|
For the passengers the trip up is free, the trip down costs? Usual CASA intelligent reasoning imposing a fee on the forces of gravity?
Like the PPL in Cairns who some years ago dropped a load of lawn darts in IMC on the approach to RW 33 from a Cessna 402 (or was it a Navajo?), resulting in commercial airliners going every way except towards the airport? |
Originally Posted by YPJT
(Post 10427420)
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 I didn't suggest you could, but the fact remains, no specific CASA approval of individual pilots is required. And, at law, meatbombing is a private operation, as far as the CAAct 1988 and the "Rules" are concerned. And, of course, there is the little matter of non-APF operations. As you may or may not be aware, most, if not all, self administering organisations have their own rules, this is one example. Tootle pip!! |
Whilst definitely sharing the concerns that a low hour pilot taking children on fun flights may raise, I also like the idea that there is some meaning and value to having the licence itself. By that I mean, there's nothing wrong with a PPL holder taking passengers on scenic flights in my opinion. That's even the whole idea or else most of us would ever be flying alone, wouldn't we? Whether the pilot has the ability to fly consistently to the standard of their licence is obviously a totally different story and probably the only that matters. On a side note I remember the first flights taking my loved ones onboard as being more on edge than flying with the ATO. It was one of those experiences that eventually expands your comfort zone (and which I highly recommend) but where you also really realise that the passengers place this huge trust in you. That's the kind of awareness (or maturity?) I'd be looking for in the pilot, whether they have an ATPL or just a RPL.
Ultimately: if something doesn't feel right, don't do it. |
You have either passed the PPL test or you haven’t. Are we now saying that because you have only just passed the test, I’m not going to fly with you until... I’d rather fly with someone who has 100hrs, 500hrs, 5000hrs? Who is safer? A CPL with 300hrs. A PPL with 1000hrs. An airline pilot with 500hrs? We make it all too complicated! |
This chap was a PPL with plenty of hours and I would have never flown with him. A local social group had recently auctioned off a ticket for a joy-flight in his aircraft to the highest bidder. He died shortly after when he ran his 172 into a power line when doing a beat-up of his neighbors property on Christmas morning as he had done previously for a number of years. Read about that here: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp....1225-754q.html |
You still can fly meatbombs on a PPL in AU, it is a private category operation. No approvals required. |
Originally Posted by YPJT
(Post 10428459)
Can't see any reference in your statement there to the regulator.
And your point is?? Don't take my comments out of context Tootle pip!! |
Originally Posted by Squawk7700
(Post 10428341)
This chap was a PPL with plenty of hours and I would have never flown with him. A local social group had recently auctioned off a ticket for a joy-flight in his aircraft to the highest bidder. He died shortly after when he ran his 172 into a power line when doing a beat-up of his neighbors property on Christmas morning as he had done previously for a number of years. Read about that here: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp....1225-754q.html What's the strict legality of selling "tickets" for private flights anyway? Who's the emitting entity? The private pilot? The aircraft operator or owner? |
Why doesn't it pass the smell test? I used to do this for the scouts many years ago when my kids were in it, when they were having a fund raiser. I would donate an hours flight for up to 3 people. They would either make it a raffle prize or silent auction (up to them ) and they would state the flight was in a single engine 4 seat private aircraft so everyone knew what they were buying/bidding on. I would be advised who my passengers were days later and I would take it from there. Did it for a number of years too. The first time I did check with CASA first that it was legal and was told as long as I made no financial gain from it which I didn't it was fine as it was a private flight ( actually cost me the hours flying). I know of another chap who to this day still does the same for a cancer research fund raiser every year.
What's the issue here? I suspect it comes from some disgruntled CPL's who are struggling for work that think that is a job they could have. It isn't. If punters had to pay full tote odds for a flight with the profit going to a commercial enterprise they would't buy it. So no one benefits. |
[QUOTE}
What's the issue here? I suspect it comes from some disgruntled CPL's who are struggling for work that think that is a job they could have.[/QUOTE] Well, to the extent that this thread is any longer to do with my original query, that's incorrect. It's to do with my wish to feel confident in the ability (and that there's effective and regulatory monitoring) of a pilot I've never met, before I wave goodbye to my child in a light aircraft. After reading the advice gratefully received, I don't so I won't. As explained, my concern was heightened by recent events in Europe where the pilot, the CAA & FAA all clearly failed to protect poor Mr Sala, which set me wondering whether the same sad story could happen here, in particular in the context of "private" flights where money has changed hands. |
And you have every right to do so if you don't feel comfortable about the pilot and or aircraft. Just as you or I have about jumping into a car with unknown driver. ( one reason I won't use UBER ). But that's me thousands do.
Best comparison I have heard between surface and air transport about safety and control is : Airlines think Railways, Private aircraft think private cars, Commercial GA think everything from taxi's to buses/trucks depending on size, Ultralights to homebuilts think motorcycles. Just pick the level of safety you are happy to go with. But don't knock those who are happy to accept a lower level on any given day. |
Originally Posted by mostlytossas
(Post 10428907)
But don't knock those who are happy to accept a lower level on any given day.
Besides which, I wouldn't criticise any Joe Public user if the regulator has turned a blind eye or the pilot has knowingly misled a passenger. Sorry to use the example yet again, but Emiliano Sala in the UK had every right to believe that he was in safe hands and probably wasn't aware let alone "happy to accept a lower level", until it was too late and he made that last pre -take off tweet about his concerns. |
Originally Posted by Max Tow
(Post 10426355)
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).
|
|
Thanks, Okihara, though it was already linked in post # 7. As mentioned there, the last half dozen pages give an idea of the latest regulatory investigations if you don't have the time for 86 pages!
|
Thankyou Okihara and Max Tow.
|
For God sake, why do we make such a fuss? The kid is going for a fly in a 172 . The most dangerous part of the day will be the drive to the airport! One of the oldest and most incorrect sayings in GA is that flying light aircraft is safer than driving. By every statistical measure we can come up with to make the comparison, flying is much riskier. |
Sure but that's as blanket a statement as it gets. The source is: https://blog.aopa.org/aopa/2009/02/2...ing-a-car-not/. Not very deep, statistically speaking that is.
In the Melbourne basin area, the air must be safer than the road if the number of people driving and texting at 80 km/h on the Nepean Hwy is any measure to go by. |
Originally Posted by Clearedtoreenter
(Post 10430540)
Max I don’t think ‘where money has changed hands’ is the issue. Even in poor Mr Sala’s case, in that aircraft, if it was fully serviceable, with a properly licensed pilot, acting within the law, that fight should have been safe, whether money was paid or not. I was once familiar with an organisation of the type you describe. Yes, the legality of the organisation’s private/cost sharing might be questionable. But they used private pilots (who paid some proportion of the flight costs) for flying sort of ‘fare paying’ children from a young persons organisation, where the flights were advertised. They flew thousands of children around the block over many years and as far as I know had no serious issues. They were very well organised and pilots were well trained and checked by a high ranking instructor very regularly before they were allowed to take part. I believe CASA were aware of this operation and gave at least tacit approval. Unfortunately, this organisation suffered some very badly managed political problems and whist they did have an AOC and training approvals I have no idea how or whether they operate now as I have moved far away. I am not implying that this is/was the organisation you might be thinking of. There are a few such organisations. |
Whether or not money changed hands in strict accordance with the private cost sharing regulations or not, it does not mean that said flight was any more unsafe than a bonafide charter. Plenty of legal charters have crashed too. I think some are missing the essential point. Is the aircraft and pilot safe? Will the intended flight be able to be completed safely given weather, fuel, load, time, daylight, terrain etc. If in doubt don't go. Same same for a charter as well. My 2 cents.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 13:15. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.