134.5 operation?

jtrain609

jtrain609

Antisocial Monster
Hey everyone,


I was posed this question by someone the other day, and I think I've got the answer to it but I wanted to make sure.

Let's say I have a friend who wants to go see a friend that goes to a college about 4-5 hours worth of flying away from here. He asked me if I could fly him there and he'd pay for the time. Of course being the astute private pilot that I am, I remembered from the written exam this is a no no and told him that would fall under 135 operations and that it requires a lot more than a pilots license to operate an aircraft like that because it's considered on demand air charter.

But then I tel him that, possibly, if I were a flight instructor and he were taking lessons (or were a private pilot and wanted someone to hang out with him for either insurance purposes or otherwise, which isn't unheard of) then I could do the same thing, because it would fall under Part 91 operations as it would be an owner flown flight, with the student acting as PIC and me giving dual given. He asked me where he could start ground school and I gave him some options.

Would I be correct in making this statement that if he wanted me to come along with him, he'd have to be a legit student? I figure it's shady to just suddendly give a guy 10 hours of dual when he's never had an intro flight, and the only way said situation could work out is if he were a legit student or owned an aircraft that he'd want an instructor on board for so he could have an extra set of eyes and whatnot.

Thoughts?
 
Do you have your Commercial liscense? (I can't recall what ratings you have John)

If so, are you getting paid for your services as a pilot?

If the answer to question # 2 is No, then you can "share expenses" for the flight. The ratio is not specified, so your friend can pay for the plane, and you are doing him a favor. As long as you don't make any money on the deal it's legit.

The question of wether or not you getting free flight time constitues "compensation" is ocasionally raised. However flight time alone isn't compensation.

Buy your freind lunch when you get there, and you are clear.



If you do have your Com liscense & are getting paid for you services as a pilot, then you must be paid seperately from the person who supplies the plane. Your freind rents the plane from the FBO, and then pays you for flying it. Otherwise, you are "holding out" as a charter operation.

Hope that helps.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Hey everyone,


I was posed this question by someone the other day, and I think I've got the answer to it but I wanted to make sure.

Let's say I have a friend who wants to go see a friend that goes to a college about 4-5 hours worth of flying away from here. He asked me if I could fly him there and he'd pay for the time. Of course being the astute private pilot that I am, I remembered from the written exam this is a no no and told him that would fall under 135 operations and that it requires a lot more than a pilots license to operate an aircraft like that because it's considered on demand air charter.

But then I tel him that, possibly, if I were a flight instructor and he were taking lessons (or were a private pilot and wanted someone to hang out with him for either insurance purposes or otherwise, which isn't unheard of) then I could do the same thing, because it would fall under Part 91 operations as it would be an owner flown flight, with the student acting as PIC and me giving dual given. He asked me where he could start ground school and I gave him some options.

Would I be correct in making this statement that if he wanted me to come along with him, he'd have to be a legit student? I figure it's shady to just suddendly give a guy 10 hours of dual when he's never had an intro flight, and the only way said situation could work out is if he were a legit student or owned an aircraft that he'd want an instructor on board for so he could have an extra set of eyes and whatnot.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]


Get your AGI and have your friend buy a logbook. Start giving him ground instruction on what to expect during flight, aerodynamics, systems, xcountry flights etc. Then make sure you log it in his logbook as well as yours. Once you do get your CFI you can then start flying him to the place he wants to go along the way showing him manuevers along the way. Do that a few times and take him in the pattern as well you are close to having yourself a private pilot!

By the way I have been meaning to try to get in touch with you. I remember meeting you in Vegas and have a few questions. Do you have a cell I can reach you at? PM it to me and the best times to call.
 
Geez Seggy...he wasn't asking HOW to do an end run around 135 rules. He was asking if that scenario IS an end-run around 135 rules!
wink.gif
smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
If the answer to question # 2 is No, then you can "share expenses" for the flight. The ratio is not specified, so your friend can pay for the plane, and you are doing him a favor. As long as you don't make any money on the deal it's legit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the FSDO's definition of "pro rata." Then again, I guess it depends on if the FSDO even finds out. I've seen some pretty shady 134.5 operators in my time that are still flying just b/c the FSDO either doesn't know or looks the other way until they crash or bust a FAR. I'm with USMC on this one. As long as you don't MAKE any money off the flight, then I'd be cool with it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the answer to question # 2 is No, then you can "share expenses" for the flight. The ratio is not specified, so your friend can pay for the plane, and you are doing him a favor. As long as you don't make any money on the deal it's legit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the FSDO's definition of "pro rata." Then again, I guess it depends on if the FSDO even finds out. I've seen some pretty shady 134.5 operators in my time that are still flying just b/c the FSDO either doesn't know or looks the other way until they crash or bust a FAR. I'm with USMC on this one. As long as you don't MAKE any money off the flight, then I'd be cool with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know guys but I would be VERY careful. The way it has been described to me is that flight time IS compensation. Jepp puts out a book, the FARs Explained and there might be an explanation about it in there. I will try to look it up later.
 
Also want to add that down the road when you get a regional interview and they see that you have a lot of entries from the airports he would need to fly between they might ask you something like, "Geez thats a lot of dual given between point A and B, was that one of your students?" If you can show them that he soloed and went on for his ticket, then obviously its legit. But if you just show them dual given a few times between those two points, well then THEY might call you out on it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
If the answer to question # 2 is No, then you can "share expenses" for the flight. The ratio is not specified, so your friend can pay for the plane, and you are doing him a favor. As long as you don't make any money on the deal it's legit.

[/ QUOTE ]

FAR 61.113 (C) States:
"A private pilot may not pay less then the pro rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with passangers, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees."

Definition of pro rata:
"In proportion, according to a factor that can be calculated exactly."

I was always told and always took this as having to pay your half of the expense if you are not commercially rated (i.e. There are two of you and the cost is $60 so you can't pay less then $30, there are 3 of you and the cost is $60 so you can't pay less then $20, etc...).

Can anyone clarify this, 'cause I'm kinda confused on this now...
tongue.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Can anyone clarify this, 'cause I'm kinda confused on this now...
tongue.gif


[/ QUOTE ]Let's give it a try.

John, essentially correct on the first part. The basic rule under 91.113 is that, no, you can't fly your friend there and have him pay for the time. That part is simple. The rule also says that everyone on board can pay their pro-rata share of expenses, and, Derek S, you are correct: this means divide the expenses by the number of people on board, including the pilot.

But here's the kicker to basic rule: in John's scenario, even if his friend only pays 1/2 of the expenses, the flight is a no-no. That's because the purpose of the flight would be to take his friend to college. You won't find it in 61.113, but the sharing rule only applies when the pilots and passengers also share the =purpose= of the flight. It's called the "common purpose" doctrine and has been used many times by the FAA to go after pilots. If you were both going to college and decided to go by air rather than by car, the sharing would be fine. But here, there's really no difference between you and a commuter flight - some of them don't get paid the full cost of the flight either.

Let's move to the CFI scenario.

Sure, a CFI can give legitimate one-way dual. But is that what you're really doing here? Is this an instructional flight or is this transportation for hire in which you're just trying to find a loophole to make it legitimate. If it's the former, fine. But be prepared for the FAA to treat it as the second and get ready to explain why the only dual your friend ever receives is on the way to college. "If it walks like a duck..."
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know guys but I would be VERY careful. The way it has been described to me is that flight time IS compensation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes indeedy, the FAA looks at free flight time as a form of compensation--and thus, a no-no for private pilots, unfortunately. This came up as an issue for CAP in the last few years; CAP has exemptions allowing private pilots to be reimbursed for operating expenses during Air Force-assigned search missions, but the FAA ruled that for other operations--even those sponsored by other federal entities--a private pilot CAP member can EITHER accept reimbursement for those expenses OR log the flight time--but not both, due to their view that flight time is a form of compensation. I completely disagree with the FAA on this one, for logged time is simply a record of experience; it's not like they can say "you can fly, but you can't gain the experience from the flight".
 
[ QUOTE ]
Also want to add that down the road when you get a regional interview and they see that you have a lot of entries from the airports he would need to fly between they might ask you something like, "Geez thats a lot of dual given between point A and B, was that one of your students?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, during my time building for the commercial, I had to run a lot of short flights before work to get the time in. I guess it kinda looks like I was running a charter op between Orlando and Ocala.
smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also want to add that down the road when you get a regional interview and they see that you have a lot of entries from the airports he would need to fly between they might ask you something like, "Geez thats a lot of dual given between point A and B, was that one of your students?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, during my time building for the commercial, I had to run a lot of short flights before work to get the time in. I guess it kinda looks like I was running a charter op between Orlando and Ocala.
smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

I COMPLETELY understand this. You should see my log book. I have multiple flights to destinations such as ISP, BDL, RIC, ORF during the my 'timebuilding' stage. I enjoyed flying to these destinations. ISP and BDL was a cool flight and one I enjoy doing because of the certain airspaces involved and I have family in those destinations. RIC and ORF are great airports and scenic trips. If this is questioned during my interview stage I know I won't have a problem answering these.

However, what would raise flags if the regional sees a pattern, for example every Friday you log dual given from A to B. Then on a Sunday from B to A, that MIGHT raise flags, not saying it will but it might.

If they ask you why there were a lot of flights like you described that won't be a problem.

The reason I bring this up is a buddy of mine had a friend who was doing a 134.5 operation and got called out for it when they interviewed at a regional. There was a VERY blatant pattern and he got nailed for it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
No, then you can "share expenses" for the flight. The ratio is not specified, so your friend can pay for the plane, and you are doing him a favor. As long as you don't make any money on the deal it's legit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe the ratio is specified:

.....pro-rata share.....

example:
(ignore the value)

total bill - $400
people on board - 2
each pays - $200

Correct????
 
It looks like I was incorrect about this.

I looked up this in "FARs explained".

You can split evenly the cost of the flight if it is simply for fun.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong... but this is how I understand tha commercial operation rules (BTW I HATE THESE RULES)

In this case (taking a friend to a college to visit someone, when that friend approaches you) would not be considered a 135 flight since there was no "holding out" and you did not express the intention to fly ANYONE to this destination, just your friend this time. This would be a part 91 commercial operation.

Providing the pilot (I don't remember if John is a Commercial Pilot) is commercially rated, he can accept payment for the flight without a problem... Part 91.

Now if he expressed to the public that he'll fly anyone up to that college for a fee, THAT would be a 135 operation and wouldn't be kosher.
 
Heya guys,


Thanks for the replies. A few clarifications for everyone.

I am not currently a commercial pilot, but I'm heading to Skymates in June and I'm going to do my commercial, multi, CFI/II/MEI and 100 hours of multi time building over the summer. That means I'll be coming back as a commercial pilot and said situation would possibly be in the above described situation.

I tend to agree that taking anything more than a pro rata share while operating under Part 91 is against the regs. More imporantly, I'm worried about getting popped by a future employer. I can't think of many ways the FAA could violate me with something like this if I was not offering services to the public, but I don't want to screw myself down the road when it comes to getting a job and someone is looking over my logbook and finds something they don't like.

Honestly, I don't plan on putting myself in this kind of a situation because I believe there is way too much grey area and I'm not interested in an extra couple of hours here or there on my way up because when it really comes down to it those extra few hours mean about jack when I get to 1,200 or 2,000 hours. At that point I'm going to be more concerned about having something in my logbook that will screw me. I honestly didn't know the correct answer to this one, and it seems that there are differing opinions on this.

Thanks for all the replies ya'll!

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 
[ QUOTE ]
In this case (taking a friend to a college to visit someone, when that friend approaches you) would not be considered a 135 flight since there was no "holding out" and you did not express the intention to fly ANYONE to this destination, just your friend this time.

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe. This is where it gets fuzzy. the "public" doesn't mean "anyone and everyone". It could be a very small group who heard that the pilot is amenable to doing this by word of mouth.

Yup, the line between 91 and 135 is really fuzzy. But that's probably more due to inventive folks trying to find ways around having to fork up the bucks it takes to meet the higher regulation and safety standards that the FAA wants before you start flying people who haven't a clue about your qualifications around for money.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong... but this is how I understand tha commercial operation rules (BTW I HATE THESE RULES)

In this case (taking a friend to a college to visit someone, when that friend approaches you) would not be considered a 135 flight since there was no "holding out" and you did not express the intention to fly ANYONE to this destination, just your friend this time. This would be a part 91 commercial operation.

Providing the pilot (I don't remember if John is a Commercial Pilot) is commercially rated, he can accept payment for the flight without a problem... Part 91.

Now if he expressed to the public that he'll fly anyone up to that college for a fee, THAT would be a 135 operation and wouldn't be kosher.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be more concerned about the insurance aspects of this. I think most rental aircraft can't be used for a commercial operation except by the owing company, eg. flight instruction. If it was your own plane you wouldn't be covered for a commercial operation without purchasing commercial insurance. Be careful about this.
 
[ QUOTE ]


I'd be more concerned about the insurance aspects of this. I think most rental aircraft can't be used for a commercial operation except by the owing company, eg. flight instruction. If it was your own plane you wouldn't be covered for a commercial operation without purchasing commercial insurance. Be careful about this.

[/ QUOTE ]

in other words, as asked in another thread "who really controls the world?" the answer is...

The Insurance companies...

I HATE INSURANCE COMPANIES TOO. Mainly due to the fact that over the course of my time on this earth, I have contributed over $45,000 to auto/ renters/ homeowners insurance and have ONE claim for $500 to show for it. And once, when I needed a claim to fix a broke axle from driving off of the road in a snow storm, they wouldn't cover it, BUT STILL CHARGED ME FOR THREE YEARS FOR AN ACCIDENT. All, just so I can have a little piece of 1/2 cent paper that says I pay blood money to the evil insurance cartel...

Aviation Insurance is no different.
[/Rant]
 
From the Gulfstream thread in General Topics...
[ QUOTE ]
What i hear is that due to pressure from the insurance company and such... plus every pilot that has been involved in these past two accidents have been from gulfstream (whether it be captains or FO's)... so training dept said the word.. and the minimums were changed to 1000 TT and 200 ME accross the board.

[/ QUOTE ]

See what I mean...
banghead.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top