R
Roger, Roger
Guest
I think you're a little miseducated on commercial pilot privileges and limitations when operating under part 91. I'm too lazy to type this out right now.
Freelance Instructing Advice
- Thread starter swarhol
- Start date
muffinman
Well-Known Member
Guys,
someone is mixing up two different rules here. If you provide the airplane and the pilot to fly a passenger from point A to point B thats charter and is a no go without being a charter operator..
If someone rents the airplane from the FBO and comes to you and asks you to fly it for them for a fee, thats fine. As long as you are not on the FBO payroll and they pay for the plane and the pilot separately.
None of this has anything to do with instruction, unless you fly someone from point A to point B in a school airplane that you are currently employed at, then try to log it for the person as "dual given".
someone is mixing up two different rules here. If you provide the airplane and the pilot to fly a passenger from point A to point B thats charter and is a no go without being a charter operator..
If someone rents the airplane from the FBO and comes to you and asks you to fly it for them for a fee, thats fine. As long as you are not on the FBO payroll and they pay for the plane and the pilot separately.
None of this has anything to do with instruction, unless you fly someone from point A to point B in a school airplane that you are currently employed at, then try to log it for the person as "dual given".
I figured I had some things confused, so when you do get a chance I wouldn't mind some more information.
Yes, ignore the private pilot part I meant to delete that sentence. It was a different train of thought that wasn't right I forgot to edit out. Can you answer/explain the rest?
Can you site this in some federal regulatory publication? People keep saying that, but I was taught differently and nobody has sited/explained this.
That AC didn't address renting, nor do any of the FARs that have been discussed. I know something exists explaining renting and I am fairly sure it is against this thought but I am unsure where. As I stated early our legal department, 2 separate aviation attorneys advised against this and my commercial course cited this somewhere but I didn't write it down. We spent 2 classes on this beating it in repeatedly, so either they were way wrong or there is something on this somewhere that should be brought to everyones attention. Either way I would like to figure out which, please help. lol
My argument is that the aircraft must be owned, not rented. This is what I am looking for clarification on and I have been reading through 119 do you have any other ideas?
muffinman
Well-Known Member
It doesn't say anything about the plane being rented or not. Many charter operations do not own their planes, they are leased. it specifies on-demand only. Doesn't matter where the plane came from.. Could be stolen for all the FAA cares, but its the act of agreeing to a time, destination and price is for the air carriage (as a whole package) is what matters.
Thats how you get around this (so to speak) If they rent the airplane from me, and then hire you to fly the plane thats OK as long as you and I do not have business relations. This is called pilot services. You are simply a pilot for hire and had nothing to do with suppling the plane, gas or anything else... you just fly it.
Thats how you get around this (so to speak) If they rent the airplane from me, and then hire you to fly the plane thats OK as long as you and I do not have business relations. This is called pilot services. You are simply a pilot for hire and had nothing to do with suppling the plane, gas or anything else... you just fly it.
First off, the charter operation is operating under a commercial operators licesnse so they are exempt from this entire situation. Secondly, everyone keeps saying if someone else rents it is OK for me to fly them if they hire me seperately, however I am looking for written regulatory proof.
I still have 2 lawyers and a classroom professor that claimed, and the professor showed us why, this is not a legal action. I am looking for that regulation or an AC that addresses the topic of flying in an aircraft that is rented and not owned by the person you are flying for.
escapepilot
Well-Known Member
This thread has gotten interesting. Back to the OP though. If the plane provided is used for instruction, then its not commercial operations. Shdw, the example you cited was for transportation of individuals, not instruction of them, which could be considered commercial.
Its similar to the part 91 sightseeing rules now. If I, as an instructor, take someone up to show them their house from the air, its sightseeing and I'd need the LOA and drug testing program. If I, as an instructor, place them in the left seat, give them some basic instruction on aircraft control, and let them fly over their house, then its an introductory flight.
IMO, the OP is ok to rent from someone else to provide instruction. If there is any doubt, he could check w/ the FSDO. I'd just be sure to let the FSDO know that its for instruction.
Its similar to the part 91 sightseeing rules now. If I, as an instructor, take someone up to show them their house from the air, its sightseeing and I'd need the LOA and drug testing program. If I, as an instructor, place them in the left seat, give them some basic instruction on aircraft control, and let them fly over their house, then its an introductory flight.
IMO, the OP is ok to rent from someone else to provide instruction. If there is any doubt, he could check w/ the FSDO. I'd just be sure to let the FSDO know that its for instruction.
I found and verified that too in the FARs and douglas pointed it out before, so I am in agreement. This other part just has me stumped because what you guys are saying is not what the college taught us which leaves me skeptical. Hopefully somebody reading this knows something more...
floridaCFII
Well-Known Member
I found and verified that too in the FARs and douglas pointed it out before, so I am in agreement. This other part just has me stumped because what you guys are saying is not what the college taught us which leaves me skeptical. Hopefully somebody reading this knows something more...
I think you're overcomplicating it. Who owns the aircraft does not matter (how would the pilot necessarily know that anyway, most aircraft are registered through corporations, not the person they would be flying). What matters is that the source of the pilot cannot be the same as the source of the airplane. If you are the pilot and it's your airplane (owned, rented by you, etc), then you'd need to be a commercial operator. If you are the pilot and it's someone else's aircraft they asked you to fly, then it's ok because you are only providing your services as a commercial pilot.
As far as the FBO rental is concerned, you're correct that they would normally not let a non-pilot rent an aircraft, but it could be legal if one pilot rents the aircraft and then seperately hires another commercial pilot, who has nothing to do with the FBO, to fly it for him.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
I hope you got this straightened out- this is absolutely not true. The only thing that will come into play when a CFI/entity owns the aircraft and provides the CFI is that a 100 hour is required. It sounds as if you were either taught this incorrectly or misunderstood.
I am not asking or talking about CFI anymore. That was discussed earlier and I agreed with it, 119.1 was very clear and I verified it in the Commercial Oral exam guide and remember being taught that in my flight training.
I am talking about for flying someone somewhere for hire (not instruction or pipeline or the various others). Unless that person owns the aircraft you cannot do it is what I was under the impression of, and nobody has provided any information proving one way or another. Hope that helps straighten my question out.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
This is normally true with some exceptions.
I would love it if you could give more information? Do you know about the air taxi renting question? Please cite a source if you give a definitive yes or no, thanks.