Paying for private flights
Thread Starter
Paying for private flights
Following the Emilio Sala crash, there's a huge stink in Europe about a blind eye having been turned to PPLs conducting commercial operations in the guise of the cost sharing exemption(see the "Accidents & Near Misses" section for the sorry saga to date).
I was therefore interested when my 8 y.o. son was invited on a $100 club excursion which apparently includes a C172 flight and saw the following: "flying activities carried out by XXX are conducted as a private flying operation and all participants share in the costs." Pardon my perhaps unjustified concern, but what documentation, if any, should I be asking for? Is this any different from buying a trial flight at a flying school?
I was therefore interested when my 8 y.o. son was invited on a $100 club excursion which apparently includes a C172 flight and saw the following: "flying activities carried out by XXX are conducted as a private flying operation and all participants share in the costs." Pardon my perhaps unjustified concern, but what documentation, if any, should I be asking for? Is this any different from buying a trial flight at a flying school?
Last edited by Max Tow; 22nd Mar 2019 at 03:55. Reason: typo
Following the Emilio Sala crash, there's a huge stink in Europe about a blind eye having been turned to PPLs conducting commercial operations in the guise of the cost sharing exemption(see the "Accidents & Near Misses" section for the sorry saga to date).
I was therefore interested when my 8 y.o. son was invited on a $100 club excursion which apparently includes a C172 flight and saw the following: "flying activities carried out by XXX are conducted as a private flying operation and all participants share in the costs." Pardon my perhaps unjustified concern, but what documentation, if any, should I be asking for? Is this any different from buying a trial flight at a flying school?
I was therefore interested when my 8 y.o. son was invited on a $100 club excursion which apparently includes a C172 flight and saw the following: "flying activities carried out by XXX are conducted as a private flying operation and all participants share in the costs." Pardon my perhaps unjustified concern, but what documentation, if any, should I be asking for? Is this any different from buying a trial flight at a flying school?
Firstly, no, it is nothing like a "trial instructional flight", which would be conducted under an Air Operators Certificate for a flying school.
"Cost sharing" is "legal" but only under defined circumstances, and cost must be shared by all on board, INCLUDING the pilot.
There is a long history of very inventive excuses/schemes to conduct disguised charters as "private flights", this may or may not be one of them, but one thing is certain, there would be no Passenger Liability Insurance in the event of injury or death. Such insurance is mandatory for all passenger operations conducted under an AOC.
In this particular case, much more detail is needed to determine whether the operation was "legal", let alone wise.
CASA (rightly, in my view) take a very dim view of disguised charters ( soon to be Part 135 Air Transport at this level) .which are private operations.
Tootle pip!!
I would not for one minute let my 8 year old son fly in said aircraft under that arrangement.
I would also voice my concerns to the other parents.
I would also advise the school of your displeasure of the arrangement.
I also would also consider contacting CASA and advising them of the details of the arrangement. If they have nothing to hide, then it won’t be an issue!
Too harsh? Probably not, but better to be safe than sorry.
I so wonder how cost sharing works when the pilot takes up say 10 plane loads of kids??? Sounds like someone with a PPL running a holiday farm for kids wanting to give them a thrill in his 172.
My children only fly with a pilot with gold bars, in a registered charter operation or flying school or with someone I trust implicitly.
I would also voice my concerns to the other parents.
I would also advise the school of your displeasure of the arrangement.
I also would also consider contacting CASA and advising them of the details of the arrangement. If they have nothing to hide, then it won’t be an issue!
Too harsh? Probably not, but better to be safe than sorry.
I so wonder how cost sharing works when the pilot takes up say 10 plane loads of kids??? Sounds like someone with a PPL running a holiday farm for kids wanting to give them a thrill in his 172.
My children only fly with a pilot with gold bars, in a registered charter operation or flying school or with someone I trust implicitly.
Thread Starter
Thanks for the replies. To clarify, which is difficult I appreciate without naming names, the organisation concerned is well regarded, has been taking kids up for years and does hold an AOC. I'm more concerned about the level of qualification required of the pilot to fly kids around as the "private" and cost sharing bits ring alarm bells (possibly unnecessarily) after poor Mr Sala. Even though I remember being scared s...less at the tender age of 14 in a Chipmunk AEF!
Thanks for the replies. To clarify, which is difficult I appreciate without naming names, the organisation concerned is well regarded, has been taking kids up for years and does hold an AOC. I'm more concerned about the level of qualification required of the pilot to fly kids around as the "private" and cost sharing bits ring alarm bells (possibly unnecessarily) after poor Mr Sala. Even though I remember being scared s...less at the tender age of 14 in a Chipmunk AEF!
Something doesn't jell here.
Either it is a private flight, or it is not, what kind of an AOC does this mob have??
If they are saying it is a private flight, cost share, that is NOT under any relevant AOC.
For the pilot, for a private operation, the only CASA qualification is to have a current Private Pilot's License, which means a valid minimum Class 2 medical certificate and recency.
Tootle pip!!
Cost sharing in the UK is more lax than in the US and Australia. In the UK you can advertise for passengers and the pilot does not have to pay an equal share. Dodgy or legit?
As this Australian operation is a private operation they can use a pilot with a PPL or RPL, but they can’t advertise for passengers. I’m with Squawk7700 on this, I would not let my kids up in such a case. It would be interesting to know how much of the $100 is for the flight. How many passengers per flight? How long Is the flight? You could then work out the hourly rate they are getting.
As this Australian operation is a private operation they can use a pilot with a PPL or RPL, but they can’t advertise for passengers. I’m with Squawk7700 on this, I would not let my kids up in such a case. It would be interesting to know how much of the $100 is for the flight. How many passengers per flight? How long Is the flight? You could then work out the hourly rate they are getting.
Thread Starter
I think the UK may close that stable door now that the horse has bolted (recent pages by far the most interesting):
Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
Advice heeded as ties in with my gut instinct so son is now off the list - I'll make it up to him & he's looking forward to the A380 in a few weeks!
Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
Advice heeded as ties in with my gut instinct so son is now off the list - I'll make it up to him & he's looking forward to the A380 in a few weeks!
What if the pilot was a freshly minted RPL at 18 years old or 75 and has 41 hours total time? Your children aren’t informed passengers... you have to make the decision for them.
Thread Starter
Fly Safe!
Some time ago, a private operation, but the pilot was a Regional Captain, the aircraft a private C-172, last flight of the day, of a series of flights at a charity open day.
Bad gust, aircraft wrecked, and the only passenger, a child, permanently disabled.
No insurance cover for TP Personal damage.
The big winners were the lawyer, of course, at the point where I ceased to have any further involvement, the combined legal expenses were already approaching $1.0M, with personal bankruptcy a real prospect for at least one involved, with further damages action ahead.
Tootle pip!!
How times change. Used to skydive in the sixties and still have the letter from the regulator giving me approval to fly skydivers as a PPL, didn't pay a dime myself while doing the flying, had to of course if I were jumping. 
Thread Starter
Yup, those were the days and I remember the same. Thalidomide babies & a commercial airliner crash every week. I think we've moved on and can still have a lot of fun. By the way, he's an only child so I don't have a spare. Querying paperwork I don't understand has made me long-lived & rich, so I'm happy to be old rather than just bold!
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Somewhere over the ocean
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cost sharing in the UK is more lax than in the US and Australia. In the UK you can advertise for passengers and the pilot does not have to pay an equal share. Dodgy or legit?
There are websites that are used for advertising these kind of flights such as Wingly, but as long as the pilot is paying their fair share they are operating within EASA rules.
Thread Starter
Under EASA rules, while the UK is still part of them anyway, it’s not permitted for a PPL holder to fly passengers and the pilot not pay equal share. I think if you actually look into the details of the link then it’s highly unlikely that the £67 the passenger paid covered anywhere near the full cost of the flight. Wet rental of Warrior is around £150 per hour so once you add landing fees it will be well in excess of £67 to operate.
There are websites that are used for advertising these kind of flights such as Wingly, but as long as the pilot is paying their fair share they are operating within EASA rules.
You still can fly meatbombs on a PPL in AU, it is a private category operation. No approvals required.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Somewhere over the ocean
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you probably already know, & if you look at the pPrune Sala thread linked above, the Malibu was flag-of-convenience N Reg, the pilot was allegedly a heavily indebted PPL, apparently not even licensed to fly at night and there's no published evidence that the he paid anything or was intending to fly the same route/time before any cost-sharing passenger climbed on board (also a requirement under FAA rules). The scenario is fairly obvious, IMHO, and no doubt a lot more will come out of the woodwork.
Leaddy,
you might not need approval from the regulator but nor can you rock up to the nearest DZ, slap your log book on the desk and say “let me fly”
https://www.apf.com.au/apf-members/a...ot-information
you might not need approval from the regulator but nor can you rock up to the nearest DZ, slap your log book on the desk and say “let me fly”
https://www.apf.com.au/apf-members/a...ot-information