Getting a Part 135 Certificate

Don’t expect free help from me.

Last night, I received yet another e-mail from a helicopter operator with questions about getting a Part 135 certificate. I thought that it was about time for me to explain why people who e-mail me for free help about this won’t get it.

But first, a bit of an explanation of what a Part 135 Certificate is.

What Is a Part 135 Certificate?

A Part 135 certificate is literally a piece of paper issued by the FAA that permits a commercial aircraft operator to perform air-taxi operations. The phrase air-taxi refers to the mission of picking up a passenger at Point A and transport him to Point B. A Part 135 Certificate also permits an operator to conduct aerial tours beyond the 25 statute mile limitation set by Part 91 or the relatively new Part 136. Part 135 gets its name from the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) Part 135, but a Part 135 operator must also comply with all other applicable FARs, including Parts 61, 91, and 119.

Zero Mike Lima at Monument Valley

Zero-Mike-Lima at Monument Valley during one of my multi-day excursions.

A Part 135 certificate is worth more than its weight in gold for an operator that has one and can use it properly. For example, if I didn’t have one, I’d be limiting my operations to short tours within 25 miles of my starting point and aerial photo/survey flights. With a Part 135, however, I can also take my tours as far as I like, transport passengers between two points, and even offer day trips and multi-day excursions. In the highly competitive area I live in — Arizona is just swarming with helicopter operators — a Part 135 Certificate gives me the competitive edge I need to stay in business. (With less local competition, I might even become profitable. Wouldn’t that be special?)

There are three types of Part 135 certificates: Single Pilot, Single Pilot in Command, and Basic. I have a single Pilot Part 135 certificate. That means that under my company’s certificate, only one pilot is allowed to fly the aircraft under Part 135: me. (Hint to jobseekers: that’s one reason why I don’t ever hire other pilots.) A Single Pilot in Command certificate is similar, but is used mostly in organizations with aircraft that require more than one pilot; just one of those pilots is allowed to fly as pilot in command, but any other pilot can be second in command. The Basic Part 135 certificate — and I may have its name wrong — allows multiple pilots to act as pilot in command on multiple aircraft. The Grand Canyon tour operator I worked for had a Basic Part 135.

At a recent meeting at my local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO; pronounced fizz-doe), I learned that there are only 4,800 Part 135 certificates in the entire country. If you take a moment to consider what percentage of those could possibly be helicopter operators, you’ll realize that I’m part of a very small club.

The penalty for conducting a Part 135 operation without a Part 135 certificate? Well, I know of at least one pilot who had his license permanently suspended. Ouch. When you consider the amount of time and money a commercial pilot — especially a helicopter pilot — might have invested in a career, that’s a very costly penalty.

Airline operations, by the way, are Part 121, which has tighter regulations.

How to Get a Part 135 Certificate

You work with your local FSDO to get a Part 135 Certificate. It requires multiple meetings at the FSDO to work your way through a flow chart of activities. Although I’ve heard of people getting their Single Pilot Part 135 as quickly as three months — it took me four months — it takes other people years. In fact, more than a few operators have gone out of business while working through the process.

Want Help Writing a Statement of Compliance?

When I wrote this blog post back in 2010, I was firmly against helping operators create their Statement of Compliance. At time time, I was based in Arizona with a lot of competition making it damn near impossible to turn a profit. Things are different now. It’s 2017 and I’m comfortably settled in Washington State with a small market but little competition for Part 135 work. In addition, I have found more lucrative sources of flying revenue that don’t require a Part 135 certificate at all. Add to that the FAA’s recent requirement for all Part 135 helicopter operators to have a radio altimeter and the cost to obtain that and I’m a bit softer about helping others — for a fee. Let’s just say that the FAA has motivated me to sell my experience and possibly increase its workload.

So here’s the deal. If you’re interested in getting help writing a Statement of Compliance for a Part 135 certificate, use the form on the Contact page of this site to get in touch with me. Tell me a little about your business and the aircraft you fly, the kind of Part 135 certificate you’re seeking, and where you are in the process with your FSDO. If I think I can help you, I’ll let you know what kind of compensation I need to write a Statement of Compliance for you.

Keep in mind that although this will make the process easier, it’s still time-consuming and you’ll still have a lot of work to do on your own.

There’s a lot of paperwork. The biggest challenge to most people is the creation of a Statement of Compliance. That’s where you list all the applicable FARs and state exactly how you will comply. My Statement of Compliance, written in 2005, was 54 pages long. It wasn’t difficult for me to create because, after all, I am a writer. But I’d say that 90% of the people who try to get their Part 135 certificate stumble on this component, which occurs about halfway through that flow chart.

You’ll also need to get on a drug testing program, create a training manual for carrying (or not carrying) HazMat, and obtain a secure location for basing your aircraft. You’ll need to create forms for pilots to log time flown, aircraft flight time, and squawks. You’ll need to have perfect maintenance records. If you’re going for a Basic Part 135, you’ll need all kinds of other manuals and documents, as well as staff in predetermined positions, such as Director of Operations, Director of Maintenance, etc.

The FAA did not make the process easy. If it were easy, everyone would have a Part 135. Instead, they made it a challenge.

I am extremely fortunate to be working with an excellent FSDO full of people who are reasonable and helpful. Yes, I’m required to jump through the same hoops as everyone else, but my contacts at the local FSDO help me make those jumps. In turn, I comply with their requests promptly, without question. After all, their mission is to keep me safe. Why wouldn’t I want to be safe?

Why I’d Rather Not Help You Get Your Part 135 Certificate

I’ve already given you several hints on why I’d rather not help you get your Part 135 Certificate. Did you read between the lines to get the answer? If not, I’ll spell it out for you.

  • Rise to the challenge. I personally believe that the FAA makes it challenging to get a Part 135 Certificate as a test to see if applicants are worthy. Let’s face it: the FSDO folks spell out what you need to do — using a flowchart, for Pete’s sake! If you come into the application process with the right attitude, they’ll help you achieve your goal. But they won’t just give you a certificate for showing up. You have to earn it. By jumping through all the hoops and smiling the whole time, you’ll prove that you have the right stuff to be a safe and cooperative aircraft operator. If I — or anyone else — help you get your certificate, you won’t prove anything other than that you can’t do it alone.
  • Membership has its privileges. That old American Express slogan can easily be applied to the 4,800-member club of Part 135 certificate holders. We can do things that Part 91 operators can’t. This gives us far more flexibility in our operations. I can’t tell you what a joy it was to finally be able to say yes to a client request for an air-taxi flight. Saying yes means more business, more revenue.

I get e-mails and calls at least twice a month from helicopter operators hoping I’ll help them get their Part 135 certificate or make their business grow. Apparently, it isn’t enough for me to write about my own experiences here so they can use them as learning tools. Instead, they want me to take them by the hand and walk them through the process.

Why should I? What’s in it for me?

I did the hard work I needed to do to get my certificate and build my business. Isn’t it in my best interest to have other operators jump through the same hoops I did and prove they’re worthy of getting a Part 135 certificate? Wouldn’t I rather be sharing the skies with pilots who passed muster with the FAA? Wouldn’t I rather refer overflow business to an operator I know has the ability to do his own homework?

You want a Part 135 certificate? Take my advice: Call your local FSDO and set up a meeting to get started. Then put a smile on your face, roll up your sleeves, and get to work.

Blogging the FARs: Avoid the Flow of Fixed Wing Traffic

What it means — and doesn’t mean.

I was at Wickenburg Airport for a short time yesterday and was dismayed to see another helicopter pilot practicing autorotations using a left traffic pattern for the taxiway parallel to Runway 23. In Wickenburg, it’s right traffic for Runway 23, keeping the airplanes on the northwest side of the runway. There are fewer houses out that way; a left traffic pattern would have you overflying dozens of homes.

Someone else at the airport told me that the owners of the homes southeast of the runway had asked this pilot several times not to overfly their homes. They were bothered by the noise of his buzzing aircraft just 500 feet over their houses over and over again. He replied that he was supposed to “avoid the flow of fixed wing traffic.” When one of the nicest guys on the airport suggested he fly on the other side, this pilot’s response was, “Fuck you.” Whoa. Seems like someone has an attitude problem.

But is he right? Should he be doing left traffic patterns if the airplanes would be doing right patterns?

The Rules

FAR Part 91.126, “Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G airspace,” says, in part:

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required, each person operating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G airspace area must comply with the requirements of this section.

(b) Direction of turns. When approaching to land at an airport without an operating control tower in Class G airspace —

(1) Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right; and

(2) Each pilot of a helicopter or a powered parachute must avoid the flow of fixed-wing aircraft.

To some, it might appear that Part 91.126(b)(2) gives helicopter pilots permission to fly wherever they want in Class G airspace, as long as it’s not anywhere near an airplane. Maybe that’s what our attitude-challenged helicopter pilot at Wickenburg thinks. But I’d argue that it’s simply not true.

Why Avoid the Flow? Why Not Join It?

Wickeburg Airport

Wickenburg Airport, from the approach end of Runway 05.

Helicopters are advised to avoid the flow of fixed-wing traffic mostly because of the significant differences in the way they operate. Helicopters are usually slower than airplanes, they tend to operate at lower altitudes, and they don’t need a runway to land or take off. Putting airplanes and helicopters together in a traffic pattern is like mixing oil and water: they just won’t blend.

But does avoiding the flow of fixed wing traffic mean creating a completely separate traffic pattern? Sometimes, it does.

Does it mean making yourself a noisy nuisance over a residential neighborhood on the side of the airport that normally doesn’t have aircraft flying over it? I say it doesn’t.

And what if there aren’t any airplanes in the traffic pattern? I’ll argue that there’s nothing to avoid so why not use their established, community-preferred traffic pattern?

And that was the problem yesterday: the bad attitude pilot was the only aircraft in the traffic pattern for the entire time he was flying yesterday. There was no fixed-wing traffic to avoid.

There was no reason to overfly those homes.

Fly Neighborly

Although I’m not a big fan of Helicopter Association International (HAI), I do want to commend them on their attempts (although usually feeble) to share information that’s useful to the helicopter community. Among that information is “The Fly Neighborly Guide” they offer as a PDF download from their site. Here’s a blurb about the program from their site:

The Fly Neighborly Program addresses noise abatement and public acceptance objectives with programs in the following areas: 

  • Pilot and operator awareness
  • Pilot training and indoctrination
  • Flight operations planning
  • Public acceptance and safety
  • Sensitivity to the concerns of the community

The point is, lots of people hate helicopters because they’re noisy. (In reality, they’re not all that much more noisy than an airplane. But because they usually fly lower, they seem louder.) By using techniques that help us fly more quietly and avoiding noise-sensitive areas, we’ll blend in with the environmental impact of aircraft traffic much better.

What does that mean to me? Well, here are some of the things I try to do:

  • Maintain speed above 80 knots in my R44 to avoid “rotor slap.”
  • Not fly low over homes, schools, or businesses.
  • Vary the flight path I use to approach or depart the airport.
  • When flying traffic patterns, choose a pattern that does not repeatedly overfly the same noise-sensitive areas. (Yes, the other day when I was practicing autorotations at Wickenburg, I shared the same standard traffic pattern with three airplanes.)

I do need to point out here that anyone who buys a home within 3 miles of an airport should expect some level of noise. If you don’t like aircraft noise, don’t buy a home near an airport. Period.

Why I Care

Why should I care that a bad attitude pilot is thumbing his nose (and perhaps making other hand gestures) at people who complain about his inconsiderate flying?

AFD for E25

The Airport/Facilities Directory entry for Wickenburg.

Well, it’s like this. Right now, at Wickenburg, there is no published noise abatement procedure. Look in the Airport/Facilities Directory and see for yourself. (Try not to notice that the diagram is inaccurate on so many levels.) That means pilots have the freedom to make their own decisions about approaching and departing the airport. We’re not forced to follow some idiotic plan set forth by an ignorant non-flyer in response to noise complaints.

But if Mr. Bad Attitude keeps ignoring the complaints and overflying the same homes again and again, the complaints will get escalated. I’m not too worried about the town doing anything — they’re extremely ineffective when it comes to solving airport-related problems. But eventually, it’ll get up to the FAA. Enough people know it’s not me — a bright red Robinson R44 looks nothing like a little white Schweitzer 300 — so I won’t get in trouble. But the FAA might actually do something to make the complaints go away. Since Mr. Bad Attitude isn’t technically doing anything wrong, the only way to fix the problem is a noise abatement program. The FAA will push the town to make one and we’ll be stuck with it.

What’s also bad is that his continued inconsiderate behavior makes everyone in the helicopter community look bad — including me and the two other helicopter owners based in town. It could cause problems in Wickenburg or other communities for helicopter pilots and operators. It could affect businesses like mine or emergency services. (Come to think of it, one of the reasons our hospital lost its helicopter medevac base was noise complaints. So if you have a heart attack in Wickenburg, you’ll just have to wait an extra 20-30 minutes for help to come.)

And all this is why I care.

In Summary

When helicopter pilots are advised to “avoid the flow of fixed-wing traffic,” that doesn’t mean we should avoid flying in empty airplane traffic patterns. It means we should avoid flying with airplanes.

It also doesn’t mean we should use FAR 91.126(b)(2) as an excuse to become a nuisance by repeatedly overflying noise-sensitive areas.

If there’s no conflicting aircraft, common sense should prevail.

FARs Explained

The FARs in a way an intelligent person can understand them. Maybe.

I was down at Williams-Gateway Airport (IWA) in Chandler the other day. They’ve got a great pilot shop there with lots of books, charts, and real-life pilot supplies. I’d venture to say that it’s one of the best pilot shops in the Phoenix area.

(Side note here. If you’re a Phoenix area pilot looking for a destination for a quick flight, try Willie. The controllers are friendly, there’s plenty of parking, and there’s both a restaurant with excellent breakfast and a pilot shop to give you an excuse for the flight.)

Jeppesen FAR Books

Among the books on the shelves was a series by Jeppesen titled Federal Aviation Regulations Explained. Ah, I thought to myself. Could this actually be a successful attempt to explain the legalese text of the FARs?

Now I don’t really like Jeppesen as a company because of the restrictions it places on suppliers. For example, when I ran an FBO some years ago, none of my pilot supply providers were able to become Jeppesen dealers, so I could not carry Jeppesen products. (Fortunately, ASA products are just as good and I had no trouble getting them.) But I do admit that Jeppesen has products that no one else carries and that their products, in general, are good. It certainly wasn’t worth turning my nose up at Jeppesen and missing out on a good book.

There were three versions of the book, each tackling a different group of FAR parts. One fat book, mostly for private pilots, covered Part 1, 61, 91, 141 and NTSB 830. A slightly slimmer book, mostly for commercial pilots, covered Part 1, 119 and 135. Another book, mostly for mechanics (I think), covered Part 1, 21, 43, 65, 145 and 147.

imageAlthough I would have purchased the first two books mentioned here, the price tag on the first book ($35.95, I think) was a little rich for my blood — especially since I hadn’t actually read any book in the series. I decided to try the series with the volume that I needed most: the one that included coverage of Parts 119 and 135. (My helicopter charter business operates under Part 135.) The cover of the book I bought is different from the one shown here; I think (hope) I bought the latest edition, dated 2005.

Now I don’t want you to think I don’t understand the FARs I’m supposed be be operating under. I do. Mostly. Every once in a while, I stumble upon a rule that I’m not quite sure of. I usually call other pilot friends or sometimes the FAA to get an interpretation. I know enough about the FARs to operate safely and legally and stay out of trouble, although I fully admit that I make no effort to understand the rules that don’t apply to my operation (i.e., rules covering cockpit recording devices, beverage carts, autopilots, and multi-pilot operations). After all, there’s only so much information that can fit into my brain. I’d rather fill it with the information that matters.

Aviation Law 101

I jumped into the book during breakfast at Willie’s Flight Line Cafe restaurant. I basically opened to a random page, paged around until I found a topic that interested me, and started reading. I was immediately reminded of my Business Law 101/102 text book back in college — a big, black volume that stated laws, interpretations, and cases.

So, for example, Page 42 begins a discussion of FAR Part 135.79, which covers Flight Locating Requirements. This applies to my operation, since I’m required to have procedures to help rescuers find me if I make an unscheduled landing and get stuck somewhere — or crash, which I prefer not to think too much about.

First, the book provides the complete text of the paragraph and all of its sub paragraphs. This is the same information you can get in any FAR book or on the FAA’s Web site.

Next, it provides a plain English Explanation of the rule with a few examples of how it might apply.

Then it lists some Cross References to other FARs, the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), and Advisory Circulars.

Finally, it lists some Chief Counsel Opinions related to the rule. This is how the rule has been interpreted when challenged in court or other proceedings.

This particular example is pretty straightforward. Other parts are more complex. For those, the book also includes Preamble information and case excerpts associated with the rule. This, when combined with lengthy Chief Counsel Option excerpts, can go on for pages.

I find the case studies and opinion excerpts the most enlightening when dealing with a complex rule. They clearly explain how a pilot did (or did not) get into trouble for doing something (or not doing something) related to the rule and why the situation was (or was not) an issue. At breakfast the other day, I was completely absorbed in the Part 135 applicability regulations, which illustrated how pilots got in trouble for operating Part 135 flights when they weren’t certified for Part 135 operations. It made me very glad I had my Part 135 certificate.

A Good Addition to Any Serious Pilot’s Bookshelf

In all, I highly recommend these books to anyone who is serious about a career in aviation. Written by aviation lawyers, they are equivalent to the business law books I had to read to get my BBA years ago. They tell it like it is and help you understand the rules in a way that a simple reading of the FARs cannot. The next time I’m at Willie, I’ll pick up the first book in the series for my reference library.

You can learn more about the books on Jeppesen’s Web site.