Too old to [be paid to...] fly ??
Here's a question of legality for you:
- Pilot X is over 60, has a CPL(H) and an FI(H)
- Passed previous medical with flying colours
- Owns own aircraft
- Runs own Company X Aerial Work Services Ltd. performing aerial photo, inspections, etc.
- Cameraman / Observer / etc is employed directly by Company X
1) As X is over 60, X CAN'T fly single pilot Commercial Flights (not allowed to receive renumeration), although Co-jockey of twin pilot is ok - AGREED no problem - law is clear
2) Aerial work is NOT classed as AOC work and therefore no AOC is required to be held - AGREED no problem - law is clear
3) CAN'T fly aerial work as it is argued (guess who) that X will be receiving renumeration for the flying (albeit that our common understanding of aerial work requirements is met: i.e. no fare-paying pax on board, invoices through Company X, etc) - huh ?
HOWEVER ...
4) CAN instruct using valid FI(H) and therefore CAN be paid to fly !! - double huh ? - seems to contradict point 3 !!
Questions:
- How can one be paid to instruct, over 60, but not be paid to fly under aerial work?
- Aren't there a "number" of older pilots out there instructing / performing aerial work over 60 (please do NOT grass yourselves up !) ?
- Where is the consistency, or am I being fed a load of old "bunny" and its a lack of understanding within the Campaign Against Aviation ?
Incidentally, this person is NOT me - I am just trying to clear up the understanding of the legal position and wondering how much other lack of understanding exists out there in industry.
I would like to think this will generate a hot debate identifying how unclear the Aerial Work section of air law is.
Answers on the back of a fag packet, postcard, PPrune thread, etc ...