The 'Munich Model' - anyone know about this?

[Sam Rutherford]

Apparently a method/way of flying people without an AOC (at airshows for example).

Client hires a plane for the day.
Client separately hires a pilot.

Pilot flies the plane with client's guests.

All okay.

Or, is it? I'm not convinced, would be interested to hear feedback.

Thanks, Sam.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Sam;

It's been tried by aircraft owners for years. It was a grey area (in fact it was called grey charter in the UK for years as well)

7-8 years ago a helicopter owner took a case against the CAA demonstrating his lease deals. The aircraft was one, the pilot another, Counsels opinion was that it was NOT legal and was Commercial Air Transport and therefore required an AOC, that owner's aircraft went on to an AOC pretty quickly.

I believe it still happens in the UK, normally on N registered aircraft where the oversight within Europe is difficult to manage (I'm talking flying activities, not maintenance etc) Certainly our insurers have stated that in the event of a claim arising from such an activity they will probably not pay out as the aircraft may be covered for commercial operations, but the Munich model does not ensure that the CAT requirements are met in any way and the flight will have been illegal, allowing the insurers to walk.

That is my experience as a current Chief Pilot and Head of Operations for an EASA AOC.

SND

[Fostex]

There are lots of companies in the UK dry hiring aircraft on this basis, usually SET like Pilatus, TBM. It is not right, of grey area legality and hurting legitimate charter businesses.

The chance of the 'client' above being covered in terms of insurance if it all goes tits up in a smoking hole in a field are very low...

[Sam Rutherford]

Thank you for these answers, confirms my suspicions but always good to ask.

My contact suggested this basis below (using 'Volvo' as a fictitious 'client',and WKA as aeroplane owner), which aligns mostly with yours.

Thanks, Sam.



As far as I know, if I am paid by volvo for my duties as pilot, and WKA is paid for renting out the plane, then we should not be infringing on any AOC requirements.

You would, in this situation, be the broker, hence you do not need an AOC to act as broker. I would be pilot to an individual client, hence I do not need to have an AOC to offer my pilot duties, and WKA would be an aircraft rental service, hence they would not need an AOC to rent their aircraft.


In terms of the plane and I being allowed to do this work:

The FAA 14 CFR Part 119 states:

An AOC is not required for the following operations:

"Provided there is a seat configuration of 20 seats or more, excluding any required crewmember seat, or a payload capacity of 6,000 pounds or more, this part does not apply to—

(1) Student instruction;
(2) Nonstop Commercial Air Tours ….
(3) Ferry or training flights;"

We would fall under option (2), making it permissible as far as FAA is concerned, so me and the plane being FAA concerned, are allowed to conduct the work.

Clearly this is a grey zone in the law rather than explicitly stated as being a legal exception. I wonder if it would maybe be worthwhile getting an aviation lawyer to quickly look over the legality of the situation, especially in Belgium?

[Fostex]

Who is insuring you while operating the aircraft?

The owner will be covered (for hull loss) under the aircraft insurance while you are operating it, however if you bend the aircraft then the owner's insurance provider will come knocking at your door looking to pass on the liability. Normally this sort of thing, be you an instructor at a flying club, or a CPL at a commercial operation would be covered under employers liability insurance. In the scenario you present above, you are individually liable and need protection in place to mitigate against that. That isn't as easy as it sounds to obtain...

[flyingfemme]

If the "guests" are "paying guests" then it's dodgy, if they are "friends and family" or the aircraft is being operated by a company for their own business, flying their own employees, it can be OK.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Originally Posted by flyingfemme

If the "guests" are "paying guests" then it's dodgy, if they are "friends and family" or the aircraft is being operated by a company for their own business, flying their own employees, it can be OK.

Spot on. We regularly fly aircraft owner's employees, thats often a reason for having the aircraft (I'm thinking a certain large store chain based in the Channel Islands) We were flying some guests when one told me to add something to his "account" turned out the owner was charging some discount rate to his mates. Immediately I found out I called the owner and grounded the rest of the trip as it was illegal and I was uninsured. After a short argument the owner came round to my way of thinking. Actually he was scared of the publicity a prosecution would bring.

SND

[ChickenHouse]

On one hand it is (dark) grey area and on the other hand - if things go bad, it puts all insurance issues on the shoulder of the pilot. Beware of such constructions.

[Hawker 800]

In terms of the plane and I being allowed to do this work:

The FAA 14 CFR Part 119 states:

An AOC is not required for the following operations:

"Provided there is a seat configuration of 20 seats or more, excluding any required crewmember seat, or a payload capacity of 6,000 pounds or more, this part does not apply to—

(1) Student instruction;
(2) Nonstop Commercial Air Tours ….
(3) Ferry or training flights;"

We would fall under option (2), making it permissible as far as FAA is concerned, so me and the plane being FAA concerned, are allowed to conduct the work.

Clearly this is a grey zone in the law rather than explicitly stated as being a legal exception. I wonder if it would maybe be worthwhile getting an aviation lawyer to quickly look over the legality of the situation, especially in Belgium?

Would this flight be in Europe or the USA? Forget the FAA if it’s in Belgium, it’s the EASA inspector I’d be concerned about that could possibly show up.

Sounds like someone is looking for ways to make grey black and white here!

Illegal public transport happens often, however. Dosent make it correct. Plenty of N/VP/M and even G reg ‘private aircraft’ being ‘lent’ or the bosses ‘mates’. It only takes one SAFA check... I’ve been in a situation on a bizjet like SND above, boss/owner told us to fly his mates from X to Y and return empty. Only found out after landing when one of the pax said to my co pilot he didn’t expect to get fed so we’ll, and it wasn’t costing the group of 9 much more than first class tickets.... I moved on shortly afterwards. If an owner has to resort to this to mitigate costs, then he can’t afford the toy long term.

Some are even now selling shares in the company that operate such aircraft for a short duration to try to be legal. It’s just not worth it as a professional pilot.

[oggers]

An AOC is not required for the following operations:

"Provided there is a seat configuration of 20 seats or more, excluding any required crewmember seat, or a payload capacity of 6,000 pounds or more, this part does not apply to—

(1) Student instruction;
(2) Nonstop Commercial Air Tours ….
(3) Ferry or training flights;"

We would fall under option (2), making it permissible as far as FAA is concerned, so me and the plane being FAA concerned, are allowed to conduct the work.

So it is sight seeing with an N reg and FAA pilot commercial certificate conducted within 25 miles of the airport and within FAA land? If so it is correct that neither an Air Carrier Certificate nor an Operator Certificate is required. But you would have to comply with the requirements listed under cfr 91.147 and obtain a Letter of Authorisation from the FAA district office nearest to the operator's base.

If it is not a sight seeing flight within 25 miles of an airport somewhere in FAA land, then no chance this is legit.

[Sam Rutherford]

So, given that black and white is always preferable to grey...

Anyone know an operator (EU based) who could help with this:

• Advertised in advance to the public
• They pay for it
• 10 minute flight, departing from and returning to the same location
• Light aeroplane, pilot plus 3 paying pax (no luggage)

I have a friend operating a C206 for sightseeing in Norway on an AOC, but it's on floats so not really ideal.

Thanks, Sam.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Originally Posted by Sam Rutherford

So, given that black and white is always preferable to grey...

Anyone know an operator (EU based) who could help with this:

• Advertised in advance to the public
• They pay for it
• 10 minute flight, departing from and returning to the same location
• Light aeroplane, pilot plus 3 paying pax (no luggage)

I have a friend operating a C206 for sightseeing in Norway on an AOC, but it's on floats so not really ideal.

Thanks, Sam.

Sam;

What you’re after is an A to A AOC operator. Check the CAA website if it’s for the UK, they have a long list of them on there.

SND

[Sam Rutherford]

Thank you, I think you mean this:

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/...OCList_A_C.pdf

Any idea whether this allows them to operate temporarily in Belgium - or do they need a Belgian AOC?

Thanks, Sam.

[winglit]

There was a story about an operation in Fort Lauderdale with an Air Cam float plane. Because the Air Cam fell into the experimental category, there was no way to get commercial insurance on it, or register it with an AOC. The operator wanted to use the plane for private charter for a hotel.

He found a loophole in the FAA regs. He found out that he could sell a client a T-shirt. And if you were wearing this particular T-shirt with the hotel logo, you got a free ride in the plane. There are no rules saying that you can't carry people for free! He also argued that because the T-shirt had this particular logo, it became a "labelled fashion item", meaning he could charge whatever anyone was prepared to pay for it.

[Flyin'Dutch']

Originally Posted by Sam Rutherford

Thank you, I think you mean this:

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/...OCList_A_C.pdf

Any idea whether this allows them to operate temporarily in Belgium - or do they need a Belgian AOC?

Thanks, Sam.

I don't know but suspect that an A to A AOC is just that, with A being their designated base.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Sam;

To operate in Belgium they’d need to add the area onto their AOC Area of Operation.

They shouldn’t need a Belgian AOC as Belgium is part of EASA with all the third and fifth freedoms that come from that. But a quick check with the Belgian CAA should confirm that.

SND

[Sam Rutherford]

This is all really helpful, thank you!