Study on Grey Charter in Europe

[Charter JAROPS 1]

Hi guys, I heard their is currently a study undertaken to asses the grey charter "problem". There was / is also a survey ongoing. Do you have an idea whom to contact to contribute?

Many thanks.

[navstar1]

Study is presently going on carried out by EBAA. Suggest that you contact them on [email protected].:ok:

[No RYR for me]

check this one out:Fly Aeolus | Rent a private jet or private plane (http://www.flyaeolus.com/) Selling private flights... if this is not grey I don't know what is...

Like this quote: "No compromise on Safety
Fly Aeolus’ safety during charter flights is safeguarded by:
Regular audits on European airline regulations guaranteeing the same quality compared to aircraft charters and airlines
:\

[His dudeness]

From their webpage:

Fly Aeolus is the first company to offer private aircraft services using single piston aircraft in Western Europe under a fractional ownership model. It sets an innovation in affordable private door-to-door air transport.

Sounds like NJE to me, just with pistons.

I think the whole issue of grey charter is totally blown out of proportion by some AOC holders

BTW, some things the EBAA asks about are very "nice" such as giving more rights to customs, SAFA checkers and the likes, they ask in their survey wether they should lobby towards a point were EVERY private operator would need to proof the relation of his passengers to the owner...

NSA light....

I asked the dude in Brussels what he would think if he´d had to explain himself and proof (what happened to "innocent until found guilty") to various authorities how his passengers in his private car are related to him.

[mattman]

When I was first employed 7 years ago with my current employer I made it crystal clear what I was prepared to do, and this was one of the issues that was raised.
All this time we have never entertained the thought of overstepping this line.

This being said we will be more than pleased to declare the principles and those associated that fly on board.

BUT all AOC holders and aircraft attached to said AOC should also play fair.
Seen many AOC's been whipped out for VAT and Duty free fuel when it is known to be a owner flown flight, or FTL and Performance factors duly brought back and forward to accommodate AOC/Owner (position flights, Samadan Premier 1) flights.
Maybe there should be undeniable, unequivocal prove that the persons onboard and AOC flight has paid for their charter at market rates.

We maintain a high standard within our company, just because we don’t subscribe to some overregulated, overpriced, beurocratic establishment to prove it to all others that knock us does not bother me one bit.

To be EBAA'ed into a criminal like position just because we are an owner/business, owned/operated flight makes it "guilty until we say otherwise" is prime example of the state of the industry.

[No RYR for me]

Sounds like NJE to me, just with pistons.

As far as I know operates NetJets to commercial rules on an AOC with two crew on proper jets... Don't see how that this compares to a single pilot, VFR flying, piston aircraft non AOC operation... :ooh:

[M-ONGO]

As far as I know operates NetJets to commercial rules on an AOC with two crew on proper jets...

Really? Don't they apply 'private' ops rules with regard to factored landing distances on certain flights, certain fleets to certain airports? Samedan etc, as has been mentioned above?

Netjets callsigns [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums (http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-202330.html)

[Globally Challenged]

I think they only do that for empty positioning flights.

[M-ONGO]

Well, I hope they paid the full whack for the fuel, not the AOC rates if it's a private positioning sector!

As this guy said:

Seen many AOC's been whipped out for VAT and Duty free fuel when it is known to be a owner flown flight, or FTL and Performance factors duly brought back and forward to accommodate AOC/Owner (position flights, Samadan Premier 1) flights.

[silverknapper]

they ask in their survey wether they should lobby towards a point were EVERY private operator would need to proof the relation of his passengers to the owner...

I sincerely hope this isn't given the slightest consideration. Pathetic. Whatever happened to innocent till proven guilty!!
Hopefully Aopa or otherwise would counter this idiocy. If every private flight were to be checked then surely every AOC flight must be SAFA inspected.

[M-ONGO]

I sincerely hope this isn't given the slightest consideration. Pathetic. Whatever happened to innocent till proven guilty!!
Hopefully Aopa or otherwise would counter this idiocy. If every private flight were to be checked then surely every AOC flight must be SAFA inspected.

Agreed. If that were the case, it would lean towards the "kill off G/A" or "I have to pay for an AOC, so why shouldn't they?" schools of thought.

It is indeed pathetic.

[cldrvr]

I don't see this ever succeeding, the lobby "power" of a few AOC holders against a few well placed phonecalls by the owners of private aircraft in Europe, not many bookmakers would be willing to start a book on that one.

This is just smoke and mirrors to justify their membership and make themselves look good.

[flynowpaylater]

All the time people break the law by offering charters without an AOC, then the authorities and the genuine charter operators will try and get it stopped. Unlike the corporate, which is bankrolled by a rich owner or company, the charter operator is trying to make a business out of flying people around. To do this, an AOC is required, which as we all know, costs a fortune to get and maintain. Why would AOC holders simply stand back and watch a non certified aircraft nick the business?

Not every corporate operator performs illegal charters....but every illegal charter is performed by a corporate operator. If the corporate end of the industry is incapable of regulating itself, then the authorities will have to do it for them.

If you want to offer your aircraft and pilots to fly them, to a 3rd party, get an AOC. It's pretty simple. If you don't want to get an AOC, don't offer your aircraft and/or pilots to 3rd parties.

[mutt]

If you don't want to get an AOC, don't offer your aircraft and/or pilots to 3rd parties. My boss can afford to give ANY of his aircraft to whoever he wants, should all passengers be interrogated on arrival in Europe to discover their relationship with the owner?

[flynowpaylater]

I'm very please for him. If he has that much money, he can afford an AOC then....if he wants to take ANY payment for these flights, or indeed the pilot wants ANY payment for these flights, an AOC will be required. In fact, even if the passengers are paying for the fuel and landing fees.....you'll need an AOC.

[PURPLE PITOT]

Many owners lend their aircraft to friends with no payment of anything taking place, because they can afford it. The owners continue to pay "their" pilots. No AOC required.

Mine has an AOC anyway.:rolleyes:

[First.officer]

It seems (to me) that the argument "AOC v Private" category operation really comes down to one or two points, namely;

If your a Private Operation, boss (or whoever) flies his chums around on his aircraft, and their is no financial (or other) inducement towards said flight, or flights - then great, no issue, and more kudos to 'em if they can afford that....don't think anyone would disagree (and the fuel cost certainly won't be an issue if you can afford to do that!).

if your an AOC Operation, flying as a business, and fulfilling all of the expensive, and onerous amounts of red-tape that are required by your local authority, EASA etc., etc. - then great, no issue, and more kudos to 'em if they can afford that....don't think anyone would disagree?.

HOWEVER....

If your a Private Operation, boss (or whoever), flies his chums, randoms etc., on his aircraft AND their is a financial contribution in some form - well, then sod you, you damn well need to get caught, and the book thrown at you fully IMHO, as it makes a mockery of all the requirements and cost that Operators with AOC's have to meet, and i'd be pretty pissy too if that was the case......just because you feel you meet (or exceed) current legislative needs, requirements or whatever, and think it's a good idea to make some hush money, don't make it right - if you want to make the money, invest the money, and join the other AOC Operators and play ball.....

F/o

[Gulfstreamaviator]

It is very common for the use of his aircraft to be extended to his political friends, his extended family, his brothers friends, to say nothing of his many company co directors.


If one of the big mans jets arrived in Paris and each passenger was "asked" for the relationship to the owner, ( an off shore company several layers deep) then I suspect a (un) diplomatic note would be very fast in arriving.

Flynowpaylater, does buying dinner in Paris count as payment in kind......

F.O. feel free to ask the passengers if they have contributed to the owner, or loaned him a house or two, or whatever.

As Mutt stated, when they are that big, the extended family alone can be many hundred, or even thousands, to say nothing of "friends", and acquaintances.


glf

[His dudeness]

All the time people break the law by offering charters without an AOC, then the authorities and the genuine charter operators will try and get it stopped. Unlike the corporate, which is bankrolled by a rich owner or company, the charter operator is trying to make a business out of flying people around. To do this, an AOC is required, which as we all know, costs a fortune to get and maintain. Why would AOC holders simply stand back and watch a non certified aircraft nick the business?

Not every corporate operator performs illegal charters....but every illegal charter is performed by a corporate operator. If the corporate end of the industry is incapable of regulating itself, then the authorities will have to do it for them.

If you want to offer your aircraft and pilots to fly them, to a 3rd party, get an AOC. It's pretty simple. If you don't want to get an AOC, don't offer your aircraft and/or pilots to 3rd parties.

Can YOU proof this ? IF you can, tell the CAA and call the police.

Now lets imagine you, Mr.FNPL, had say a VW bus cause you have a big family and a lot of friends. Lets assume you would take some of your friends along for a ride. Now imagine that you could be questioned by police at every drive you take what the relations between you and your "passengers" are... would you like this ? Would you think its approbiate ? Would you think that just because - I think - very few VW bus owners illegally charter out their VWs that every VW bus owner needs to be hosed with reulations ?

If one offers his services to the public without being allowed to do so - he needs punishing. But I don´t want to be thrown in the same basket.

If you argue towards a point where someone is a suspect because he sets his foot in a non AOC airplane you should think again. (as in "beware what you wish for")

And by the way, there are many AOC holders that break regulations, that I could argue that if the sector is unable to regulate itself, then...blablabla.

I have been flying air taxi for 15+ years and I have seen very, very few flights that I thought that they could be sort of... outside the regs.

I´m in corperate now for 6+ years and have seen very few flights that could be outside the regs.

As I said before, I think its blown out of proportion big time.

And no, we don´t do illegal charters.

[First.officer]

I have to say I agree with the point(s) made regarding asking every person on-board a Private Flight - its not realistically possible to do that, and not really desirable either for reasons mentioned earlier in others postings - my issue would be with the more blatant violators that are allegedly operating and advertising "grey" charters, and if the advertising such as an earlier mentioned company on this thread, really, really was carrying out charters without the proper paperwork in place etc., that would really be IMHO disgusting. That's the kind of thing that I personally can't stomach :yuk:

F/o

[mutt]

We don't operate under the equivalent of FAR125, but if we did, then the owner is permitted to charge reasonable costs to anyone who travels on the aircraft. Maybe that isn't permitted under JAA rules, but it is legal for some non European operators.

If he has that much money, he can afford an AOC then. Sure he can afford an AOC, but why would he want one?

Mutt

[flynowpaylater]

Now lets imagine you, Mr.FNPL, had say a VW bus cause you have a big family and
a lot of friends. Lets assume you would take some of your friends along for a
ride. Now imagine that you could be questioned by police at every drive you take
what the relations between you and your "passengers" are... would you like this
? Would you think its approbiate ? Would you think that just because - I think -
very few VW bus owners illegally charter out their VWs that every VW bus owner
needs to be hosed with reulations ?

HA ha Dudeness - I DO own a VW bus!!!
I get your point. But if I were to hang outside a nightclub, or station, or airport terminal picking up passengers in my VW bus and charging them for the journey then the local taxi drivers would probably have something to say would you think? As would the authorities.

The people who post on Pprune in reality are probably not those who do IPT. The risky ones are those who pursued someone to buy a small jet or turbo prop, telling them that they can get "additional" income from short term "leases". This projected income then forms part of the business plan to justify buying the aircraft in the first place. This then often escalates because the running costs of the aircraft have been under estimated, leaving a black hole in the finances that needs filling. I'm sorry to say that this is more wide spread than we all care to think. As I said before, if the corporate world can't regulate itself, then the authorities will step in.

Smoke out the minority and protect your way of life.

FNPL

[His dudeness]

But if I were to hang outside a nightclub, or station, or airport terminal picking up passengers in my VW bus and charging them for the journey then the local taxi drivers would probably have something to say would you think?

As would the authorities.

Yeah, and I´m not against THAT. I'm not against making the law work its way (after all, its already illegal to charter out without an AOC)
The way to get proof and justice done is where I say what EBAA are having in their questionaire is partly outragious and totally inacceptable.

All I say is, when "Airpolice" (whoever that may be, police, customs, SAFA checkers, ATC etc.etc.) would have PERMISSION to check/question WITHOUT reasonable suspicion, then I object.

I'm sorry to say that this is more wide spread than we all care to think.

Is there ANY evidence to that ? Just because someone says its so, doesn`t mean anything. As I said before, I can´t say I´ve witnessed many flights that I thought are suspicious. (not that I ever particuliarly cared... I had way more issues with the shoddy AOC holders)

As for filling the black hole... if you look at the cost of the airplane privately operated and then how much one would have to charge to fill in the gap I´d say you could possibly get a smaller loss, but not make money from it. (at least not with a relatively new airplane) And how much would the difference between an illegal and a legal be for the "client" ? Looking at the margins AOC operators usually make that can´t be too much of a difference IMO...

I suspect we won´t agree on this and thus I rest my case now.

Good car you have btw. :D

[Kerosene]

If I recall right, commercial use is defined as 'for reward or hire'. Nothing stops a private aircraft owner however from cost sharing.

So, as long as there is no profit involved, no AOC should be required, unlike some here have stated.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[flynowpaylater]

Good car you have btw. :D


More of a hobby than a car. The old girl is a T2 air cooled.

Sorry to go off piste...

You're right though about how to police it. At the end of the day our friends at EASA seem unable to deal with these simple things. They just want everyone to be like an airline so it's easier to stay below the radar. A simple system of some accountabilty and operating procedures for corporate operators of complex types would be easy and cheap to implement. This way, the bottom end would have to raise their game and the top end would benefit from already doing it properly.

My comment on the black hole is more reference to the managing of the financials and maintenance. I've met a lot of people who under estimate what these machines cost to keep in the air in good condition AOC or not.

[His dudeness]

The old girl is a T2 air cooled.

Had a VW Type 3 station wagon ('Variant') myself, a 73 model with the 1.6 litre /54 horses engine. IIRC thats the one the T2 has as well...? Although they built em with the 1.5 ltr / 45 hp as well, didn´t they ?

A simple system of some accountabilty and operating procedures for corporate operators of complex types would be easy and cheap to implement.

EASA-Ops will contain some of that methinks. However, if one wants to betray the system, he does it. No way we can implement something workable that solves that issue - that is life I suppose....

[mutt]

Saudi Arabia is in the process of implementing their own aviation regulations rather than accepting the FAA regulations. In the new regulations, the only aircraft that will be allowed to operated under Part 91 are small aircraft, all others will be required to be operated under 121/125 or 135. So all jet operators must have an AOC of some type.

This however won't stop 125 operators from operating at cost and charging accordingly.