Flying for charity - is it a commercial operation ?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My reply cannot be repeated here.......Muppet's
How does any of this make sense?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tropical Australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen a few ads in the employment section of the paper looking for "Salesmen" who have a PPL. The deal is to fly the company aircraft, loaded with company products, to remote communities and sell the stuff. Fair bit of "hire and reward" involved in paying the "salesman"; so how do these people get around that one if selling a photo taken on a private flight means the pilot is in breach of the regs?
For crying out loud, anyone who flies for charity (Angel Flight etc) isn't doing that to try to beat the system. Why does the Corporation Against Sensible Aviation spend so much time and energy on trying to curb such activities? Have they really lost the plot that badly or am I missing something?
For crying out loud, anyone who flies for charity (Angel Flight etc) isn't doing that to try to beat the system. Why does the Corporation Against Sensible Aviation spend so much time and energy on trying to curb such activities? Have they really lost the plot that badly or am I missing something?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen a few ads in the employment section of the paper looking for "Salesmen" who have a PPL. The deal is to fly the company aircraft, loaded with company products, to remote communities and sell the stuff.
They may well sell the stuff but do they deliver the stuff?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tropical Australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They may well sell the stuff but do they deliver the stuff?
Hey Rutan Around,
I've got no idea, nor any concerns, about whether they do sell or deliver. I just wonder why these operators can keep advertising (and presumably employ people) for these sorts of operations over and over again.
The operation itself does not sound legitimate to me regardless of the legality of the "stuff" being transported or sold. If taking a photo and selling it after a private flight has complications, and conducting private flights for charity are under the microscope, how does this type of operation keep popping up time after time without any apparent concerns from the regulators?
If this was dodgy, surely the mob against aviation would have acted before now? If it isn't dodgy, why do others get such heavy scrutiny?
Just doesn't sound reasonable to me.
Hey Rutan Around,
I've got no idea, nor any concerns, about whether they do sell or deliver. I just wonder why these operators can keep advertising (and presumably employ people) for these sorts of operations over and over again.
The operation itself does not sound legitimate to me regardless of the legality of the "stuff" being transported or sold. If taking a photo and selling it after a private flight has complications, and conducting private flights for charity are under the microscope, how does this type of operation keep popping up time after time without any apparent concerns from the regulators?
If this was dodgy, surely the mob against aviation would have acted before now? If it isn't dodgy, why do others get such heavy scrutiny?
Just doesn't sound reasonable to me.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it isn't dodgy, why do others get such heavy scrutiny?
Just doesn't sound reasonable to me.
Just doesn't sound reasonable to me.
However if a Real Estate agent takes his aircraft up and sells heaps of land from the photos but doesn't sell the photos it's ok.Go figure.
(It may be estate agents are friends of CASA as they sell airports for housing estates thus reducing flying thus increasing safety.)
What has being reasonable got to do with CASA rules?
If an employer flies a team of say plumbers to a job in his own plane it's a private flight as it should be. If in order to complete that job they sell one tap washer that they carried with them it's a commercial operation.
The current government claims to be busy helping business by removing outdated stupid laws.
Perhaps Mr Truss will sort this mess out. HA HA HA HO HO HO COUGH COUGH!!!!! Sorry about that. I know it wasn't funny.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rutan: If an employer flies a team of say plumbers to a job in his own plane it's a private flight as it should be. If in order to complete that job they sell one tap washer that they carried with them it's a commercial operation.
Are your sure?
I have flown a LAME out to field job in the 206 as private flight.
He does the job, including "selling" the parts and oil.
I would think that there would have to be commercial gain for the pilot before it became airwork or closed charter.
Are your sure?
I have flown a LAME out to field job in the 206 as private flight.
He does the job, including "selling" the parts and oil.
I would think that there would have to be commercial gain for the pilot before it became airwork or closed charter.
I know of many LAME's that fly out to remote properties to carry out maintenance etc on the clients aircraft. That is a private flight. No different to loading the van and driving to the job,tools, parts and all, and done every day of the year.
Because Baron Bernstein of Leigh didn't like people flying over his land taking pictures of his stately manor.
Seriously.
Don't try to apply objective safey criteria to try to explain the classification of operations rules. You will go barking mad.
Seriously.
Don't try to apply objective safey criteria to try to explain the classification of operations rules. You will go barking mad.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: VIC
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the comments. I really think it's sad that pilots need to have a legal background.
I have just emailed CASA. Let's see if they respond and what they say.
Will let you know about the outcome!
Cheers
I have just emailed CASA. Let's see if they respond and what they say.
Will let you know about the outcome!
Cheers
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creamy
As you know Baron Bernstein's case relied on :-
As you also would know he LOST his court case thus giving great comfort to coal miners and bringing forth the dawn of a Golden Age in Australian General Aviation. Seriously.
As you know Baron Bernstein's case relied on :-
Cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum et ad inferos (whose is the soil his is also that which is above and below it).
He did indeed lose the battle about trespass.
But, as is so often the case in these matters, he didn't lose the war.
He went on to ensure that aerial photography became a strictly regulated activity, so that there was more 'appropriate' 'control' over the people permitted to engage in this 'dangerous' activity.
But, as is so often the case in these matters, he didn't lose the war.
He went on to ensure that aerial photography became a strictly regulated activity, so that there was more 'appropriate' 'control' over the people permitted to engage in this 'dangerous' activity.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
And with all the rule changes, is an AFR for the VFR guys/girls and a instrument renewal for the IFR guys/girls PRIVATE or AIRWORK ? Or does it depend on….??
(yes I am being lazy….but when rules change you never know where all the answers are hidden)
(yes I am being lazy….but when rules change you never know where all the answers are hidden)
Actually, I may have incorrectly attributed the current aerial photography rules to Baron Bernstein (Deceased). The current words were inserted into ANR 191 in 1973. (ANR 191 was the predecessor to CARs 206 and 2(7).)
Baron B’s case wasn’t decided until 1978.
Baron B’s case wasn’t decided until 1978.
