Ferry/ Positioning flights
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ferry/ Positioning flights
Ferry Flying/positioning question
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I have an opportunity to do some ferry flying, positioning, dropping aircraft here and there and picking them up from maintenance etc. UK only
I was just wondering is this allowed under regulation to count as hour building towards the CPL, in other words to reach the 150 hours required to start the CPL.
Obviously I would not be getting paid for it, but would likely to be getting a reduced rate on the aircraft due to doing said organisation a favour.
Would appreciate some useful hints and whether the CAA are happy with this to count as hour building?
Many thanks in advance
Expedite
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I have an opportunity to do some ferry flying, positioning, dropping aircraft here and there and picking them up from maintenance etc. UK only
I was just wondering is this allowed under regulation to count as hour building towards the CPL, in other words to reach the 150 hours required to start the CPL.
Obviously I would not be getting paid for it, but would likely to be getting a reduced rate on the aircraft due to doing said organisation a favour.
Would appreciate some useful hints and whether the CAA are happy with this to count as hour building?
Many thanks in advance
Expedite
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: beverley
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done some similar flying mostly for maintainance positioning etc,and as its all solo(P1) X-country I don't see a problem with it.(I was paying for the flying at an "hour building"rate)
They would never be able to tell from a log book entry anyway would they?
They would never be able to tell from a log book entry anyway would they?
Experience is experience either you are PIC or you are not! If you need "X" hours PIC, why would it not count? Probably a damm sight more use than flying down the Florida coast!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry,
Cant belive as to why you would pay the company to take their aircraft to their maintanance organisation for them.
They could at least let you fly it for free, as if it doesnt go it cant earn any money for them.
When I went for my FI the school let me take their aircraft to maint, as it was cheaper for them due to not taking an instructor out for the day.
But if it gets you your hours then cool.
Enjoy
259
Cant belive as to why you would pay the company to take their aircraft to their maintanance organisation for them.
They could at least let you fly it for free, as if it doesnt go it cant earn any money for them.
When I went for my FI the school let me take their aircraft to maint, as it was cheaper for them due to not taking an instructor out for the day.
But if it gets you your hours then cool.
Enjoy
259
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rjay,
Thats the thing im touching on, with regard to the whole caa 'flying for reward' heading. Would flying and not being charged be classed as reward in thier eyes of the ANO. I wouldnt actually be earning out of it, but at the same time I would not be billed for the hours!
I would envisage that saving money is different from earning money. Which is the case we are talking about here.
Thats the thing im touching on, with regard to the whole caa 'flying for reward' heading. Would flying and not being charged be classed as reward in thier eyes of the ANO. I wouldnt actually be earning out of it, but at the same time I would not be billed for the hours!
I would envisage that saving money is different from earning money. Which is the case we are talking about here.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cant belive as to why you would pay the company to take their aircraft to their maintanance organisation for them
I know a few PPLs who do exactly that. The school uses a maintenance firm a long away away (why, I can only speculate, but this practice is pretty common on the training scene) and they get various self fly hire renters to ferry the planes there, and they charge them just the fuel. The chap hangs around while the 50hr check is done and then flies back.
I know a few PPLs who do exactly that. The school uses a maintenance firm a long away away (why, I can only speculate, but this practice is pretty common on the training scene) and they get various self fly hire renters to ferry the planes there, and they charge them just the fuel. The chap hangs around while the 50hr check is done and then flies back.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expedite,
I presume your concern is that the CAA will look on this as being illegal public transport, because you're getting a valuable reward of reduced rate flying.
I don't think that the reduced rate would count as valuable reward, because you also have reduced utility, in that you can't choose where and when to go! You must go to/from the maintenance facility on the particular day.
That's why you would be getting the reduced rate, not because you were doing them a favour.
I think you should be ok on that.
Bose, I don't see many low houred PPL's being asked to ferry aircraft across Europe There might be a reason that they prefer you to do it for free, rather than a low houred PPL to pay for the privlidge
dp
I presume your concern is that the CAA will look on this as being illegal public transport, because you're getting a valuable reward of reduced rate flying.
I don't think that the reduced rate would count as valuable reward, because you also have reduced utility, in that you can't choose where and when to go! You must go to/from the maintenance facility on the particular day.
That's why you would be getting the reduced rate, not because you were doing them a favour.
I think you should be ok on that.
I ferry aircraft all over the UK and Europe for people. I would never expect to have to pay to do it!!
There might be a reason that they prefer you to do it for free, rather than a low houred PPL to pay for the privlidge dp
Life's too short for ironing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Scotland, & Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at it another way. Lets say you had a sugar daddy or mummy who let you fly their aeroplane, for free, that would not be considered commercial flying, just flying for free. What you are doing is not all that different, is it. Have fun flying (for free!).
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These things have been done to death here.
The reason nobody can settle it is because - apparently - the CAA has never prosecuted anybody for what one could describe as debatable cases of aerial work. They also refuse to be drawn on where they would draw the line.
They have prosecuted breaches of Article 115 (140 in 2005 ANO) in cases where there was obvious and easy evidence of aerial work, perhaps from disgruntled individuals. But that is foreign reg aircraft, not G-reg, so always provocative.
They have prosecuted blatent cases of aerial work in G-reg, but to get this you would have to ferry a load of fare paying passengers in full view of a severely p*ssed off AOC holder.
IMHO the person to ask is your insurance broker, or make sure you are a named pilot on the owner's policy.
If you are not a named pilot, then you are not insured yourself. The owner is, but you are not. Not many PPL students and self fly renters know this!
In most of these scenarios, insurance is what really matters, not the CAA.
The reason nobody can settle it is because - apparently - the CAA has never prosecuted anybody for what one could describe as debatable cases of aerial work. They also refuse to be drawn on where they would draw the line.
They have prosecuted breaches of Article 115 (140 in 2005 ANO) in cases where there was obvious and easy evidence of aerial work, perhaps from disgruntled individuals. But that is foreign reg aircraft, not G-reg, so always provocative.
They have prosecuted blatent cases of aerial work in G-reg, but to get this you would have to ferry a load of fare paying passengers in full view of a severely p*ssed off AOC holder.
IMHO the person to ask is your insurance broker, or make sure you are a named pilot on the owner's policy.
If you are not a named pilot, then you are not insured yourself. The owner is, but you are not. Not many PPL students and self fly renters know this!
In most of these scenarios, insurance is what really matters, not the CAA.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to my insurance company (one of the largest) checked at 12:01 today that the standard aircraft insurance policy includes flight by an instructor solo or giving instruction.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many policies I have seen say 'QFI' in the context of giving instruction or ferrying, some say any pilot with the permission of the insured, some are named individuals only. Most also allow ground handling by qualified mechanics associated with maintenance.
As always, you need to read the applicable insurance policy. In the general case of the hours building PPL flying a not for hire aircraft, not paying for flight time and not being paid to fly - this would be legal from the aerial work perspective but probably not covered by the insurance company.
As always, you need to read the applicable insurance policy. In the general case of the hours building PPL flying a not for hire aircraft, not paying for flight time and not being paid to fly - this would be legal from the aerial work perspective but probably not covered by the insurance company.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So when I get me mate to ferry me Slingsby to the new elastic band shop then he is breaking the law if he doesn't pay me for the privilege. I would be tempted to pay towards the legal costs of anyone prosecuted.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue is no different to that of a car.
If your mate drives your car legally he must be insured. If he has a vehicle it may have a policy which allows him to drive other vehicles, although increasingly this is not the case.
If your mate flies your aircraft he has to be insured. That means either a named individual (and that usually costs very little - unless said mate has less than 100 hours and no time on type), or he may have third party insurance from his own insurance. But this could stretch your friendship if there is an incident and expensive repairs.
Either way it is the aircraft operators responsibility to ensure the aircraft is insured for the flight. If you have 'any pilot' insurance fine, if it is named pilots he/she needs to be named. If there are other limitations they have to be met.
Of course if you're hiring your aircraft out then presumably you already have 'any pilot' insurance.
If your mate drives your car legally he must be insured. If he has a vehicle it may have a policy which allows him to drive other vehicles, although increasingly this is not the case.
If your mate flies your aircraft he has to be insured. That means either a named individual (and that usually costs very little - unless said mate has less than 100 hours and no time on type), or he may have third party insurance from his own insurance. But this could stretch your friendship if there is an incident and expensive repairs.
Either way it is the aircraft operators responsibility to ensure the aircraft is insured for the flight. If you have 'any pilot' insurance fine, if it is named pilots he/she needs to be named. If there are other limitations they have to be met.
Of course if you're hiring your aircraft out then presumably you already have 'any pilot' insurance.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always worth checking the insurance, with a full disclosure of the situation.
There are two cases to consider, both legal
1) the plane is insured with a particular pilot flying it
2) as above, with the pilot being himself insured
The two are very different things.
If you own a plane, or are in a group, then your name should be on the policy, and you are in 2). So if you prang it and there is a 3rd party (or passenger) claim, they insurer can't go after you to recover what he paid out.
A normal renter, or flying student, will be under 1). You are not insured.
Another thing is this: my insurance covers me (named) and also covers me for receiving any training. It stipulates 500hrs and a PPL/IR as a minimum. Now, what if the instructor has only 200hrs? Many PPL instructors have only that; my first PPL instructor had 150hrs. Under FAA rules, the student is usually PIC so it would be OK. But in a G-reg, the instructor is AIUI always PIC (even if the student is legally capable of being PIC)...
There are two cases to consider, both legal
1) the plane is insured with a particular pilot flying it
2) as above, with the pilot being himself insured
The two are very different things.
If you own a plane, or are in a group, then your name should be on the policy, and you are in 2). So if you prang it and there is a 3rd party (or passenger) claim, they insurer can't go after you to recover what he paid out.
A normal renter, or flying student, will be under 1). You are not insured.
Another thing is this: my insurance covers me (named) and also covers me for receiving any training. It stipulates 500hrs and a PPL/IR as a minimum. Now, what if the instructor has only 200hrs? Many PPL instructors have only that; my first PPL instructor had 150hrs. Under FAA rules, the student is usually PIC so it would be OK. But in a G-reg, the instructor is AIUI always PIC (even if the student is legally capable of being PIC)...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by effortless
So when I get me mate to ferry me Slingsby to the new elastic band shop then he is breaking the law if he doesn't pay me for the privilege. I would be tempted to pay towards the legal costs of anyone prosecuted.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To quote the original question:-
The insurance issue is in fact thread drift.
I was just wondering is this allowed under regulation to count as hour building towards the CPL, in other words to reach the 150 hours required to start the CPL.
Obviously I would not be getting paid for it, but would likely to be getting a reduced rate on the aircraft due to doing said organisation a favour.
Would appreciate some useful hints and whether the CAA are happy with this to count as hour building?
Many thanks in advance
Expedite
Obviously I would not be getting paid for it, but would likely to be getting a reduced rate on the aircraft due to doing said organisation a favour.
Would appreciate some useful hints and whether the CAA are happy with this to count as hour building?
Many thanks in advance
Expedite