You lost me there. Is a flight safer if a pilot pays for part of it?
Well yes, a charter operator has much higher standards
Which is the answer to a different question. When a pilot pays for the
flight, it does not become safer.
Are you saying because there happens at this moment in
time to be no charter operators where I'm based I should be able to rent out
my PP-SEL R-H skills
No, I don't think that's what he was saying. I also don't think that a
PP should be able to "rent out" one's skills just because there isn't a
charter operation out there. However, there's a large area between
"taking a friend on a flight that you would have made anyway, to a place
he was going anyway" and putting a shingle at the airport "I'll fly
anyone anywhere for money". For example, a college student who is a
pilot offers to fly people in his dorm for costs. I see no reason this
should be prohibited, nor where safety is enhanced by requiring the
pilot to subsidize the flight. In fact, overall safety is increased the
more the pilot flies.
The difference I see is in whether a pilot =represents himself= or
passively =allows= himself to be represented as a charter pilot of
sorts. Doing so is what I believe the FAA wants us to believe it is
going after with its "holding out" rule, but I think the FAA's holding
out rule is too stringent.
Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
|