Cost sharing when you have to re-position the aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cost sharing when you have to re-position the aircraft
If I'm accepting a cost-share arrangement (friend would like me to fly him) with a PPL, and I need to fly first from my local airfield to an airfield near to my pal to pick him up, is it against the rules for us to share also the costs of the re-positioning flight when I'm the only one on board?
I've tried to search for this, but to no avail.
I've tried to search for this, but to no avail.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Exeter
Age: 70
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone need to know.....?
The only way you are likely to be caught out is if your friend drops you in it, or you make a great play of what you have done, so it is a question of trust and being discreet.
The only way you are likely to be caught out is if your friend drops you in it, or you make a great play of what you have done, so it is a question of trust and being discreet.
Last edited by Peter Gristwood; 28th Aug 2012 at 11:27.
Almost certainly, yes, it's against the rules.
In reality, it's never been tested in court, nobody knows for certain unless it has been, and the odds are that nobody'll ever check.
G
In reality, it's never been tested in court, nobody knows for certain unless it has been, and the odds are that nobody'll ever check.
G
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree. Technically it's against the rules but I don't think you'll be caught for it.
We've got the same situation this upcoming weekend. Four of us are going to participate in an aeros competition about half an hour away from our home-base. So the (two-place) aircraft needs to be positioned to this other airfield, and be flown back to home base after the competition.
Nobody needs these ferry hours for CPL/hour building, the flight is not a challenge, nobody is going to make a sightseeing detour. It's just a quick straightforward hop from one field to the next. So we're just going to split these costs four-way, and the ones flying the plane are chosen based on what's convenient in respect of where people live, where cars are parked, hotels and such.
We've got the same situation this upcoming weekend. Four of us are going to participate in an aeros competition about half an hour away from our home-base. So the (two-place) aircraft needs to be positioned to this other airfield, and be flown back to home base after the competition.
Nobody needs these ferry hours for CPL/hour building, the flight is not a challenge, nobody is going to make a sightseeing detour. It's just a quick straightforward hop from one field to the next. So we're just going to split these costs four-way, and the ones flying the plane are chosen based on what's convenient in respect of where people live, where cars are parked, hotels and such.
The cost sharing rules specifically relate to the carriage of passengers which if money changed hands would constitute Public Transport. Article 267 provides an exemption whereby a pilot may share the costs with one or more passengers. If there are no passengers, it can't possibly be public transport, so how the flight is funded is of no consequence. Anyone could pay for the flight.
Last edited by Whopity; 28th Aug 2012 at 14:05.
But the pilot must pay his share,
Doesn't that mean that one can use a PPL holder to ferry an aircraft, with him paying nothing
Put it another way, I am given £150 for my birthday, I spend it on flying, no problem. My brother is given £150 for his birthday, he gives it to me to take him flying, its illegal. If I took him with my £150, I can get him to pay £75 towards the cost so we have a beer as well!
Last edited by Whopity; 28th Aug 2012 at 15:01.
Cost sharing applies to a flight not an aircraft. For example you can charge all members the same standing charge and fly different hours. You can also have an overall owner who gives some users free hours but charges others. Fine as long as he isn't flying more with the free pilot that the charged pilots. Where you come unstuck is if another person pays for the flight by example by buying the fuel and where that person is seen to have directly benefitted
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Age: 40
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Realistically?
Only ever did one sight seeing trip for a mate that needed collecting from another airfield. We shared the cost only for the time he was a passenger in the aeroplane. I just did the trip on a day when I was going toward his direction anyway making 'ferrying' less inconvenient. I think this is the best way.
On the other hand, there's not much of a reason why a pilot (PPL) and a passenger (non-pilot) couldn't agree to share all costs for all the flying, inclusive of the ferrying between airfields.
Without opening up wider discussion, these arrangements are purely based on trust depending on pilot nav ability, distance between airfields, anything that may keep you in the air longer than necessary. These are all detrimental to the cost-sharing passenger. To agree full cost sharing including positioning means a higher portion of cost for the passenger for much less flying time.
I'd keep this sort of thing honest and simple, and only agree to share the actual passenger flight costs.
On the other hand, there's not much of a reason why a pilot (PPL) and a passenger (non-pilot) couldn't agree to share all costs for all the flying, inclusive of the ferrying between airfields.
Without opening up wider discussion, these arrangements are purely based on trust depending on pilot nav ability, distance between airfields, anything that may keep you in the air longer than necessary. These are all detrimental to the cost-sharing passenger. To agree full cost sharing including positioning means a higher portion of cost for the passenger for much less flying time.
I'd keep this sort of thing honest and simple, and only agree to share the actual passenger flight costs.
Last edited by GeeWhizz; 29th Aug 2012 at 09:00. Reason: Schpelling
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Back in the UK again.
Age: 77
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't that mean that one can use a PPL holder to ferry an aircraft, with him paying nothing
If the PPL is receiving a benefit in kind (free flying) is it aerial work??
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The more basic question is whether I can just lend my plane (let's assume it is G-reg) to somebody, to fly around.
Obviously he will write up the flight in his logbook.
If that is illegal, I am absolutely staggered. Why should it be illegal? It cannot be illegal otherwise, in say a family, if the old man owns a plane then another family member would not be able to fly it.
If the above is legal then it must be legal for me to get somebody to fly the plane to a maintenance facility.
The fact that the pilot at the time logs the flight (and thus receives a "benefit") cannot possibly be relevant, which is what Whopity is saying.
Obviously he will write up the flight in his logbook.
If that is illegal, I am absolutely staggered. Why should it be illegal? It cannot be illegal otherwise, in say a family, if the old man owns a plane then another family member would not be able to fly it.
If the above is legal then it must be legal for me to get somebody to fly the plane to a maintenance facility.
The fact that the pilot at the time logs the flight (and thus receives a "benefit") cannot possibly be relevant, which is what Whopity is saying.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Back in the UK again.
Age: 77
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If a friend, doing it as a favour, flies your airplane, the ANO does not list doing a favour for a friend under its definition of valuable consideration so what is the problem.
That is different to the question of how a business rewards a pilot it does not otherwise employ for doing work for the business (moving an aircraft from a to b).
That is different to the question of how a business rewards a pilot it does not otherwise employ for doing work for the business (moving an aircraft from a to b).
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see your drift, but is there any case law on whether the "benefit" to the aircraft owner in having the plane dropped off at a place of their choosing, rather than having it dropped off at a place of the pilot's choosing, and in circumstances where the pilot is absolutely not obliged to do the flight, amounts to a benefit sufficient to make it Aerial Work?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fortunately the CAA has better things to do (yeh) than worry about the strict legal status of such flights.
They only worry about it if and when there is an incident or where someone shouts what they are doing.
They only worry about it if and when there is an incident or where someone shouts what they are doing.
If the PPL is receiving a benefit in kind (free flying) is it aerial work??
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That suggests that the flight would not be ok if e.g. the plane was out of time on its 50hr check, or some other thing which is ok on private CofA ops.
Interesting... I recall one school local to me used PPLs to ferry planes for maintenance but they took care to ensure that the pilot paid for the fuel. Given these were trainers, it seems this precaution was wasted unless they were out of time on something. But I used to fly with one of the pilots and he said he had to pay for the fuel to make it legal. Of course the school would have preferred that anyway
The only realistic issue in this is insurance.
Interesting... I recall one school local to me used PPLs to ferry planes for maintenance but they took care to ensure that the pilot paid for the fuel. Given these were trainers, it seems this precaution was wasted unless they were out of time on something. But I used to fly with one of the pilots and he said he had to pay for the fuel to make it legal. Of course the school would have preferred that anyway
The only realistic issue in this is insurance.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Marlow UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think its totally irrelevant who pays how much towards the flight where you are not carrying anyone else. Or carrying someone who is not contributing to the costs of that flight.
If a friend/colleague or family member or kind benefactor gives me some money and I choose to spend it flying then that is up to me.
It is also totally irrelevant where I choose to fly.
If I choose to spend the money on a meal/hotel present for the wife etc. instead, then that is also up to me.
When your friend gets on board and you split the costs that flight is subject to the rules on cost sharing. The flight before and after when you are on your own or with someone else who is not contributing towards the costs is just flying like every other time you fly.
All in my opinion of course.
If a friend/colleague or family member or kind benefactor gives me some money and I choose to spend it flying then that is up to me.
It is also totally irrelevant where I choose to fly.
If I choose to spend the money on a meal/hotel present for the wife etc. instead, then that is also up to me.
When your friend gets on board and you split the costs that flight is subject to the rules on cost sharing. The flight before and after when you are on your own or with someone else who is not contributing towards the costs is just flying like every other time you fly.
All in my opinion of course.
