said:
My thought process was, "I broke a reg, I should do everything I can to make sure I don't get in trouble for it."
Click to expand...
Correct. And as you said, IF the FAA asks, it was an honest mistake, and you've learned to watch that more closely. End of problem.

Which, to me, is self-disclosing to the FAA via ASRS. Is there a better way to go about this? And if it is ever found in an airline interview, I can at least say I self-disclosed it.
Click to expand...
No, self disclosing would not be anonymous. But more than likely if the FAA found out about it it wouldn't be worth their time, so don't feel guilty. How many other regs have you inadvertently busted? By this time in your career, I'd assume you're easily in the triple digits.

Forget about it, and move forward. Go home and sin no more.
 
Last edited:
JC M said:
I mean there are definitely ways to say I didn't fly 8 within 24, but our scheduling systems and such keep track of times so there's no way out of it. One of my assistant chiefs caught the first one so then I dug through my logbook and found the second. They "require" me to submit a NASA report as well as a company SMS so there's not really a way to change the numbers to make it work. At this point, I'm just going to be honest with the FSDO if they ask questions, but I'm not sure if they will or not.

At the end of the day, I just don't want it to turn into a long process where I need to meet with them, they look through my logbook, etc. but I'm not sure cause I've never dealt with them regarding stuff like this.
Click to expand...
Okay, so I was quick to jump to a conclusion, but I'm really surprised that some places monitor this so strictly, to the point of getting the FAA's attention. I really don't think you have a thing to worry about in all honesty. I can't imagine you getting your PP slapped for this. You disclosed it, so move on.
 
ASRS is run by NASA and is anonymous as far as the FAA is concerned. The FAA may receive information about your incident, but they will not receive your identity. It certainly doesn't hurt to file an ASRS report anytime you believe you may have violated an FAR. The only caveat is you only get one "get out of jail" card every five years...
 
Remember that when you fill out a NASA form the subject is NOT private and protected so you should write "airspace confusion" not "busted the Bravo".
 
fasteddie said:
Haven't heard this before. Source?
Click to expand...

I can't give you a source, but if you look on the ASRA website it should tell you.

In a nutshell, you can report however many times you deem necessary. In the event that the FAA tries to take some sort of disciplinary action, you can show that you filed an ASRA report within 10 (??) days and with a few caveats, have that disciplinary action negated. Once you do that, you can't do it again for 5 years.
 
Here's where one needs an interpretation of the definition of "flight time". How does your system record? Hobbs time? Tach Time? Block time? Pick-up-the-keys-time?

I suspect the 8.2 is not going to be an issue, depending on how time is recorded. If the Hobbs were recorded as it were about to roll over at the beginning, and the same at the end, one could argue that it was within rounding error of 8.0. 8.4 - who knows.

Here's the definition: "Flight training means that training, other than ground training, received from an authorized instructor in flight in an aircraft." (section 61.1) and "In any 24-consecutive-hour period, a flight instructor may not conduct more than 8 hours of flight training." (61.195(a)). So define "in flight".

Or you could end up in Gitmo.
 
wsuffa said:
Here's where one needs an interpretation of the definition of "flight time". How does your system record? Hobbs time? Tach Time? Block time? Pick-up-the-keys-time?

I suspect the 8.2 is not going to be an issue, depending on how time is recorded. If the Hobbs were recorded as it were about to roll over at the beginning, and the same at the end, one could argue that it was within rounding error of 8.0. 8.4 - who knows.

Here's the definition: "Flight training means that training, other than ground training, received from an authorized instructor in flight in an aircraft." (section 61.1) and "In any 24-consecutive-hour period, a flight instructor may not conduct more than 8 hours of flight training." (61.195(a)). So define "in flight".

Or you could end up in Gitmo.
Click to expand...
Normally the FAA goes by what is logged, because normally that's all they have. If he logged 8.2 hours flight time with students, they're going to read that as "in flight". Whether it was a Hobbs rounding error or not, it was logged as 8.2, and if the Hobbs meter is the standard that someone uses in their logbook for flight time, that's what the FAA will use as well.
 
fasteddie said:
Haven't heard this before. Source?
Click to expand...

What Anymouse said. You can find all the info here: https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/immunity.html

Here is the pertinent text to the question:

Enforcement Restrictions. The FAA considers the filing of a report with NASA concerning an incident or occurrence involving a violation of 49 U.S.C. subtitle VII or the 14 CFR to be indicative of a constructive attitude. Such an attitude will tend to prevent future violations. Accordingly, although a finding of violation may be made, neither a civil penalty nor certificate suspension will be imposed if:
  • The violation was inadvertent and not deliberate;
  • The violation did not involve a criminal offense, accident, or action under 49 U.S.C. § 44709, which discloses a lack of qualification or competency, which is wholly excluded from this policy;
  • The person has not been found in any prior FAA enforcement action to have committed a violation of 49 U.S.C. subtitle VII, or any regulation promulgated there for a period of 5 years prior to the date of occurrence; and
  • The person proves that, within 10 days after the violation, or date when the person became aware or should have been aware of the violation, he or she completed and delivered or mailed a written report of the incident or occurrence to NASA.
 
The constant se of NASA form on this website is insane. Any little possible infraction people file one for protection. It’s real basis is informative deviations or errors that may have been a safety issue. Such as I inadvertently busted airspace due to missing a call, or I inadvertently flew into IMC due not getting a wx briefing, etc. But filing because I can’t count.
 
As long as you planned to complete the flight within legal hours, you are fine.
It's not like FAA says you've got to divert and land immediately if you are about to go over.
 
TommyG said:
The constant se of NASA form on this website is insane. Any little possible infraction people file one for protection. It’s real basis is informative deviations or errors that may have been a safety issue. Such as I inadvertently busted airspace due to missing a call, or I inadvertently flew into IMC due not getting a wx briefing, etc. But filing because I can’t count.
Click to expand...

The OP said it was inadvertent. That’s exactly what the form is for.

Inadvertently flying into IMC because a weather briefing was not obtained wouldn’t be covetable with the NASA form, however.

It’s a direct violation of the regs to not familiarize oneself with all aspects of a flight prior to launching into the wild blue.

Going .2 over during a multiple flight lesson day isn’t willfully choosing to not get a weather briefing.

I’d love to know what “call” someone would “miss” to “bust airspace” too.

Horrible examples and mostly just a complaint that the guy couldn’t taxi fast enough? LOL.

Gimme a break.

There’s been whole monthly NASA Callback magazine articles that are nothing more than a list of airline pilots who missed crossing altitudes for bad descent planning.

The entire monthly publication, nothing but those.

If you’re going to give examples of dumb stuff that gets filed over and over and over again, there’s one.

The “feedback loop” for safety that the NASA system is supposed to create, doesn’t seem to be leading up to any grand plans to fix that repetitive problem. But it does highlight it at least once a year.

(For those unaware, the program has a monthly publication that cherry picks repetitive issues and publishes excerpts from the reports (anonymously of course) as a “monthly topic”. It’s free, and worth signing up to read. Since it’s not just a GA safety feedback system, there’s months that are dedicated to topics that only happen at air carriers. There’s other months that focus on GA issues. Always an interesting read. Search for “NASA Callback” and you can sign up for a subscription or read them online anytime.)
 
mtuomi said:
As long as you planned to complete the flight within legal hours, you are fine.
It's not like FAA says you've got to divert and land immediately if you are about to go over.
Click to expand...
That only applies to the Part 135 flight daily limits...not the flight instruction limits
 
Nate @denverpilot , I think @TommyG 's point was about the original purpose of the ASRS form, which as you know was to alert the folks who can do something about it to potential safety issues. The "get out of jail free" card aspect was always secondary, a carrot to encourage more reports. And yes, I agree that we tend to go overboard on this board with advising people to file for anything that might remotely bring about an enforcement action, whether it is even remotely safety-related or not. But given the carrot they've offered us, that is to be expected, just normal human psychology.
 
azure said:
Nate @denverpilot , I think @TommyG 's point was about the original purpose of the ASRS form, which as you know was to alert the folks who can do something about it to potential safety issues. The "get out of jail free" card aspect was always secondary, a carrot to encourage more reports. And yes, I agree that we tend to go overboard on this board with advising people to file for anything that might remotely bring about an enforcement action, whether it is even remotely safety-related or not. But given the carrot they've offered us, that is to be expected, just normal human psychology.
Click to expand...

Agree on the human nature, but that has a lot more to do with the possible repercussions of Administrative law, which isn’t truly “innocent until proven guilty” (most Administrative law judges side with FAA, the case history is clear on that) and possible repercussions to people in what’s essentially a hobby, a legal “get out of jail free” card for inadvertent acts is bound to be used and used heavily. You won’t get a “jury of your peers” in front of the ALJ, or the only option for an appeal, the NTSB. People SHOULD stake their claim on that carrot EVERY time they think they might need it. It’s not over-prescribed.

This is the legal system that didn’t even allow the accused to see the evidence against them until Imhofe made them do that by law, after all.

It’s not a deck stacked in the accused’s favor to defend themselves or even not incriminate themselves by shutting up and making a prosecutor have to make a case to a jury. This system is the complete and total opposite of that.

File a hundred of the things if you think you might need one of them. That’s not overdone in any possible way, considering the past behavior of out of control inspectors against Hoover. Once you have seen there’s little if no chance for legal due process inside the administrative law system, you’d be an utter fool not to file the form for anything, anything at all.

People want to think the regulators always act from a place of altruism and fairness, and that simply has been shown to be mostly true with the occasional “WTF?!” and the form might save an errant pilot who makes normal mistakes like every other human on the planet from going bankrupt paying an attorney to fight under a system that’s about as tilted in the government’s favor as a legal system can get.

The only worse courtroom to find oneself fighting that I can think of over an administrative law court is a FISA court. In those, they’ve voted away your right not to be detained without charges.

Always file the NASA form. Unless you enjoy administrative law court proceedings and an almost inability to mount any sort of reasonable legal defense. It’s a significant check and balance on a system that’s completely stacked against the pilot.
 
denverpilot said:
Always file the NASA form. Unless you enjoy administrative law court proceedings and an almost inability to mount any sort of reasonable legal defense. It’s a significant check and balance on a system that’s completely stacked against the pilot.
Click to expand...
Agreed, no reason not to as long as the violation is inadvertent. Just make sure admission of violation isn't in the header. My only point was, that wasn't the original purpose of the ASRS.

Maybe we should be just as quick to recommend filing when there's no reg that was violated, inadvertently or otherwise, but just a gotcha in the system or a confusing notation on a chart or airport signage with possible ramifications affecting safety. ;)
 
VmL9UcD.jpg
 
azure said:
Maybe we should be just as quick to recommend filing when there's no reg that was violated, inadvertently or otherwise, but just a gotcha in the system or a confusing notation on a chart or airport signage with possible ramifications affecting safety. ;)
Click to expand...

I do recommend they get filed for such things when I see them or someone mentions something like that.

Usually doesn’t come up here on the Internet much, though. And talking to the airport manager or the charting folks directly is usually more effective.

NASA reporting was really intended to catch larger systemic safety issues by mining the data for trends. Pilot admits a mistake, describes how they got there, and folks look it over and see if there’s a trap that’s catching a bunch of pilots.

If you look at it that way, crew rest for CFIs actually meets the qualifications of a trap for many players very well.

Note how many above have already come up with ways around it, and the lone poster who says his hours are tracked digitally by his employer so he can’t play the games the others above are already playing.

Flying 0.2 over the hour limit isn’t the problem crew rest statutes we’re trying to solve. But in a digital world the law created a trap to fall into as an unintended consequence.

The pilot wasn’t flying 16 hours a day and trying to hide it or fly fatigued on purpose.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top