Helihub
The problem with AOC v private is the incredible expense that goes with having an AOC against the amount one makes. It is even worse when it comes to single engine VFR AOC where one has to have something like 300m of open space infront of one to take off . Somewhat defeats the object of having a helicopter in a load of instances. When I had an AOC the number of jobs we had to turn down due to the sites not being big enough was a joke. I remember one customer getting very shirty when I said no to a pick up he said "what is wrong with the system, my mate landed his R22 in my garden and it is unsafe to fly a Hughes 500 in and out."
I realise it is all about safety but if an engine is that likely to fail on take off should single engine helicopters be allowed ? There is a risk to everything we do, the probability of an engine failure on take off is so low as to be not worth talking about. I shut down my AOC as one couldn't legally make a profit doing it with all the expense, pointless auditing etc etc. Realistically to stop the Sala case happening Gatwick needs to make the costs and hoop jumping more realistic and then it would be able to control what happens out there. Seeing as that is never going to happen the problem will never go away.The law is the law, It is not illegal for someone to hire a helicopter, it is not illegal for someone to hire a jockey. It is only illegal for a jockey to offer his services, a helicopter and fuel to a punter. It would be almost impossible to draw up a law to prevent Sala case. For instance a CPL can be hired to fly an N reg ac for the" owner", but they are not strictly the owner as in most cases a trust owns the machine , so you start to see the problem for the law makers.