A charity flight thread ran some months ago, and the outcome of whether to do it or not mainly hinged on the insurance question.
Altho the passenger donates a ticket cost to the charitable entity, there is still a liability/duty of care by the pilot/operator to the passengers which has to be covered. So I guess the Tiger ,chtr cat, and AOC owner pilot....to have the charity flight under his insurance could call it a chtr flight. Free to the winning pax, raffle revenue to the charity.
And for Tiger in pvt cat with a PPL donor of operating cost...how now?
Classed as 'cost sharing'? Remember CoOPs policy 1997.!! Que !!!!
Maybe we have missed the big picture. CASA is a "charity". We all donate our taxes, big time, to keep the bloody place afloat. (unfortunately)
Since CASA has "crashed" GA by regulatory neglience/lack of duty of care (see reg 206) and etc...
We the aviation industry should do a class action and sue for financial, physical and mental injury.
I wish.
But like the simple act of carrying a box of fish, CASA "lawyerism" has turned something simple into the complexities of a High Court challenge.
Why, you might ask? My take is its just standard CASA corporate disinterest, sloth, denial,neglience and neglect in doing something about rectifying 206
Do NOT do anything with the actual intent or possible intent or proposed future intent of flying in, or the utilising of, or in involvement with, to use an aeroplane/aircraft/heavier than air device without first consulting yr para-legal, solicitor, lawyer, barrister or QC..!
Aahh .. the Clever Country.