Question regarding flying a company aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Surrey UK/Quebec CA
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question regarding flying a company aircraft
I have tried reading through the abyss that is the aviation world and it hasnt completly answered my question so was hoping you guys could shed some light.
If a company owned aircraft is avaible for private hire then there is no problems using it on a PPL. I know that I cannot fly for hire or reward but if the aircraft needs to transit from base to a job can I fly it and log the hours? This seems to be an extremly grey area. Any ideas?
If a company owned aircraft is avaible for private hire then there is no problems using it on a PPL. I know that I cannot fly for hire or reward but if the aircraft needs to transit from base to a job can I fly it and log the hours? This seems to be an extremly grey area. Any ideas?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi PP
My understanding is that unless the flight is classed as aerial work (ie where a charge is being made for the carriage of goods or pax), then it is a private flight. Accordingly, the proposed flight you describe (positioning. ferry) should be quite legal on a PPL providing that your licence is valid for that aircraft type. Hope that helps. bm
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand the question...
The ownership of the plane is irrelevant.
If the question is whether a PPL can fly on company business - yes, so long as he is an employee and is not contractually bound to fly (i.e. has other travel options). This can be found in the ANO.
If the pilot is contractually required to fly then he needs a CPL.
In all cases above, the company can supply the plane FOC to the pilot. He doesn't have to pay a penny towards the flight. This is nothing to do with the PPL Cost Sharing scheme.
There is a PDF leaflet on the CAA website called Summary of Public Transport which covers some of this stuff.
The ownership of the plane is irrelevant.
If the question is whether a PPL can fly on company business - yes, so long as he is an employee and is not contractually bound to fly (i.e. has other travel options). This can be found in the ANO.
If the pilot is contractually required to fly then he needs a CPL.
In all cases above, the company can supply the plane FOC to the pilot. He doesn't have to pay a penny towards the flight. This is nothing to do with the PPL Cost Sharing scheme.
There is a PDF leaflet on the CAA website called Summary of Public Transport which covers some of this stuff.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Surrey UK/Quebec CA
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, thanks for the replies.
What about this situation:
The aircraft IS going to be doing aerial work. There is a CPL pilot and myself, an employee with a PPL. We are due to do aerial work over say the Isle of Wight, however we are based in XYZ. Can the 100 mile journey to the South coast for example be flown on a PPL as no aerial work is being done, we are simply transiting to a location TO undertake aerial work.
What about this situation:
The aircraft IS going to be doing aerial work. There is a CPL pilot and myself, an employee with a PPL. We are due to do aerial work over say the Isle of Wight, however we are based in XYZ. Can the 100 mile journey to the South coast for example be flown on a PPL as no aerial work is being done, we are simply transiting to a location TO undertake aerial work.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this question depends a bit on the detail facts.
If for instance you are doing an aerial survey over the IOW, take off from your base, fly to over IOW, survey, and fly home. I don't see how you could credibly say that the initial and final stages of the flight where not aerial work when the survey part clearly was.
On the otherhand, if there is a positioning flight to Bembridge, a flight to undertake the Survey ending at Sandown and then a return positioning flight to XYZ, Only the actual Survey flight need be aerial work.
However, if the bill to the customer said,
1 - Positioning XYZ - Bembridge - £1000
2 - Survey - £2500
3 - Positioning back to XYZ £1000
Then all three flights clearly have been aerial work, as there is a clear documented payment associated with each one.
If for instance you are doing an aerial survey over the IOW, take off from your base, fly to over IOW, survey, and fly home. I don't see how you could credibly say that the initial and final stages of the flight where not aerial work when the survey part clearly was.
On the otherhand, if there is a positioning flight to Bembridge, a flight to undertake the Survey ending at Sandown and then a return positioning flight to XYZ, Only the actual Survey flight need be aerial work.
However, if the bill to the customer said,
1 - Positioning XYZ - Bembridge - £1000
2 - Survey - £2500
3 - Positioning back to XYZ £1000
Then all three flights clearly have been aerial work, as there is a clear documented payment associated with each one.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that an AOC may be needed for the middle one, in which case the two others are a bit moot...
Is this a question about whether the PPL holder can do some of the flying, and log it as P1?
Is this a question about whether the PPL holder can do some of the flying, and log it as P1?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Surrey UK/Quebec CA
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, Im trying to work out what I could fly and log as P1.
I know the rules on the subject but my example I believe to be in the greyest of the grey area.
If a customer isnt charged for a transit, and no work is undertaken on the transit, then im hoping that I could fly it and log it, however, there may not be a landing involved to clearly define it in the eyes of the CAA.
I know the rules on the subject but my example I believe to be in the greyest of the grey area.
If a customer isnt charged for a transit, and no work is undertaken on the transit, then im hoping that I could fly it and log it, however, there may not be a landing involved to clearly define it in the eyes of the CAA.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they were separate flights, it is quite reasonable to conduct the positioning flights as private flights (and I believe many AOC holders do this to take advantage of the greater flexibility of private ops).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Surrey UK/Quebec CA
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, so the landing/taking off part to seperate the flights would in some ways be the dertermining factor seperating aerial work from private. I will try and get this confirmed because it means I could still log some flying if the transit is a seperate flight.
Cheers for the help.
PP
Cheers for the help.
PP
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I was implying that while it's possible that the CAA could view the positioning sectors as private and the survey as aerial work, the insurers might view all sectors as commercial (in that they would not have occurred without the aerial work sector), and therefore cover for the positioning sectors by a PPL may be questionable?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not convinced either way about this. Not enough info.
I would agree that if the whole lot is one flight without a landing, then the whole flight is subject to the AOC and to whatever rules apply under the AOC.
This may or may not mean anything for the ability of a PPL in the RHS to log the time.
If the plane is multi crew, that will narrow the logging possibilities fairly drastically - the RHS possibly can do it on a PPL but will need the Type Rating (if any) for the type, and the scenery here depends on whether G-reg or N-reg.
If the plane is single crew then obviously anybody (your granny etc) can sit in the RHS but her ability to log the time as PIC is a separate matter and again depends on whether G-reg or N-reg.
The rules on logging have changed, IIRC (this is not my area of interest) in recent years; before that a plain PPL, in a single crew plane, could log FAA (N-reg) PIC time in the RHS without having the TR.
To probe this area further, especially for multi crew aircraft, one could post in the Bizjet forum here, for this is a subject apparently close to the hearts of many, including some in the CAA
I don't have answers, but we have so little information.
I doubt it.
Firstly they would have to find out about it (and the only record anywhere will be the RHS's logbook entry, perhaps countersigned by the LHS if the LHS is an instructor).
Secondly, what is the actual benefit? It isn't a free ticket to Jamaica. The value of the logbook entry is nil.
I know for a fact that HMRC does not care about benefit in kind when a PPL flies on his employer's business, even though the chap logs the time and the time could count towards an ATPL (a benefit) or could reduce his own insurance premiums (a benefit) - provided that the flight is wholly and exclusively for the business. Perhaps an accountant practicing in this area can input here?
Regarding insurance, well obviously the logbook entry will be written up only after a successful landing!! Once, years ago, I had a taxiing prang with an instructor in the RHS and he never wrote up anything, anywhere. As far as he was concerned the "flight" never happened with him in the plane.
I would agree that if the whole lot is one flight without a landing, then the whole flight is subject to the AOC and to whatever rules apply under the AOC.
This may or may not mean anything for the ability of a PPL in the RHS to log the time.
If the plane is multi crew, that will narrow the logging possibilities fairly drastically - the RHS possibly can do it on a PPL but will need the Type Rating (if any) for the type, and the scenery here depends on whether G-reg or N-reg.
If the plane is single crew then obviously anybody (your granny etc) can sit in the RHS but her ability to log the time as PIC is a separate matter and again depends on whether G-reg or N-reg.
The rules on logging have changed, IIRC (this is not my area of interest) in recent years; before that a plain PPL, in a single crew plane, could log FAA (N-reg) PIC time in the RHS without having the TR.
To probe this area further, especially for multi crew aircraft, one could post in the Bizjet forum here, for this is a subject apparently close to the hearts of many, including some in the CAA
I don't have answers, but we have so little information.
Could this be taken as an "employee benefit" by HMRC and taxed in some way?
Firstly they would have to find out about it (and the only record anywhere will be the RHS's logbook entry, perhaps countersigned by the LHS if the LHS is an instructor).
Secondly, what is the actual benefit? It isn't a free ticket to Jamaica. The value of the logbook entry is nil.
I know for a fact that HMRC does not care about benefit in kind when a PPL flies on his employer's business, even though the chap logs the time and the time could count towards an ATPL (a benefit) or could reduce his own insurance premiums (a benefit) - provided that the flight is wholly and exclusively for the business. Perhaps an accountant practicing in this area can input here?
Regarding insurance, well obviously the logbook entry will be written up only after a successful landing!! Once, years ago, I had a taxiing prang with an instructor in the RHS and he never wrote up anything, anywhere. As far as he was concerned the "flight" never happened with him in the plane.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO is right about not enough information, however, in my answer above, I assumed
1 - The aircraft is certified as single pilot, so to log time PilotPieces will either need to be under instruction or PIC.
2 - In the details of the owner's AOC, there will be an experience/currency/training requirement that PP will not meet (likely to be a minimum of CPL, X time, certain recent experience detailed in the AOC - and different from the general PPL requirement)
3 - The owner's AOC structure will have a facility that allows the aircraft to be used for private ops and exempt from some or all of AOC requirements in the AOC.
4 - that the insurance company is aware of point 3 and has agreed to insure on this basis
5 - PP is a named insured or meets the qualification requirements the insurance company has placed on unnamed pilots flying the aircraft.
6 - AOC refers to all of the documents, manuals, policies, standing order books, etc. that were required to get the AOC.
1 - The aircraft is certified as single pilot, so to log time PilotPieces will either need to be under instruction or PIC.
2 - In the details of the owner's AOC, there will be an experience/currency/training requirement that PP will not meet (likely to be a minimum of CPL, X time, certain recent experience detailed in the AOC - and different from the general PPL requirement)
3 - The owner's AOC structure will have a facility that allows the aircraft to be used for private ops and exempt from some or all of AOC requirements in the AOC.
4 - that the insurance company is aware of point 3 and has agreed to insure on this basis
5 - PP is a named insured or meets the qualification requirements the insurance company has placed on unnamed pilots flying the aircraft.
6 - AOC refers to all of the documents, manuals, policies, standing order books, etc. that were required to get the AOC.
Last edited by mm_flynn; 25th Aug 2009 at 12:33. Reason: fixed of to or
