Private Pilot doing illegal charters

Boris Badenov said:
Nope. I don't do the Fed's work for them. Now, I think everyone in this thread probably knows that if a guy is doing 134.5 enough that it's putting charter guys out of business, even the FAA is going to notice.
Click to expand...

So, at what point would you go to the fed with anything? Flying with a pilot who operates illegally? Whole company operating illegally? Or never?
 
Houston said:
You tell me. What level of illegal activity is okay with you? What level of risk does one human being have to impose upon another before you would take an action? Would you allow your mother to fly aboard an airplane that you knew was being operated illegally?
Click to expand...

You tell me when I said it was okay with me to fly illegally? There are different levels of illegal activity and different levels of risk. Just because I don't exaggerate the level of risk of an illegal activity doesn't mean I condone or support that activity, such as in your example of comparing a private pilot illegally flying commercially to a drunk driver getting ready to drive drunk and kill people.
 
If I was a 135 operator in this area I would make sure this guy gets hanged by the the FAA. Then I would make a example of him. It's hard enough to run a profitable business without being undercut by the guy breaking the rules. I'm assuming that he is in fact running a part 134.5 here.
 
Just out of curiosity, what passenger flying does the peanut gallery consider acceptable in connection with a non-aviation business? With a PPL as the pilot.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Just out of curiosity, what passenger flying does the peanut gallery consider acceptable in connection with a non-aviation business? With a PPL as the pilot.
Click to expand...
Only what the rules allow. As long as it is incidental to the business it is ok. For example if say you and a coworker need to go visit a client. You can fly you and your coworker to go visit that client and have the expenses covered as a private pilot. It is no different in that situation then being reimbursed for driving expenses without a commercial driving license. The key is that you can't be paid to transport your coworker. One test that is used is whether you would be going on that trip if you weren't a pilot. If the company is simply sending you on the trip so that you can fly the plane then that's not legit. You have to have a reason for going to the location. Also the key is that you can't be paid more than the cost of the flight. So if it costs 500 to rent the plane then 500 is the most you can be reimbursed. The rules are clear cut on this.
 
Inverted25 said:
Only what the rules allow. As long as it is incidental to the business it is ok. For example if say you and a coworker need to go visit a client. You can fly you and your coworker to go visit that client and have the expenses covered as a private pilot. It is no different in that situation then being reimbursed for driving expenses without a commercial driving license. The key is that you can't be paid to transport your coworker. One test that is used is whether you would be going on that trip if you weren't a pilot. If the company is simply sending you on the trip so that you can fly the plane then that's not legit. You have to have a reason for going to the location. Also the key is that you can't be paid more than the cost of the flight. So if it costs 500 to rent the plane then 500 is the most you can be reimbursed. The rules are clear cut on this.
Click to expand...

I believe you can still draw a salary while you are flying (if you are paid hourly, it wouldn't be legal not to pay you). You actually are allowed to fly for compensation if it is "incidental" - meaning your primary business isn't flying airplanes.

Not being a troll here - we have all seen a million examples of what you can't do, but I have seen few examples of what is allowed.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Saying "hey Ma, maybe you should wait for the next one" isn't quite the same thing as calling the Feds. MYOB.
Click to expand...


The "MYOB" mantra is the standard within certain segments of society. It's the standard among the felons incarcerated in our penitentiaries. It is also the common behavior in crime ridden areas. There are two fundamental reasons for that. The first is fear. Fear of reprisal from those who choose to conduct themselves in antisocial ways. That is a rational fear. The person who misbehaves is more than likely to be of the ilk that will continue misbehaving and may likely reprise against anyone who calls attention to their misbehavior. The second is what might be called a criminal commonality. An individual who is a rule breaker chooses to "MYOB" in the hope they will not be called to account for their rule breaking or antisocial behavior.

Sadly, there is also a third reason for "MYOB" that cuts across all segments of society. That is a lack of social consciousness. We've all seen the people who witness an accident and then drive on rather than stop. To them, arriving somewhere a few minutes early is more important than getting help for someone who may be hurt. To them, the fact an innocent driver may be charged for the accident is less important than a few minutes of their time. That is the kind of logic that leads some to conclude that they would say "hey Ma, maybe you should wait for the next one" rather than let their mother fly aboard an illegally operated aircraft, but they apply a "MYOB" logic when it is someone else's mother.

As this Memorial Day weekend approaches, it is a particularly proper time to take stock of our individual conduct. Are we the kind who have the courage and the social consciousness to be a positive force within society, or do we have a "MYOB" attitude.
 
Well on that website they seem to be advertising flight available. The FAA won't and can't do anything to the website, but they could respond to an ad and have a chat with the pilot that listed on a website, a flight available.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
I believe you can still draw a salary while you are flying (if you are paid hourly, it wouldn't be legal not to pay you). You actually are allowed to fly for compensation if it is "incidental" - meaning your primary business isn't flying airplanes.

Not being a troll here - we have all seen a million examples of what you can't do, but I have seen few examples of what is allowed.
Click to expand...
I am not a lawyer so this is hearsay but from what I was told by a FSDO inspector here in Cleveland is that you can only be reimbursed the cost of the flight. Reimbursing you for more than the flight would be compensating you as a pilot and is not allowed. I looked around for some case law on this and didn't find any. Maybe a letter of interpretation would be nice on this subject.

On a side note though the FAA ruled last year that private pilot could be compensated for towing gliders.
 
You can be reimbursed for the share of the flight that is not you. You plus one, you can get paid half what it cost you.

You plus 2, you can take 66,6% of what it cost.

And if I'm not mistaken this applies to commercial pilots as well unless doing a sightseeing flight 25nm from base, and all the other exclusions.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
 
elmetal said:
You can be reimbursed for the share of the flight that is not you. You plus one, you can get paid half what it cost you.

You plus 2, you can take 66,6% of what it cost.

And if I'm not mistaken this applies to commercial pilots as well unless doing a sightseeing flight 25nm from base, and all the other exclusions.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
If I'm sitting in an FBO and a guy just walks in and says hey you pilot, can you fly me to XXX, I'll give ya $1000. I can do that.
 
Yeah but if you don't announce that you do that (hold out) when is a guy you absolutely don't know going to request your service?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
 
elmetal said:
You can be reimbursed for the share of the flight that is not you. You plus one, you can get paid half what it cost you.

You plus 2, you can take 66,6% of what it cost.

And if I'm not mistaken this applies to commercial pilots as well unless doing a sightseeing flight 25nm from base, and all the other exclusions.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

As a commercial pilot you can have limited contracts with particular companies and fly them, but it cannot be a service open to the public. The number of, and means of defining those contracts, under part 91 is a very blurry gray area open to the interpretation of your local inspectors.
 
Inverted25 said:
I am not a lawyer so this is hearsay but from what I was told by a FSDO inspector here in Cleveland is that you can only be reimbursed the cost of the flight. Reimbursing you for more than the flight would be compensating you as a pilot and is not allowed. I looked around for some case law on this and didn't find any. Maybe a letter of interpretation would be nice on this subject.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'll dig up the LOIs tomorrow however this is what I have read on this.

Say you have an engineer (private pilot) that works on windmills. The company the engineer works for requires the engineer to travel directly to the different sites. As a result the company has the engineer fly the company Mooney around for the job. This is completely legal. The job depends on the flying.

Now if the engineer takes a passenger the operation will require a commercial certificate.

The company would pay all costs of the flight. The engineer would get paid his typical salary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top