Ferry flight a commercial op?

Recently, Maxwell posted:

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Recently, Travis Marlatte posted:


Taking passengers to locations for their purposes and that you would
not otherwise be going is specifically disallowed in the FARs,
regardless of whether you charge for the "service". OTOH, such
activities as taking co-workers to a work site or taking friends
somewhere (or nowhere) that you are going is specifically allowed.


Could I advertise a no-cost ferry business?

No.


Why not?

Well, I'll clarify my statement. You can _advertise_ whatever you want,
and mainly risk only getting sued for false advertising. However,
_operating_ a no-cost ferry business witout a commercial rating is likely
to get you in hot water.

Neil

"Helen" wrote in message
news:8ft_i.6111$VB6.5184@trnddc06...
Just call AOPA. All of our membership dollars pay those folks to sit
around reading the FAA legal interpretations. You'll be surprised at some
of the petty cases the FAA has taken on under this rule to prosecute well
meaning pilots.

Do you have any examples?

-c

"Helen" wrote in message
news:Nbt_i.6091$VB6.694@trnddc06...
And additional...
http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=1467

Thanks, Helen. A couple of thoughts:

"The FAA's position on sharing expenses is not supported by the language of
61.118(b), but pilots need to be aware of the FAA's policy. Current FAA
enforcement policy is so strict that if a private pilot ferries an airplane
at no charge, with no passengers on board, the FAA position is that the free
flying time is compensation for the private pilot, and therefore a violation
of 61.118. "
So the CFI was correct. At some point, I'd be likely to say that the FAA
could kiss my ass. As a private pilot, the risk of a 90-day suspension
isn't enough to offset the hazards of not remaining current because you
can't afford to. (As a commercially-licensed pilot with a small fraction of
the time as many of the PPL holders out here, I guess the FAA has decided
I'm more qualified to "cope with the demans of charter flying" so it's not
my problem.)

Lastly, the comment: "Private pilots can build time cheaply and safely."

I wonder what combination of prescription drugs and lack of oxygen would
prompt somebody to say something that absurd.

-c

"Gatt" wrote in
:


"Helen" wrote in message
news:Nbt_i.6091$VB6.694@trnddc06...
And additional...
http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=1467

Thanks, Helen. A couple of thoughts:

"The FAA's position on sharing expenses is not supported by the
language of 61.118(b), but pilots need to be aware of the FAA's
policy. Current FAA enforcement policy is so strict that if a private
pilot ferries an airplane at no charge, with no passengers on board,
the FAA position is that the free flying time is compensation for the
private pilot, and therefore a violation of 61.118. "
So the CFI was correct. At some point, I'd be likely to say that the
FAA could kiss my ass. As a private pilot, the risk of a 90-day
suspension isn't enough to offset the hazards of not remaining current
because you can't afford to. (As a commercially-licensed pilot with a
small fraction of the time as many of the PPL holders out here, I
guess the FAA has decided I'm more qualified to "cope with the demans
of charter flying" so it's not my problem.)

Lastly, the comment: "Private pilots can build time cheaply and
safely."

I wonder what combination of prescription drugs and lack of oxygen
would prompt somebody to say something that absurd.



hear hear,


Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in
:

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
...

OK, what about sending one of our club members up to collect an airplane
that's been at a radio shop?


Bertie

Who is paying for the gas?


Pilot pays for nothing.

Let's break it down into two examples then.

One, he's part of a flying club, pays dues monthly, let's say he washes
airplanes and what not for flying time,

If he/she/it "paid" for this flight by working for the club - then they
"paid" their own way. Not much the FAA can do.

and in the second example he's just
a friend of a guy who hasn't got time to schlepp his airplane to the field
where the radio shop is. He's just doing it as a favor to the owner.

Then he/she/it is getting "free hours" which, if someone gets a bug up their
butt, could be a problem.


I've known both of these to have happened in the distant past (with the
flying club an FAA inspector was one of the members and knew)


I'm sure it hapens a lot. I assume in these cases, the FAA inspector didn't
think it was worth making a fuss about. 1 hour of "free" time? Big Whoop. On
the other hand, if someone is looking for an excuse to cause trouble...

There is no shortage of a-holes out there.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in
news:44idnaGpF44DJ6HanZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@wideopenwest .com:

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in
:

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
...

OK, what about sending one of our club members up to collect an
airplane that's been at a radio shop?


Bertie

Who is paying for the gas?


Pilot pays for nothing.

Let's break it down into two examples then.

One, he's part of a flying club, pays dues monthly, let's say he
washes airplanes and what not for flying time,

If he/she/it "paid" for this flight by working for the club - then
they "paid" their own way. Not much the FAA can do.

and in the second example he's just
a friend of a guy who hasn't got time to schlepp his airplane to the
field where the radio shop is. He's just doing it as a favor to the
owner.

Then he/she/it is getting "free hours" which, if someone gets a bug up
their butt, could be a problem.


I've known both of these to have happened in the distant past (with
the flying club an FAA inspector was one of the members and knew)


I'm sure it hapens a lot. I assume in these cases, the FAA inspector
didn't think it was worth making a fuss about. 1 hour of "free" time?
Big Whoop. On the other hand, if someone is looking for an excuse to
cause trouble...

There is no shortage of a-holes out there.


Well, as I said, it was years ago and the FAA, PITA though it may have
been back then, wasn't anything like as anal as it is now.
For instance, in one 135 operation I did some part time for, single
engine "over the top" was pretty common. Anyone who has ever looked at
the rules for this and actually remembered them should get some sort of
award. So, the way it worked was, you didn't do anything too stupid
during an over the top flight and when you got back you looked it up and
matched your flight to one of the many options in the book. The FAA were
OK with that, too. Commone sense prevailed.
I wouldn't imagine that's the case nowadays.

Bertie

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
t...
Recently, Maxwell posted:

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Recently, Travis Marlatte posted:


Taking passengers to locations for their purposes and that you would
not otherwise be going is specifically disallowed in the FARs,
regardless of whether you charge for the "service". OTOH, such
activities as taking co-workers to a work site or taking friends
somewhere (or nowhere) that you are going is specifically allowed.


Could I advertise a no-cost ferry business?

No.


Why not?

Well, I'll clarify my statement. You can _advertise_ whatever you want,
and mainly risk only getting sued for false advertising. However,
_operating_ a no-cost ferry business witout a commercial rating is likely
to get you in hot water.


My mistake Neil, I just saw the anser in another post.

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
news
Recently, Gatt posted:

"Helen" wrote in message
news:Nbt_i.6091$VB6.694@trnddc06...
And additional...
http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=1467

Thanks, Helen. A couple of thoughts:

"The FAA's position on sharing expenses is not supported by the
language of
61.118(b), but pilots need to be aware of the FAA's policy. Current
FAA enforcement policy is so strict that if a private pilot ferries
an airplane at no charge, with no passengers on board, the FAA
position is that the free flying time is compensation for the private
pilot, and therefore a violation of 61.118. "
So the CFI was correct.

Note that the relevant condition is that the flying time is free. If the
pilot picks up the expense (possibly only 50% of the expense), then
there is no issue with this policy.


That's what I'm wondering. Based only on the AOPA link, I didn't run down
the individual rulings noted:

The FAA has no policy or regulations on setting rental rates.

If I want to ferry someone's plane, they should rent it to him for a $1 an
hour.

And since I can rent a Skyhawk for $100 hour, I can charter the three empty
seats for $75 and hour.

And I can advertise either service.

Really not trying to be a smart ass, or insult anyone. It just seems there
is still a hole here you could drive a truck through, or you better have a
rental agreement on you, and well breifed passengers if you ever get ramped
checked. Because if you are a private pilot, you may have to prove you are
always paying for everything.

Recently, Gatt posted:

"Helen" wrote in message
news:Nbt_i.6091$VB6.694@trnddc06...
And additional...
http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=1467

Thanks, Helen. A couple of thoughts:

"The FAA's position on sharing expenses is not supported by the
language of
61.118(b), but pilots need to be aware of the FAA's policy. Current
FAA enforcement policy is so strict that if a private pilot ferries
an airplane at no charge, with no passengers on board, the FAA
position is that the free flying time is compensation for the private
pilot, and therefore a violation of 61.118. "
So the CFI was correct.

Note that the relevant condition is that the flying time is free. If the
pilot picks up the expense (possibly only 50% of the expense), then
there is no issue with this policy.

Neil

Recently, Maxwell posted:

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
news
Recently, Gatt posted:

"Helen" wrote in message
news:Nbt_i.6091$VB6.694@trnddc06...
And additional...
http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=1467

Thanks, Helen. A couple of thoughts:

"The FAA's position on sharing expenses is not supported by the
language of
61.118(b), but pilots need to be aware of the FAA's policy. Current
FAA enforcement policy is so strict that if a private pilot ferries
an airplane at no charge, with no passengers on board, the FAA
position is that the free flying time is compensation for the
private pilot, and therefore a violation of 61.118. "
So the CFI was correct.

Note that the relevant condition is that the flying time is free. If
the pilot picks up the expense (possibly only 50% of the expense),
then there is no issue with this policy.


That's what I'm wondering. Based only on the AOPA link, I didn't run
down the individual rulings noted:

The FAA has no policy or regulations on setting rental rates.

If I want to ferry someone's plane, they should rent it to him for a
$1 an hour.

That would be a very short ferry with fuel at current prices, not to
mention maintenance etc.

And since I can rent a Skyhawk for $100 hour, I can charter the three
empty seats for $75 and hour.

And I can advertise either service.

Really not trying to be a smart ass, or insult anyone. It just seems
there is still a hole here you could drive a truck through, or you
better have a rental agreement on you, and well breifed passengers if
you ever get ramped checked. Because if you are a private pilot, you
may have to prove you are always paying for everything.

As PP, You can not "charter 3 empty seats", period. As PP, you must pay
50% of the cost of the flight, so if that cost is set at $100/hr., you
must pay at least $51/hr. regardless of how the other $49/hr. gets picked
up. IMO, you're trying too hard to justify an activity and in doing so
making some serious misinterpretations of rules that are pretty clear.

Neil