PPL Passenger Limit in Australia
PPL Passenger Limit in Australia
Is there a passenger limit for a PPL holder in Australia? Looks like there was a limit of 5 passengers + 1 crew (i.e. 6 in total). But I cannot find this in the latest CAR Compilation 92?
Before
Compilation 91 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020C00784)
CAR 2 (7A)An aircraft that carries persons on a flight, otherwise than in accordance with a fixed schedule between terminals, is employed in a private operation if: (a) public notice of the flight has not been given by any form of public advertisement or announcement; and
(b) the number of persons on the flight, including the operating crew, does not exceed 6; and
Today
Compilation 92 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021C01179) - I do not see see any more definition for "private operations" - in fact seems unhelpful to even figure out what a private operation is!
Edit and Update
Indeed that part has been repealed and the definition of private operation has been replaced and defined in the CASR Dictionary (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021C01179).
OK I had too much time on my hands...private operation: an operation of an aircraft is a private operation if the operation is not one of the following:
(a) an operation that is required to be conducted under the authority of an AOC under Part 119, 129 or 131 or regulation 206 of CAR;
(b) an operation that is required to be conducted under the authority of an aerial work certificate under Part 138;
(c) Part 141 flight training (within the meaning of Part 141);
(d) a Part 142 activity (within the meaning of Part 142);
(e) an adventure flight for a limited category aircraft;
(f) a specialised balloon operation that is conducted for hire or reward;
(g) an operation authorised by a New Zealand AOC with ANZA privileges that is in force for Australia;
(h) an operation under a permission under subsection 25(2) or (3) (non‑scheduled flights by foreign registered aircraft) or section 27A (permission for operation of foreign registered aircraft without AOC) of the Act.
So it does seem that there is no more passenger limit for a PPL holder (which brings it in-line with other jurisdictions)
Before
Compilation 91 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020C00784)
CAR 2 (7A)An aircraft that carries persons on a flight, otherwise than in accordance with a fixed schedule between terminals, is employed in a private operation if: (a) public notice of the flight has not been given by any form of public advertisement or announcement; and
(b) the number of persons on the flight, including the operating crew, does not exceed 6; and
Today
Compilation 92 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021C01179) - I do not see see any more definition for "private operations" - in fact seems unhelpful to even figure out what a private operation is!
Edit and Update
Indeed that part has been repealed and the definition of private operation has been replaced and defined in the CASR Dictionary (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021C01179).
OK I had too much time on my hands...private operation: an operation of an aircraft is a private operation if the operation is not one of the following:
(a) an operation that is required to be conducted under the authority of an AOC under Part 119, 129 or 131 or regulation 206 of CAR;
(b) an operation that is required to be conducted under the authority of an aerial work certificate under Part 138;
(c) Part 141 flight training (within the meaning of Part 141);
(d) a Part 142 activity (within the meaning of Part 142);
(e) an adventure flight for a limited category aircraft;
(f) a specialised balloon operation that is conducted for hire or reward;
(g) an operation authorised by a New Zealand AOC with ANZA privileges that is in force for Australia;
(h) an operation under a permission under subsection 25(2) or (3) (non‑scheduled flights by foreign registered aircraft) or section 27A (permission for operation of foreign registered aircraft without AOC) of the Act.
So it does seem that there is no more passenger limit for a PPL holder (which brings it in-line with other jurisdictions)
Last edited by zegnaangelo; 7th Dec 2022 at 08:22. Reason: Found the answer
It used to be 5 pax if cost sharing.
Any more than that, the pilot would bear the full cost.
The saying as it went was that you could get hold of A380 and fly it on your PPL with 500 passengers as long as you paid for it all yourself.
Any more than that, the pilot would bear the full cost.
The saying as it went was that you could get hold of A380 and fly it on your PPL with 500 passengers as long as you paid for it all yourself.
Alas, as always, the answer is not so simple. (And, as always, the persistent folklore that there was a passenger limit on cost sharing flights under the 'old' rules is just that - persistent.)
Under the 'new' oh-so-simple rules, the answer also depends on whether the registered operator of the aircraft is or is not an individual. So, before you go on a jolly as PIC with a private licence and a large bunch of mates, you need first to know whether the registered operator of the aircraft is a human or not. (We all look up the register to check whether the registered operator of the aircraft we hire is a human or a company, don't we?) Be careful if the registered operator of the aircraft is a corporate entity rather than you as an individual.
And, Squawk, please let me know your view on the maximum number of passengers I can carry, as PIC with a private licence, on a Cessna 208:
- whose registered operator is a corporate entity, and
- whose registered operator is me as an individual.
Under the 'new' oh-so-simple rules, the answer also depends on whether the registered operator of the aircraft is or is not an individual. So, before you go on a jolly as PIC with a private licence and a large bunch of mates, you need first to know whether the registered operator of the aircraft is a human or not. (We all look up the register to check whether the registered operator of the aircraft we hire is a human or a company, don't we?) Be careful if the registered operator of the aircraft is a corporate entity rather than you as an individual.
(1) A passenger transport operation is an operation of an aircraft that involves the carriage of passengers, whether or not cargo is also carried on the aircraft.
(2) Despite subclause (1), an operation is not a passenger transport operation if the operation is:
(a) an operation of an aircraft with a special certificate of airworthiness; or
(b) a cost‑sharing flight; or
(c) a medical transport operation; or
(d) if the registered operator of an aircraft is an individual—an operation of the aircraft:
(i) that involves the carriage of that individual; and
(ii) does not also involve the carriage of other passengers; or
(e) if the registered operator of an aircraft is an individual—an operation of the aircraft:
(i) that involves the carriage of that individual; and
(ii) involves the carriage of other passengers; and
(iii) for which no payment or reward is made or given in relation to the carriage of the other passengers or cargo.
(2) Despite subclause (1), an operation is not a passenger transport operation if the operation is:
(a) an operation of an aircraft with a special certificate of airworthiness; or
(b) a cost‑sharing flight; or
(c) a medical transport operation; or
(d) if the registered operator of an aircraft is an individual—an operation of the aircraft:
(i) that involves the carriage of that individual; and
(ii) does not also involve the carriage of other passengers; or
(e) if the registered operator of an aircraft is an individual—an operation of the aircraft:
(i) that involves the carriage of that individual; and
(ii) involves the carriage of other passengers; and
(iii) for which no payment or reward is made or given in relation to the carriage of the other passengers or cargo.
- whose registered operator is a corporate entity, and
- whose registered operator is me as an individual.
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 7th Dec 2022 at 10:00.
Seems pretty clear in my mind :-)
I read it that:
If I am the aircraft operator, the flight is private if I am onboard with no other passengers, but means I can be flown by my pilots and crew in my private C208.
I can also take other passengers on my private C208, as long as they aren’t paying for their seat and as long as I am onboard.
If the C208 is owned by my company, it is classed as a passenger transport operation.
LB, I’m thinking that there is no passenger limit for my privately operated C208. If it’s owned by my company it’s a moot point based on the above paragraph.
I read it that:
If I am the aircraft operator, the flight is private if I am onboard with no other passengers, but means I can be flown by my pilots and crew in my private C208.
I can also take other passengers on my private C208, as long as they aren’t paying for their seat and as long as I am onboard.
If the C208 is owned by my company, it is classed as a passenger transport operation.
LB, I’m thinking that there is no passenger limit for my privately operated C208. If it’s owned by my company it’s a moot point based on the above paragraph.
If the C208 is owned by my company, it is classed as a passenger transport operation.
LB, I’m thinking that there is no passenger limit for my privately operated C208. If it’s owned by my company it’s a moot point based on the above paragraph.
If the C208 is owned by a company, the only circumstances in which the aircraft can be flown with any passengers without the operation being classed as a "passenger transport operation" are those in (a), (b) and (c). Best to look at the definition of the term in (b).
A type rated Boeing 747 PPL can fly with 400 POB so long as its a private flight ... no paying punters!
Just ****en tell us LB, you're the lawyer.
(PS: Under the new rules, "passenger transport operations" are subject to either Part 121 or Part 135.)
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 7th Dec 2022 at 19:56. Reason: Added the PS.
It's all very simple. Here's the 'Q&A':
Can I, as a private pilot, lawfully fly a PC12 with 8 mates on board?
Yes, if one of your mates on board is the registered operator of the PC12 and no payment or reward is made or given in relation to the carriage of the passengers.
No, if none of your mates on board is the registered operator of the PC12.
My mate was the registered operator of the PC 12 last week but, on his accountant’s advice, sold it to a $1 company of which I’m the sole director and now the company is the registered operator of the PC12. The company hires the aircraft to me at an arm’s length rate. Can I lawfully fly it as PIC this week with 8 same mates on board?
No. The registered operator is no longer an individual. The aircraft has a maximum seat configuration in excess of 6.
How did the change in registered operator from my mate to my $1 company make the operation unsafe?
Answer: [TBA]
Can I cost share a flight on the PC12 with me as PIC with only 1 passenger?
No. The aircraft has a maximum seat configuration of more than 6.
What if I remove 3 of the seats?
No. The aircraft still has a maximum seat configuration of 9.
So if the company sells the aircraft back to my mate who again becomes registered operator, it will again become ‘safe’ for me as a private pilot to fly my 8 mates around, provided my mate is on board and there’s no payment or reward?
Yes.
My $1 company buys a Bonanza, becomes registered operator and hires it to me at an arm’s length rate. Can I fly myself and 3 mates around as a private pilot?
Yes, provided you are not remunerated and you pay at least one quarter of the direct costs of the flight.
So I can be rewarded but not remunerated?
Yes, reward is not mentioned in the definition of cost-sharing flight.
Why’s it OK for me to be rewarded for a cost-sharing flight in an aircraft whose registered operator is someone else but not if I am the registered operator of the aircraft and didn’t cost share?
Answer: [TBA]
So just to be clear, provided the aircraft I hire has a maximum seat configuration of 6 or less and I am not remunerated for the flight and I at least pay my share of the direct costs, I can do that as a private pilot?
Yes.
What if all of my mates pay my $1 company e.g. double their share of the fixed costs of the flight?
That’s you being remunerated.
No it’s not. My company is being remunerated.
Well… you are one and the same.
No I'm not. If I were, you’d treat me as the registered operator but you don’t.
And so on...
You see: Simple!
Can I, as a private pilot, lawfully fly a PC12 with 8 mates on board?
Yes, if one of your mates on board is the registered operator of the PC12 and no payment or reward is made or given in relation to the carriage of the passengers.
No, if none of your mates on board is the registered operator of the PC12.
My mate was the registered operator of the PC 12 last week but, on his accountant’s advice, sold it to a $1 company of which I’m the sole director and now the company is the registered operator of the PC12. The company hires the aircraft to me at an arm’s length rate. Can I lawfully fly it as PIC this week with 8 same mates on board?
No. The registered operator is no longer an individual. The aircraft has a maximum seat configuration in excess of 6.
How did the change in registered operator from my mate to my $1 company make the operation unsafe?
Answer: [TBA]
Can I cost share a flight on the PC12 with me as PIC with only 1 passenger?
No. The aircraft has a maximum seat configuration of more than 6.
What if I remove 3 of the seats?
No. The aircraft still has a maximum seat configuration of 9.
So if the company sells the aircraft back to my mate who again becomes registered operator, it will again become ‘safe’ for me as a private pilot to fly my 8 mates around, provided my mate is on board and there’s no payment or reward?
Yes.
My $1 company buys a Bonanza, becomes registered operator and hires it to me at an arm’s length rate. Can I fly myself and 3 mates around as a private pilot?
Yes, provided you are not remunerated and you pay at least one quarter of the direct costs of the flight.
So I can be rewarded but not remunerated?
Yes, reward is not mentioned in the definition of cost-sharing flight.
Why’s it OK for me to be rewarded for a cost-sharing flight in an aircraft whose registered operator is someone else but not if I am the registered operator of the aircraft and didn’t cost share?
Answer: [TBA]
So just to be clear, provided the aircraft I hire has a maximum seat configuration of 6 or less and I am not remunerated for the flight and I at least pay my share of the direct costs, I can do that as a private pilot?
Yes.
What if all of my mates pay my $1 company e.g. double their share of the fixed costs of the flight?
That’s you being remunerated.
No it’s not. My company is being remunerated.
Well… you are one and the same.
No I'm not. If I were, you’d treat me as the registered operator but you don’t.
And so on...
You see: Simple!
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 7th Dec 2022 at 20:33.
The following 2 users liked this post by Lead Balloon:
LB…………
Brilliant!
Straya, the land of the free. I don’t confess to know a teeny weenie bit of the new rules and was easily enough confused with the old ones. These ones look like so much fun! Would an FOI give advice?
Brilliant!
Straya, the land of the free. I don’t confess to know a teeny weenie bit of the new rules and was easily enough confused with the old ones. These ones look like so much fun! Would an FOI give advice?
Try getting insurance approval for a PPL for anything big . There is a reason why John Travolta got his commercial license. The insurance company requirements for approvals are tougher than the regulations . Unless you are rich enough to self insure . Then you only need post a few million in bond like the Government when they self insure .
The following users liked this post:
The following 2 users liked this post by megle2:
I dont have the source legislation and have not traced it through
1. But why is the 6 seater Bonanza not considered a passenger transport operation in this case? Is it because aircraft 6 seats or less do not fall under the regime of a passenger transport operation (but under your extract, it does not provide a carve out - so definitionally it captures me and grandma et al going out for a scenic joy flight)
2. Taking your scenario further, I would argue that even if the PC12 was owned by a company, it could legally be flown with you and your mate under the carve out for a (1) (b) "cost sharing flight"
1. But why is the 6 seater Bonanza not considered a passenger transport operation in this case? Is it because aircraft 6 seats or less do not fall under the regime of a passenger transport operation (but under your extract, it does not provide a carve out - so definitionally it captures me and grandma et al going out for a scenic joy flight)
2. Taking your scenario further, I would argue that even if the PC12 was owned by a company, it could legally be flown with you and your mate under the carve out for a (1) (b) "cost sharing flight"
This thread has given me a headache.
Under the "old regs" CAR206 I think it was, there was provision for operating and aircraft privately (PVT) for a business purposes,
(carriage of staff, tools, equipment) as long as it wasn't operated on an AWK, CHTR or RPT basis.
The aircraft had to be owned / hired by the business or individual doing the hauling. Worked well in the outback.
Does anyone know if such a provision exists in Part 61 land?
And yes I have tried looking but find the new simpered regs anything but. Good job CASA.
BAz
Under the "old regs" CAR206 I think it was, there was provision for operating and aircraft privately (PVT) for a business purposes,
(carriage of staff, tools, equipment) as long as it wasn't operated on an AWK, CHTR or RPT basis.
The aircraft had to be owned / hired by the business or individual doing the hauling. Worked well in the outback.
Does anyone know if such a provision exists in Part 61 land?
And yes I have tried looking but find the new simpered regs anything but. Good job CASA.
BAz
1. You need the source legislation and you need to trace it through.
2. In the scenarios I gave, the operation of the Bonanza is not a passenger transport operation as defined, even though passengers are in fact carried in the scenarios I gave. So much depends on the individual facts. See answer to question 1.
3. You evidently haven't read the definition of flights that are considered "cost sharing". I chose an aircraft with a maximum seat configuration of 9, for a reason. See answer to question 1.
1. But why is the 6 seater Bonanza not considered a passenger transport operation in this case? Is it because aircraft 6 seats or less do not fall under the regime of a passenger transport operation (but under your extract, it does not provide a carve out - so definitionally it captures me and grandma et al going out for a scenic joy flight)
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 8th Dec 2022 at 02:34.
This thread has given me a headache.
Under the "old regs" CAR206 I think it was, there was provision for operating and aircraft privately (PVT) for a business purposes,
(carriage of staff, tools, equipment) as long as it wasn't operated on an AWK, CHTR or RPT basis.
The aircraft had to be owned / hired by the business or individual doing the hauling. Worked well in the outback.
Does anyone know if such a provision exists in Part 61 land?
And yes I have tried looking but find the new simpered regs anything but. Good job CASA.
BAz
Under the "old regs" CAR206 I think it was, there was provision for operating and aircraft privately (PVT) for a business purposes,
(carriage of staff, tools, equipment) as long as it wasn't operated on an AWK, CHTR or RPT basis.
The aircraft had to be owned / hired by the business or individual doing the hauling. Worked well in the outback.
Does anyone know if such a provision exists in Part 61 land?
And yes I have tried looking but find the new simpered regs anything but. Good job CASA.
BAz
If an operation falls within the definition of "passenger transport operation", it falls within the scope of Part 121 or Part 135. PPL PIC verboten.
If an operation does not fall within the definition of "passenger transport operation", the answer to the question whether a PPL can be PIC depends...
Good luck.
The definition of "passenger transport operation" I've quoted above is in the Dictionary in the CASRs.
If an operation falls within the definition of "passenger transport operation", it falls within the scope of Part 121 or Part 135. PPL PIC verboten.
If an operation does not fall within the definition of "passenger transport operation", the answer to the question whether a PPL can be PIC depends...
Good luck.
If an operation falls within the definition of "passenger transport operation", it falls within the scope of Part 121 or Part 135. PPL PIC verboten.
If an operation does not fall within the definition of "passenger transport operation", the answer to the question whether a PPL can be PIC depends...
Good luck.
The definition of "passenger transport operation" I've quoted above is in the Dictionary in the CASRs.
If an operation falls within the definition of "passenger transport operation", it falls within the scope of Part 121 or Part 135. PPL PIC verboten.
If an operation does not fall within the definition of "passenger transport operation", the answer to the question whether a PPL can be PIC depends...
Good luck.
If an operation falls within the definition of "passenger transport operation", it falls within the scope of Part 121 or Part 135. PPL PIC verboten.
If an operation does not fall within the definition of "passenger transport operation", the answer to the question whether a PPL can be PIC depends...
Good luck.
Per CASR Dictionary Part 1.
A cost-sharing flight can only be definitionally conducted in an airplane with 6pob or less on board,
Hence, If i rent a C172 plane from a commercial flight school and pay for at least my share, that is allowed.
Edit think I found the answer.
Per CASR Dictionary Part 1.
A cost-sharing flight can only be definitionally conducted in an airplane with 6pob or less on board,
Hence, If i rent a C172 plane from a commercial flight school and pay for at least my share, that is allowed.
Per CASR Dictionary Part 1.
A cost-sharing flight can only be definitionally conducted in an airplane with 6pob or less on board,
Hence, If i rent a C172 plane from a commercial flight school and pay for at least my share, that is allowed.
The actual words used in the legislation are important. The element of the definition of "cost sharing" to which you referred is not about the number of POB. It's about the maximum seat configuration of the aircraft.
Thus, there is no such thing (under the new rules) as a "cost sharing" flight in an aircraft that has a maximum seat configuration of e.g. 9, even if there are only e.g. 2 POB on board. Again, that's why I chose the particular scenarios.
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 8th Dec 2022 at 05:34.
You're nearly there.
The actual words used in the legislation are important. The element of the definition of "cost sharing" to which you referred is not about the number of POB on the aircraft. It's about the maximum seat configuration of the aircraft.
Thus, there is no such thing (under the new rules) as a "cost sharing" flight in an aircraft that has a maximum seat configuration of e.g. 9, even if there are only e.g. 2 POB on board. Again, that's why I chose the particular scenarios.
The actual words used in the legislation are important. The element of the definition of "cost sharing" to which you referred is not about the number of POB on the aircraft. It's about the maximum seat configuration of the aircraft.
Thus, there is no such thing (under the new rules) as a "cost sharing" flight in an aircraft that has a maximum seat configuration of e.g. 9, even if there are only e.g. 2 POB on board. Again, that's why I chose the particular scenarios.
What is the definition of a maximum seat configuration though? Dang, now I am getting worried that I can't rent/fly a Piper PA-32 Piper Cherokee 6 under a PPL given that it technically accommodated to fit 7 seats?