S300 - Share the cost anyone?

[Kopterman]

I've got about 100hrs on the Schweizer 300 and after completing my ATPL(H) Theory course, I'm looking to build around 50hrs before the CPL(H) Course. I was just wondering if anybody in the SE/London area wanted to do some shared flying?

My only request is that I'm able to log the P1 flight time towards my 155hrs needed!

Many thanks,

KM :)

[GWidgery]

I've just completed my PPL (A), and have just turned 17. I'm yet to take a flight in a rotary aircraft, and would love to try it out for a bit. My e-mail is [email protected] - Forgot to add - I live in Reading, fly from White Waltham

[Whirlybird]

There is no legal requirement in the UK to remove the controls on the passenger side. However, some schools do require that you should.

[S-Works]

There is also nothing stopping you having a go. I learnt to fly rotary by having a lot of goes on a friends. Enjoyed so went and learnt and am just negotiating to buy another R22. Ideal to fly to fly from the garden to the airfrield to get a proper airplane out! Also ideal for visiting some of my project sites.

[Abbeville]

Apols on thread drift

Which schools near London teach on the Schweizer?

[Whirlybird]

I think Biggin Hill do. Not sure who else.

Alpha Helicopters at Sheffield do....but I suppose we don't exactly qualify as near London!

[Kopterman]

I've just completed my PPL (A), and have just turned 17. I'm yet to take a flight in a rotary aircraft, and would love to try it out for a bit. My e-mail is [email protected] - Forgot to add - I live in Reading, fly from White Waltham

Sorry GWidgery, am looking for another PPL(H) who is not planning to further their studies and isn't concerned about logging P1 time.

I suggest you visit a training school and go for a trial lesson with a CFI/QHI.

Thanks,

KM

[S-Works]

You might be a bit thin on the ground with takers though buddy. As effectivly you are asking for someone else to pay for your flying. That happens after you get a job not before......:p

[S-Works]

which also would constitute illegal flight......

[pistongone]

I am looking for someone to give me some money to fly their C172 whilst i log all the hours and he doesnt say anything and sits in the back!! And as i am on my wish list, can i have 2 cakes with full cream and i want to eat them all myself!

[Whirlybird]

Why all the sarcasm and criticism? Kopterman is asking - only asking, mind you - if anyone would like to do some flying and cost share, but with him as P1 for all the flights. That's perfectly legal. And it might suit someone who wants the cheaper flying and the company, but doesn't care about the hours. It might not, but what's the harm is asking?

[Whirlybird]

As I said on the similar thread on Rotorheads, I can think of several reasons why someone might want to take up this offer....

1) A PPL(H) has lost their medical, but is likely to get it back again in a few months. He/she would like to do some flying to keep current, but naturally can't log it.
2) A pilot is in the UK, but has a foreign licence. They would like to do some flying, without paying for an instructor or jumping through all the hoops required to be P1 over here.
3) A PPL(H) can't afford to fly helicopters any more. He'd just like to occasionally, and doesn't care about logging the hours.
4) Same as number 3, but this PPL's rating has lapsed since he/she can't afford to keep it up.
5) The pilot isn't rated on the 300, but has flown it a bit and would like another go. Or his 300 rating has lapsed, perhaps.

[muffin]

Clearly you can do what you want as long as (a) you don't get caught and (b) you don't bend it.

And (c) complete all the paperwork after the flight when conditions (a) and (b) have been satisfied.

[Whirlybird]

ca flyer,

Flying Lawyer wrote on the other thread....

"I always assumed that allowing an unqualified passenger to touch the controls was illegal until my assumption was challenged by an aviation solicitor (and, coincidentally, former pro pilot). His argument was that provided the PiC retained control of the aircraft, then he was flying, not the passenger."

Is the PIC allowed to let his passenger manipulate the controls? To my knowledge, nowhere does it say that he isn't allowed to. If I, as PIC, say that I have full control of the aircraft while letting my passenger have a go, who is to say that I haven't? If you disagree, please show me where it is written that I'm not allowed to do so.

And now, will one of the mods please amalgamate these two threads so that I don't have to switch back and forth between them, since some rather interesting points are being discussed on both.

[S-Works]

I am sorry whirls but I think you are wrong. If a person is flying for the entire trip as P1 then he is being paid either cash or benefit in kind. This requires a CPL.

If the pilot logging P1 is proposing to pay the 50% cost share then fair enough then it is a cost share flight. Why would another PPL want to pay to be a passenger?

[Flying Lawyer]

(1) "I am sorry whirls but I think you are wrong."
Just out of interest, which part of what Whirly has posted do you say is wrong?

(2) If the pilot flies the entire trip as P1 and the passenger gives him cash or dinner representing 50% of the cost, why does he need a CPL?

(3) Where has Kopter said he expects to pay a smaller proportion of the cost than he's required to pay under the cost-sharing provisions?

[S-Works]

(1) "I am sorry whirls but I think you are wrong."
Just out of interest, which part of what Whirly has posted do you say is wrong?
(2) If the pilot flies the entire trip as P1 and the passenger gives him cash or dinner representing 50% of the cost, why does he need a CPL?
(3) Where has Kopter said he expects to pay a smaller proportion of the cost than he's required to pay under the cost-sharing provisions?
Read above FL, I did say if it was a 50% cost share then fair enough....

[Whirlybird]

I was always assuming a 50% cost share. Wasn't that stated somewhere? Isn't that what we're discussing? Do I have to say it in every post? Dohhhhhhhh.:( :{ :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[S-Works]

Nope there was no mention of a 50/50 that I saw hence the comments!

As usual we have gone off on a tangent! I merely pointed out that if the flying was being paid for by someone else then it coulod be construed as a taxi flight. If there was a 50/50 cost share then a private flight but then I asked who would pay 50% of a flight to let someone else log the time?

Enough said.