Sponsored Flying
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern England
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sponsored Flying
Hello,
If I owned an aircraft and was approached by a company to advertise them by having there name and logo on the side of the plane, in return for payment would this be allowed if I flew the aircraft when I get my PPL?
If I owned an aircraft and was approached by a company to advertise them by having there name and logo on the side of the plane, in return for payment would this be allowed if I flew the aircraft when I get my PPL?
Not so N, but still FG
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that Flyin Dutch is probably right, but note the "probably".
I would say:-
(1) this is arguably borderline (for reasons indicated below);
but
(2) it is apparently not objected to in practice by the CAA, as sponsors logos are seen on balloons, aerobatic aircraft etc.
Why borderline? Well, given that "aerial work" means:
"any purpose (other than public transport) for which an aircraft is flown if valuable consideration is given or promised in respect of the flight or the purpose of the flight"
you might argue that the sponsor's payment for the display of a logo on the aircraft is made for the purpose of having the aircraft flown displaying the logo, and is therefore consideration in respect of the flight or the purpose of the flight. If the logo was displayed on a banner towed by the aircraft, the banner tower pilot would be performing aerial work.
The counter argument is that the payment is made simply for the display of the logo on the aircraft as a physical object. The payment does not relate to any particular flight, and the sponsor may be obtaining the desired marketing benefit when the aircraft is parked. The pilot is being paid for the use of his aircraft as an advertising hoarding, not for flying. As mentioned above, some display pilots have sponsors' colours and logos on their aircraft (although I do not know if they are CPLs) but NB the fact that this is done does not necessarily guarantee that it can be done, if you see what I mean.
Things would become more clear cut if the sponsor said "I would like you to fly the sponsored aircraft to X, or overhead Y" , in which case you'd have to say no if just a PPL.
As always, free legal advice may be worth precisely what you pay for it (I hope that FD will forgive me if I add "especially when given by doctors").
PS take two aspirin and call me in the morning.
I would say:-
(1) this is arguably borderline (for reasons indicated below);
but
(2) it is apparently not objected to in practice by the CAA, as sponsors logos are seen on balloons, aerobatic aircraft etc.
Why borderline? Well, given that "aerial work" means:
"any purpose (other than public transport) for which an aircraft is flown if valuable consideration is given or promised in respect of the flight or the purpose of the flight"
you might argue that the sponsor's payment for the display of a logo on the aircraft is made for the purpose of having the aircraft flown displaying the logo, and is therefore consideration in respect of the flight or the purpose of the flight. If the logo was displayed on a banner towed by the aircraft, the banner tower pilot would be performing aerial work.
The counter argument is that the payment is made simply for the display of the logo on the aircraft as a physical object. The payment does not relate to any particular flight, and the sponsor may be obtaining the desired marketing benefit when the aircraft is parked. The pilot is being paid for the use of his aircraft as an advertising hoarding, not for flying. As mentioned above, some display pilots have sponsors' colours and logos on their aircraft (although I do not know if they are CPLs) but NB the fact that this is done does not necessarily guarantee that it can be done, if you see what I mean.
Things would become more clear cut if the sponsor said "I would like you to fly the sponsored aircraft to X, or overhead Y" , in which case you'd have to say no if just a PPL.
As always, free legal advice may be worth precisely what you pay for it (I hope that FD will forgive me if I add "especially when given by doctors").
PS take two aspirin and call me in the morning.
Last edited by FNG; 25th Jun 2004 at 07:54.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FNG,
That is the problem with these legal eagles, you turn your back on them and:
1. They get out the daggers and plant one in your back and
2. They consider themselves to be doctors!
Bloody cheek!
Anyway, 2 asprins is old fashioned now, update your manual. It is 2 paracetamols.
I'll be away from these shores for a little while, but upon my return choose your weapons for the meet at WW!
Best check that catering and their prices!
Ciao
FD
That is the problem with these legal eagles, you turn your back on them and:
1. They get out the daggers and plant one in your back and
2. They consider themselves to be doctors!
Bloody cheek!
Anyway, 2 asprins is old fashioned now, update your manual. It is 2 paracetamols.
I'll be away from these shores for a little while, but upon my return choose your weapons for the meet at WW!
Best check that catering and their prices!
Ciao
FD
Not so N, but still FG
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Custard pies at dawn, then.
Oh, they're only open between 1145 and 1215, so may have to re-schedule.
PS: Nederland voor de kop!
Oh, they're only open between 1145 and 1215, so may have to re-schedule.
PS: Nederland voor de kop!
Last edited by FNG; 25th Jun 2004 at 08:49.
