"Rescue" flight, PPL

Roger Long wrote:

Here is the letter:

http://baldeagleflyingclub.org/FAAopinion.pdf

It really does say "to build flight time". So not using that time would
appear to be a loophole. Wild!

[...]
The insurance company will probably follow the same dynamics but you
should
check with them. I have had excellent experience discussing things like
this very frankly with Avemco. You get points with them for asking and
appearing to be concerned and attempting to do the right thing. They'll
remember that if there is an incident.

Thanks for the letter and the suggestion.

- Andrew

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:39:35 -0600, Newps wrote:



Dave S wrote:

Is your neighbor logging the driving time in his logbook for the
furtherance of a commercial drivers license??

At the point where the needed hours are logged and any further hours
don't help in that regard does it suddenly get legal?

I'm shooting from the hip here, with no time to research this but I
was always under the impression that the flight time would not
represent any "value" to the pilot if it were not eligible to be used
toward a rating. It would be interesting to hear a full legal
interpretation of this issue. It seems kind of odd that an activity
could be legal if not logged and illegal if logged. The government
does work in strange ways at times.

Rich Russell

On 20 Aug 2004 18:52:00 GMT, (BllFs6) wrote:

The FAA has said in the past that flying for free is compensation and
requires a commercial. For CFIs its very easy since we already have a
commercial, we just need to keep up our class 2 medical. Most CFIs do
because it allows you to do the occasional local sight seeing pax too.

-Robert



What if you did the "rescue" flight but you DID NOT log the hours?

Would that count? Or would you get in trouble for some OTHER rule violation for
not logging some hours you actually flew?

take care

Blll

Most of us log all of our hours but there is no requirement to do so.
You only have to log the hours that are to be used in pursuit of a
rating or certificate.

Rich Russell

"Roger Long" wrote in message
.. .
Here is the letter:

http://baldeagleflyingclub.org/FAAopinion.pdf



Wait... IANAL, but the situations discussed in this letter are NOT the same
as the "rescue flight" discussed in this thread.

The FAA letter makes it clear that THE FLIGHT ITSELF must be non profit, not
just no pilot monetary compensation. Thus, if the organization receives
benefit (donations, either fixed or per flight) from the flight, it is a
"flight for hire" and must be flown as such. Part of this is to assure
higher standards for passengers who by the nature of the flight might have
the expectation of higher standards than a Private pilot has demonstrated.

The rescue flight is not a revenue flight. It is only the good will of the
FBO picking up stranded people in an expedient manner. They could just as
well have driven there and accomplished the same result, but this was a
win-win-win situation, you get a chance to fly and be a good guy, they get
the task done quickly at low cost (their hourly marginal operating cost is
relatively small, and the stranded people get back much quicker than if by
car. (I don't remember) but if this was a student-instructor being
stranded, effectively the return flight was done with the instructor on
board so the student did not have any higher apparent risk than a normal
training flight.

(BllFs6) wrote in message ...
The FAA has said in the past that flying for free is compensation and
requires a commercial. For CFIs its very easy since we already have a
commercial, we just need to keep up our class 2 medical. Most CFIs do
because it allows you to do the occasional local sight seeing pax too.

-Robert



What if you did the "rescue" flight but you DID NOT log the hours?

Would that count? Or would you get in trouble for some OTHER rule violation for
not logging some hours you actually flew?

take care

Its not the logging its the enjoying. You would have to prove that you
did not enjoy the flight, therefore its not compensation.

-Robert

That might be a hair properly split. IOWUEMWALWAH (I Only Wake Up Every
Morning With A Lawyer With A Headache) but the FSDO thought it supported the
idea of our "Club Time" flights being compensation even though they said not
to worry about it.

All I know at this point is that is really isn't worth worrying about. If
you set up some kind of arrangement that's getting you lost of flying that
you otherwise would have paid for, you should check it out more carefully.
Otherwise, don't worry, be happy.

--

Roger Long



"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
. net...

"Roger Long" wrote in message
.. .
Here is the letter:

http://baldeagleflyingclub.org/FAAopinion.pdf



Wait... IANAL, but the situations discussed in this letter are NOT the
same
as the "rescue flight" discussed in this thread.

The FAA letter makes it clear that THE FLIGHT ITSELF must be non profit,
not
just no pilot monetary compensation. Thus, if the organization receives
benefit (donations, either fixed or per flight) from the flight, it is a
"flight for hire" and must be flown as such. Part of this is to assure
higher standards for passengers who by the nature of the flight might have
the expectation of higher standards than a Private pilot has demonstrated.

The rescue flight is not a revenue flight. It is only the good will of
the
FBO picking up stranded people in an expedient manner. They could just as
well have driven there and accomplished the same result, but this was a
win-win-win situation, you get a chance to fly and be a good guy, they get
the task done quickly at low cost (their hourly marginal operating cost is
relatively small, and the stranded people get back much quicker than if by
car. (I don't remember) but if this was a student-instructor being
stranded, effectively the return flight was done with the instructor on
board so the student did not have any higher apparent risk than a normal
training flight.

Peter Gottlieb opined

"Ash Wyllie" wrote in message
...

A good quick test: Unless you are worse off financially after a flight,
you
are doing something wrong.


I know you meant this part humorously, but this cannot be right, since you
are allowed to fly "in furtherance of your business," which would leave you
financially ahead.

It's only semi-humorous .


-ash
Cthulhu for President!
Why vote for a lesser evil?

All this seems like big BS!

Are you really this concerned with this in the US?????

Surely, war on terror is more important....?

hehe....

Seriously.

I am a hobby pilot. I do not intend ever to consider a CFI rating.
However, I log all my hours.

OK, say I'm really broke.
Honestly, I can't afford to fly 5 minutes, but a friend really wants a short
hop over town.
He says, he'll pay the 30 dollars or whatever it costs.

We do it, and nobody cares.

So what??????

Now, if i do this ever once in a while, and 15 years down the line, I figure
i don't wanna be a musician anymore, but a full time parachute jump
pilot....

OK, I get my CFI rating.

Would I have to confess to God for this, or take 40 beatings of the FAA
whip?

It doesn't make sense.

Isn't the idea that we should all be safe up there???

I'd say that it's far better that some geezer pay my 30 bucks and I get my
30 minutes of flying now and then rather then making the sky unsafe to all
the paying passengers of airliners caose I am not allowed to fly without
spending my own money.

Oh well, maybe US is different.....or I'm probably ignorant...(or too
drunk...hehe)

Here in my country we probably have the same rules.

However, most pilots bend them in this regard, but in my opinion, this makes
a safer sky.

This is one rule bent that actually makes it way safer to do this! Letting
someone else pay for you fyling them around, therefore beeing a better
pilot.

This must be the goal for all of us right?

Anyone who honestly thinks this is wrong, please convince me.
And please, no BS about commercial planes loosing gigs. Which commercial
firms would even start up their planes for 30 bucks???

Frode




"Robert M. Gary" skrev i melding
om...
(BllFs6) wrote in message
...
The FAA has said in the past that flying for free is compensation and
requires a commercial. For CFIs its very easy since we already have a
commercial, we just need to keep up our class 2 medical. Most CFIs do
because it allows you to do the occasional local sight seeing pax too.

-Robert



What if you did the "rescue" flight but you DID NOT log the hours?

Would that count? Or would you get in trouble for some OTHER rule
violation for
not logging some hours you actually flew?

take care

Its not the logging its the enjoying. You would have to prove that you
did not enjoy the flight, therefore its not compensation.

-Robert

"Frode Berg" wrote in message
...

Anyone who honestly thinks this is wrong, please convince me.


I think everyone here more or less agrees with you but the point of this
discussion is what the actual rules say and when the FAA might go after
someone for bending them.

Richard Russell wrote:

I'm shooting from the hip here, with no time to research this but I
was always under the impression that the flight time would not
represent any "value" to the pilot if it were not eligible to be used
toward a rating.

You are probably correct IMO, since the only prosecution cases I've heard of are ones
in which it was argued that the pilot intended to use the time as justification for
an additional rating.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.