Police in the US do not have to have a license to operate anything, including aircraft. In this case, insurance requirements take over though. They may have a legal right to fly but no insurance company would approve operation by anyone but a commercial pilot. I got a few hours in a local police Bell 206 because they needed a commercial pilot to fly while their official pilot only had a private license. Fun!
I’d like to hear more about this, because I’m a pilot and I’ve never heard anywhere that the FAA waives their license requirements for local police? That doesn’t make any sense to me.
As I mentioned above it is not that the FAA waves their requirements as much as the FAA does not have jurisdiction over such operations (under appropriate circumctances).
Here is a quote from AC No: 00-1.1A (Public Aircraft Operations):
What Oversight of PAO Does the FAA Have? The FAA has limited oversight of PAO,
though such operations must continue to comply with the regulations applicable to all aircraft
operating in the NAS. The government entity conducting the PAO is responsible for oversight of
the operation, including aircraft airworthiness and any operational requirements imposed by the
government entity. The government agency contracting for the service assumes the responsibility
for oversight of a PAO.
The military is another entity that operates aircraft outside of FAA jurisdiction. Even military airman certificates have to be `converted' to civilian ones i a military pilot wants to become a civilian pilot.
True, though this may mean many things. The only part of CFR 14 that mentions that a certificate is required for operating aircraft is CFR 14 61.3 which states that an unexpired certificate is required to `exercise the privileges' of that certificate. So if the PAO does not require the certificate to begin with, this part does not apply and one only has to comply with part 91 rules. Again, feel free to disagree, the sheriff told me this so who knows:)
