It seems to me that we are drifting away from the subject.

The key question is whether as a PPL you can contract with somebody to directly sell your few skills as a pilot. The answer is that you cannot enter into a commercal arrangement without a commercial license. That's it.

If you contract with somebody to write a magazine article that is different. You are selling your skills as a journalist not a pilot and you don't have to be a commercially licensed journalist to write commercially (more's the pity sometimes).

There are doubtlessly as many ways to try and twist the law so you get paid for piloting as there are are shades to the weather - the only reasonable certainty is that you'll get caught out in the end.

I can't answer your point about the magazine articles, but I don't see any big problem there.

As to your second point, it doesn't matter what the purpose of the owner's trip is. The aircraft is simply a form of transport.

.

Trex

I think you are in the mentality of the PPL in a small single and what he can use the aircraft for It is quite feasable for a large aircraft (jet) to be operated on a private cat, with a highly qualified crew and to not only fly the owner and his friends/family but also his employees, business associates and their employees, etc too. He doesnt even need to be on the aircraft.

Pace

Not at all Pace, an aircraft with a private category C of A surely is such regardless of what it is. It simply highlights what a grey law it is.

the particular case you are talking about is not very grey - the first paragraph of the law says you can pay your pilot and it is still private - 'your pilot' is a guy flying 'your aircraft' not 'his aircraft'.

There has been quite extensive debate about the reasonableness of the law. However, it is important to keep clear what the law says.

At a very simple level, if strangers (or their goods) are flying with you and they have provided any valuable consideration related to the flight - it is likely to be public transport and not allowed.

The CAA also take a broad view of the valuable consideration that will make a flight aerial work (which covers almost everything involving payments in respect of a flight or its purpose (which catches photo runs) that isn't public transport) and then carve out a very specific set of exemptions that they consider private (this is a more onerous approach than in the US).

Understand these exemptions and what 'in respect of the flight or purpose of the flight' means and the law becomes much closer to black and white.

mm

thought this was well written till we got to this bit Having been involved in private jet ops I think the law is far from Black and White and has very large grey areas.

Having said that this topic is supposed to be about a PPL charging for his/her services and I dont want to steer the thread way off course :=

Pace