OK here's my question.

It might be obvious and at the moment I am erring on the side of caution.....

I am doing my PPL in March. I have been offered a job this summer with a flight company who want me to fly tourists around where I live and have promised me about 100 hours per month flight time.

Now.....I told them that I didn't think I could do this without a CPL but they have told me that it's ok for me to do it because I'm not getting PAID...I'll just be getting the flight experience and that it would be no different to taking my friends up for a tour of the city......

Are they right?? Or is it against rules because SOMEONE is getting paid on my behalf?

Thanks

Wayne

i dont know the answer to your Q ,

but it certainly is an interesting one and will also be eager to find out the answer.

( That will be very good experience for you by the way :) )

Calum

Cheers Calum!

It's a strange one isn't it? :confused:

lol ,

it most definately will be great experience if it is legal , i'll need to look at something like that as soon as i get my PPL , build hours.

Calum

If it is a commercial venture, whereby "hire and reward" comes into it then I think there maybe implications. Although the company might not directly give you money, they are clearly getting something for it and you are operating as part of a commercial venture and that will be illegal.

Imagine if you pitched up for your trip to tenerfie and the pilot claimed that he didnt have a CPL but it was ok because he wasnt getting paid............................................ interesting eh?

i am not questioning your ability/airmanship, but the way that beaurocracy is these days, I would be surprised if it was ok.

Not sure how relevant this observation is, but in the US that would be a definite no-no. I've read in AOPA of a few real horror stories. One pilot helped a friend out by shuttling a mechanic to an island in the pilots plane -did not even take gas money. Problem was his friend was being paid!! Somehow the FAA got hold of it and the pilot got busted for commercial flying without the valid permits. Suspension fine etc. Pilot appealed etc but lost the appeal.
Another case I read would tell me you should turn this down. Read about a guy who was getting examined for his ATPL - examiner questioned him a a few hours he logged as copilot on a type he was not rated for - bingo - lost all his permits/ratings. He also appealed and no joy. Poor guy had to start all over again -from zero time!!!
If the time goes in your log book and an examiner goes through your log book as part of a ratings/employment check he is bound to notice the accumulation of time and will surely ask you how you were able to fly that much.
Be a real drag to loose it all 5 -10 years down the line.

I'm afraid that the fact is that it's a commercial flight and you can't doit on a PPL. The rules are that a PPL holder must pay his proportion of the flight costs i.e. the aircraft rental is £400 and 3 passengers plus the pilot are on board then the pilot must pay at least 1/4 share of the costs (£100) and if the pilot and one pasenger are on board the pilot must stump up at least £200 of the cost. Of course the pilot can pay all of the costs but it is illegal for him to pay less than his proportionate share otherwise it's a commercial flight and he needs a CPL.

Sensible is right. Nothwithstanding the fact that the pilot is not being paid, this is a commercial undertaking. Not only should the pilot have a commercial ticket, but the company must also have an Air Operators Certificate (AOC) with all the associated nausea and expense that comes with it.

probably not much help to you but in the U.S. I am pretty sure that the FAA views the hours you are gaining as compensation, so its a no no.

Where you live would appear to be France. You may want to look into this further but I think there is a provision in France for PPLs to take paying passengers on what they call a 'Bapteme de l'Air'. If that is what you are doing you may find that it is perfectly legal. Having said that I'd expect there to be some sort of minimum hours that you would need under your belt before doing so. I don't know the details of any of this though so you ought to check it all out.

I was taken on a flight from Megeve around the Mont Blanc area a couple of years ago by a PPL who was advertising the 'service' in a local restaurant.

In the UK this would definitely be illegal. I strongly suspect that's the case in France too, as others have said. You need to check it for certain with your own Aviation Authority.

However, as a lowish-hours CPL and instructor doing mainly trial lessons/pleasure flights (in helicopters, but that's not relevant in this case), I wouldn't think that this is a good idea for a very new PPL, even if it's legal. Most of us find passengers, even friends and relatives, are hard work - they talk to you at the most inconvenient moments in flight, they wander about on the ground, they touch controls. You'd be taking up strangers, about whom you know absolutely nothing. To do this safely, you need to be comfortable enough with flying, navigating, and talking on the radio, that you have enough spare capacity for...anything - the person who won't stop talking, the one who feels sick, the one who's scared, the crying children, etc etc etc etc. Plus the fact that 100 hours a month is 25 hours a week, which is 4-5 hours a day - that's pretty knackering, even for somebody with quite a lot of experience. And I imagine you'll be doing this in short hops, with loads of takeoffs and landings, and a continuous succession of different people - even harder and more tiring.

This is not at all the same as you taking your friends on a tour of the city. IMHO, this company hasn't got a clue what they're doing, and is just trying to get a pilot for free, with no concern for the safety of anyone involved. It's because of people like them that such things are usually illegal - and probably need to be, to protect everyone.

Once you can fly, you get asked to do all sorts of things, which ignorant people think are just fine when they aren't. It's one very good reason for learning about Air Law, airmanship, and your own limitations. And also learning when and how to say no.

Good luck with your PPL . :ok:

Whirly beat me to it!

I was just thinking the same things as she was.

When you get your PPL, you might be a qualified pilot, but you WILL make plenty of mistakes afterwards. Someone once told me, that on every flight you take you will make at least one mistake, and they were right.

Some of these as very minor, and some are more significant. As your experience increases, and you've made the mistakes before, you'll learn to quickly deal with them, but in the begining, mistakes can be more stressfull.

Best to make them when you are either alone, or with friends, and not with strangers, and under pressure.

I suspect you will also be put under pressure to fly in weather conditions that you might not be happy with, given your level of experience, expecially if there are more experienced pilots flying that day.

For what it's worth, I believe such flights would also be illegal in Ireland. As I understand it, we don't even have the cost sharing rule here. PPL must pay full cost.

dp

I suspect you will also be put under pressure to fly in weather conditions that you might not be happy with, given your level of experience, expecially if there are more experienced pilots flying that day.

dublinpilot,
You beat me to that one! I thought of that after I'd posted, but haven't had time to get back here. Passengers often put you under pressure to fly, even if they're only friends and family. They don't realise that "lovely day" is 3km vis in the air, and that you can't cope with that yet. And if it's this sort of set-up, it'll be even worse, and quite difficult to refuse a flight when it's all booked, everyone's looking forward to it, and other people are flying. It can be one of the hardest problems to deal with, and despite everything you do, you still sometimes end up flying in conditions when you'd rather have stayed on the ground. I certainly wouldn't like to be put in that position as a new PPL.

I am doing my PPL in March. I have been offered a job this summer with a flight company who want me to fly tourists around where I live and have promised me about 100 hours per month flight time. My first thought was to suggest that you shop this lot to the police before they kill someone.

Upon mature reflection, some time later, I haven't had a second thought.

Hi Folks

I'm stuck to my initial reservations and turned down the position today. it was indeed a 'Bapteme de l'Air' type of thing.

I reviewed my thoughts on how I would feel as a new PPL, taking that level of responsibility, not to mention the thought that if this outfit were willing to risk me getting a reprimand or losing my licence before I've even had a sniff of flying experience then God knows where their priorities lie in other areas like well-maintained aircraft and adherence to other regs.

It may very well be legal to do it here in France, but I think it's best I leave it alone for now.

Thank you all for your advice.

Wayne

Well done.

That's a good decision. :ok:

dp

I agree with dp; a good decision. Probably the first of many difficult decisions you'll have to make as a pilot, so get used to it. :)

However, without more facts, don't let's be too hard on this organisation. They may be merely ignorant, rather than unconcerned for people or safety. ANYONE can set up a company doing pleasure flights. And many people think a pilot is a pilot - you learn to fly, get a licence, and that's it; you can fly. They don't know that a PPL is merely a licence to learn, that flying involves a lifetime of training and practice, and is not just like driving an aerial car. :eek: We often have to spell it out to them.

This incident reminds me slightly of something that happened to me. A flying school asked me to teach on a type on which I wasn't either legally qualified, or suitably experienced, and I refused. It was inconvenient, as they'd already booked the lessons, and they couldn't understand why I was so adamant that I couldn't do it. I explained, slowly and carefully, that it might be safe, but I wasn't certain. And even if it was safe, it was illegal, and if there was an accident, we weren't covered by insurance, and I'd probably lose my licence, and they'd...not sure what would happen, but they'd get the book thrown at them anyway. "But Whirly", they gasped in horror, finally getting my point, "We'd NEVER ask you to do anything illegal!" The fact that they had been doing just that seemed to have entirely escaped them.

That's people for you. :confused:

Hi Farrel,

GRP is correct, there is such a thing in France as a "Bapteme de l'Air", literally translated it is "Aerial Baptism" or "First Flight". But as he suggested there is a little more to it for it to be legal for you to do. From your point of view, you need a PPL and at least 150 Hrs experience post PPL and to do/have at least 30 Hrs a year / the last year. (someone please correct me if Im wrong)

As I understand it, the spirit of the exemption exists so that Aeroclub members can easily take people flying who are interested in learning to fly at their Aeroclub or those who want to go on a local flight jolly, and recoup the cost of the flight in total from the passenger/s, without the need to have a CPL Flight instructor there to do it. The Aeroclub should be just that, ie a not for profit (reg.1903 is it?) club in the true sense, and is not supposed to overtly advertise these baptemes. They should charge only the cost of the flight, regardless of how many pax there are.

Such 'Bapteme de l'air' are usually done by club members to help out the club on an ad hoc basis, ie whoever happens to be around with the right flight experience etc. flys the Bapteme de l'air. Ive done a couple and its great to be able to take up someone for their first flight and show them the area from the air. Similarly, last year club members themselves donated flights to a few locals also, no charge.

The way you are talking about an 'outfit' leads me to believe that what you have been asked to do might not be exactly this.....ie its a company doing this on the side.....though they are not calling it such, probably a classic example of the French bending the rules slightly to suit the situation. (One of the things I love about living here incidentally!!)

Regards, SD..

I have to agree, it is a nightmare of a country to get used to, but once you get to now the locals it's great.....I love living here!

:ok:

In the UK I understand you can take up all your mates and share the cost of the flight. You must NOT make a profit.

ie: If it costs you £200 per hour then 4 people including yourself pay £50.

So I suppose if you advertised to that effect saying you were hour building and were offering rides on a cost share basis, you could remain within the law.

Am I right?

Coop & Bear

So I suppose if you advertised to that effect saying you were hour building and were offering rides on a cost share basis, you could remain within the law. I think not, I seem to remember that there's a rule that any such advertising must only be on the club noticeboard to club members and that advertising to the public is illegal.

Gertrude,

I believe you are correct, though I'm not quite sure where this is written; someone else probably knows. About the only legal thing you can do is spread the word around among friends, relatives, and flying club members.

I think it also boils down to common sense too, and not taking advantage of potential loopholes in, or interpretations of laws that I assume are made to protect everyone.

Will take this up with the CAA and see if there is a proper answer as to what constitutes "advertising".

I don't want to flout the law nor do I want to gain financially from private flying.

I like many others want to fly as cheaply as possible. Going down the share road is one way but if you don't want the commitment of shared ownership, then why not share the flying with people who like to go for rides.

Seems there is a lots of "oooooooo you don't want to do that" or "you can't do that because some big wig told me in the pub".

A commercial licence is just that. A licence to operate for commercial gain. If you are not making a commercial gain, then whats the problem?

Coop & Bear

A commercial licence is just that. A licence to operate for commercial gain. If you are not making a commercial gain, then whats the problem?


What indeed? Leaving aside my opinion of this, I think the usual argument is that the CAA wants to protect the "unsuspecting public" from flying with Private Pilots, who are not qualified to do public transport flights. Maybe they also want to prevent the sort of thing which started this thread. The idea, I suggest, being that friends and relatives know you and can decide whether or not to take the risk, but others don't. Not that I know precisely what's in the collective mind of the CAA, you understand. So by all means ask them, though I wouldn't place any bets on your getting a definite answer. But if you do, maybe you should make sure you get it in writing. And please post it here for the benefit of everyone else.

This has nothing to do with "someone told me in the pub" or anything similar. This is written clearly in LASORS, and if I wasn't about to go to work, I'd quote it and give you the page number. There are a number of regulars on this forum who are instructors, commercial pilots, or very experienced PPLs; we DO know what we're talking about as regards Air Law! I don't want to over-react to what I suspect was an unthought-out post...but someone will if you take that apparent attitude.

I wasn't being flippant or casting any dispersions over anyone's character.

I have been around all walks of Aviation for some time and it just annoys me that the Plain English Society hasn't managed to make the CAA one of its members!

As for your friends and family having better judgement about your flying skills compared to a complete stranger? Well unless they too are qualified pilots, then I don't think they would be any better judge of ability. (Its OK to kill your mates but wow betide you if you kill a stranger!)

The bottom line is that if you passed the PPL to the satisfaction of the authorities, then the licence allows you to take passengers.
Who they are, with regard to flight safety to my mind is quite irrelavent.

Perhaps the CAA should make you take another test to allow you to take passengers! Generate some more income for the hard pressed government.

Anyway I am sure someone will want to come and fly with me if only for the jokes!

Coop & Bear

Quote:

Gertrude,

I believe you are correct, though I'm not quite sure where this is written; someone else probably knows.

Well you two, its in the ANO buried in the the massive Article 130, section 8 paragraph (ii) subsection (bb).

C&B.

If you look at this section it says that if you do advertise in a flying club only club members may be carried, they also all have to be over 18 years old. It also implies that you can't advertise in other locations.

As Whirly rightly says the point of this type of regulation is to prevent the general public being misled as to the type of flight they are paying for. If you advertise or persuade your mates to pay for a trip to Le Touquet say, they expect to go and be taken back. This can put pressure on you to fly when at the early stage of post-PPL operation, frankly you don't need. If the weather worsens for example and you can't get back you are stuck and so are they. Alternatively they all pitch up at the airfield, with unsuitable weather and ask glibly, 'Why aren't we going then'

If you advertise or persuade your mates to pay for a trip to Le Touquet say, they expect to go and be taken back. I have never invited any passenger to share costs. However one of my mates raised the subject himself, asking whether we could fly somewhere further or more interesting if he were to contribute to the cost. So we'll do that come the spring, but I've made absolutely certain that he understands that we might fly somewhere and land and be unable to come back when we wanted to!

GW

Couldn't agree more. However there are some people who are not as understanding as your mate.

I always spell it out to people like this...

The fact that we arrange to fly, doesn't mean it'll happen.
The fact that we drive to the airfield, doesn't mean that we'll actually take off.
If we take off, we may not fly where we planned to.
If we fly to another airfield, we'll get back if at all possible, but I don't guarantee it.

Anybody who can't accept all of the above, and accept that I decide, doesn't get to come.