Originally Posted by
Lead Balloon
I think you’ll find that in the USA - as in Australia - a person can buy an aircraft (and the fuel that’s put in it) and pay a pilot to fly the person around, and that’s a private flight that can be carried out VFR. The person who buys the aircraft may have zero understanding of the risks of being flown around privately to the VFR. I wonder how the aircraft ‘knows’ the passenger (owner) is not a community service flight passenger and how the pilot resists get-home-itis.
Folks,
It is worth noting that there are some fundamental differences between the US and Australian regulations in this area.
In the above, the hire pilot would have to have a CPL, even though the operation would be Part 91 private. FAA General Counsel takes such a narrow minded view of the regulations that say , if a pilot with a historic aircraft goes to an airshow, to even accept a can of coke and a hamburger,
they must have a CPL ----- BUT ---- NONE of that position is based on risk assessment or "safety", but simply the rule that says that to receive compensation of any kind as a pilot, no matter how indirect, the said pilot must have a least a CPL.
So, it in no way relates to the position CASA is taking on Angel Flight.
Operations that can be conducted under Part 91 as Private operations are far broader than AU, for example aerial photography ---- is private, there is no Aerial Work in the US system.
Tootle pip!!