CPL question regarding common carriage

[9692ou]

Came across a question earlier that I wasn't too sure about providing services as a commercial pilot.

Say I just got my commercial rating and I had a passenger approach me offering $500 to fly him down to the Dallas area in his plane. Am I able to legally do this?

I'm confused since it appears that I'm not necessarily holding out my services to him, but it seems to fall under the definition of common carriage..

[this is my username]

According to my CPL examiner the correct answer is "no, you can't do it" - which puzzled me too as there was no element of "holding out". He did say that if the passenger offered you a contract to fly him to Dallas once a week for 6 months then that would be OK .......

[selfin]

On the assumption that the legitimacy of the friendship is sufficiently demonstrable to detract from any impression of holding out then the flight, for which you are compensated, is simply a private carriage commercial operation.

14 CFR 119 applies to any person operating (or intending to operate) a civil aircraft as a ... commercial operator ... in air commerce. Assuming the aircraft has fewer than 20 approved passenger seats and has a payload capacity of under 6 000 lbs, then the only exemptions available to Part 119 (disregarding those under 14 CFR 129, 133, 137, 139, 375, etc) are operations coming under Subpart K of Part 91 or 119.1(6)(e).

Furthermore, for noncommon carriage operations where passengers/cargo are carried 119.23 is applicable:

Part 119.23
(b) Each person who conducts noncommon carriage (except as provided in §91.501(b) of this chapter) or private carriage operations for compensation or hire with airplanes having a passenger-seat configuration of less than 20 seats, excluding each crewmember seat, and a payload capacity of less than 6,000 pounds shall—

(1) Comply with the certification and operations specifications requirements in subpart C of this part;

(2) Conduct those operations in accordance with the requirements of part 135 of this chapter, except for those requirements applicable only to commuter operations; and

(3) Be issued operations specifications in accordance with those requirements.

For more information see the FAA Office of Chief Counsel's legal interpretation provided to Wagner, Feb 25th 2010: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2010/Wagner.pdf

You'll find more information in FSIMS.

P.S. If you do not log the hours and split the operating costs pro-rata then it is not a commercial operation and 119 will not apply - provided you are not holding out.

[B2N2]

The examiner is correct.
Accepting this flight indicates a willingness to fly for anybody and take them anywhere, pretty much the definition of common carriage.
What would stop you from doing another 27 flights just like this with 27 other people?
Any "one time" flight indicates trouble unless you hold a 135 certificate.

The FAA undersatnds you cannot live of one flight a week so there is no formal limit to the number of private carriage contracts you can have but more then 4-6 will raise suspicion.

[MarkerInbound]

Wait a minute, the question is can the OP be paid to fly the owner's plane. He's not supplying the plane. If a commercial pilot can not sell his services every private part 91 King Air and Lear that's not owner flown would be illegal.

[Tinstaafl]

That's what I was thinking. There are a lot of commercial & ATP pilots getting paid to fly owners & their guests without having to meet air carrier requirements.

[B2N2]

Wait a minute, the question is can the OP be paid to fly the owner's plane. He's not supplying the plane. If a commercial pilot can not sell his services every private part 91 King Air and Lear that's not owner flown would be illegal.


No it's not.
On the original question the scenario was that the pilot was approached by the owner for a one-time flight in his airplane.
Which is illegal as it is common carriage.

If I have a Lear jet and ask you to work for me you are employed and it becomes private carriage as you and I now have an agreement you fly me whenever I want to. Not a one time deal.

[mad_jock]

What happens if you thought you were going to be employed and then after one trip you were sacked for being :mad:?

And how does that work with freelance ferry pilots?

[MarkerInbound]

91.501(a) says personal transportation for the operator of the aircraft falls under part 91.

[peterh337]

Yes; the scenario where the aircraft owner hires a CPL (in practice obviously a CPL/IR) to act as a hired pilot, is very common, and that is how most privately owned jets operate around the world.

It is legal under N-reg (it is a Part 91 operation) and similarly under G-reg where an AOC is not required. This is a principle established worldwide, for many years.

But the pilot should not be supplying the aircraft :)

In practice the rule is sometimes sailed close to the wind, because many weathy individuals are not knowledgeable enough to choose and thereafter operate an aircraft suitable for their mission profile etc, so they may contract a pilot to locate the aircraft and generally look after it. That is OK but the pilot has to be very careful to not pay for anything himself; the "wealthy individual" has to be the one signing all the contracts and making all the payments.

[B2N2]

If I get fired after one flight, too bad soo sad, I better have a contract proving that this one flight was conducted under "Private carriage".

That is OK but the pilot has to be very careful to not pay for anything himself; the "wealthy individual" has to be the one signing all the contracts and making all the payments.

Pilots don't want to pay because they are frugal not because it's illegal.
Besides the amounts we are talking about are usually waaaaaay beyond the budget of a pilot.
I've never seen a corporate pilot advancing a $5000 fuel bill for the boss man.
Or $2000 catering including the bubbly.


And how does that work with freelance ferry pilots?

Sec. 91.501

Applicability.

[(a) This subpart prescribes operating rules, in addition to those prescribed in other subparts of this part, governing the operation of large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft of U.S. registry that are operating under subpart K of this part in operations not involving common carriage. The operating rules in this subpart do not apply to those aircraft when they are required to be operated under parts 121, 125, 129, 135, and 137 of this chapter. (Section 91.409 prescribes an inspection program for large and for turbine-powered (turbojet and turboprop) multiengine airplanes and turbine-powered rotorcraft of U.S. registry when they are operated under this part or part 129 or 137.)
(b) Operations that may be conducted under the rules in this subpart instead of those in parts 121, 129, 135, and 137 of this chapter when common carriage is not involved, include--]
(1) Ferry or training flights;(2) Aerial work operations such as aerial photography or survey, or pipeline patrol, but not including fire fighting operations;
(3) Flights for the demonstration of an airplane to prospective customers when no charge is made except for those specified in paragraph (d) of this section;
(4) Flights conducted by the operator of an airplane for his personal transportation, or the transportation of his guests when no charge, assessment, or fee is made for the transportation;

Source:
FAR Part 91 Sec. 91.501 effective as of 11/17/2003 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFar.nsf/FARSBySectLookup/91.501)

[mad_jock]

I don't have a clue about FAR's to be honest.

And I must admit that sort of thing under EU regs I would be a bit chancy on as well.

I have always thought that a CPL could be payed a fee to fly a plane anywhere as long as they don't supply the machine.

Never been in that situation so never looked into it.

Only situation is when a mate/someone asks. Can you shift this machine somewhere. I know I can do it for free with out having to cost share with a commercial license. Its never been worth from a tax declaration or bollocks factor ever charging for a ferry flight.

My bar bill is more than likely higher than the ferry fee anyway :D

[this is my username]

Oops. Missed the bit in the original post where it said it was the owner's aircraft. My reply assumed that you were supplying the aircraft. Sorry!