Commercial "Operator" Question

[minitour]

My step-grandmother-in-law (follow all that?) has to go to two weddings this summer and doesn't want to take a greyhound (bad legs). Instead, she would rather rent a plane and have me fly her and her party to the weddings and back...one day each for each wedding.

My question is:
1. Any recommendations on what kinda plane I should be looking for? (Twins? HP Singles?)

2. Does this screw me under that "commercial operator" thing?

At the time, I'll have the CSEL/MEL/CFI-IA stuff, but obviously not a "commercial operator" certificate...

I'm thinking it's going to be illegal unless I rent the plane and take them...

Anyone? Thanks.

-mini

 

[pilotyip]

You can share costs and not be a "commercial operator". You are not holding out if she is a relative.

 

[nosehair]

2. Does this screw me under that "commercial operator" thing?

At the time, I'll have the CSEL/MEL/CFI-IA stuff, but obviously not a "commercial operator" certificate...

I'm thinking it's going to be illegal unless I rent the plane and take them...

Anyone? Thanks.

-mini

Can't help you with No.1, except in my part of the country, you can't find anything much beyond a straight-leg 172 to rent (without an instructor).

No. 2: If you rent the airplane and pay for it, you are legal. Forget all that CSEL/yada,yada,yada. You are exercising the privilege of a Private Pilot, namely, carrying pax NOT for hire. Also, 61.113(c) allows your pax to pay half (or pro rata share) of the rental price.
Now, IF your pax can somehow rent the airplane, without the usual checkout, then he/she can pay for ALL the expenses, plus throw some your way for your time, because that person is the airplane operator. If you rent the airplane, you are the operator, and therefore must have a commercial operator's certificate.
BTW, this you will need to know for your CAX oral....oh, wait! is this just a sneaky way of asking that question...?

 

[minitour]

... BTW, this you will need to know for your CAX oral....oh, wait! is this just a sneaky way of asking that question...?

actually I was thinking about that too . So you're saying she can go into the FBO, pay them $x per hour for the plane, I can fly it, and all is well?

OR

Obviously, I can rent the plane and pay my portion (PPL stuff) and all is well.

I get caught on this commercial operator stuff...the "private v common carriage" I understand...but needing this operator thing...dang...

This ranks right up there with "effect v intensity" for me...I always screw those two up..

But thanks for the help!

-mini

 

[nosehair]

I get caught on this commercial operator stuff...the "private v common carriage" I understand...but needing this operator thing...dang...


-mini

Part 125. I don't have a copy to quote, but that part covers Corporate flying.
Not holding out to general public. A company aircraft used exclusivly in the conduct of business. You are the paid pilot to carry company employees to business (or business-related pleasure).
The main difference from 125 to 135/121 is that the 135/121 ticket buyer from the street expects, and gets, a higher level of FAA supervision and safety. The company airplane is basicly a privately owned airplane, and all the employees, or customers, or friends of the boss, or whatever, know it is company or privately owned, and is not under the supervision, and responsibility of the DOT.

If you rent, lease, or buy a bus or airplane, you can hire a driver or pilot to drive/fly it without a "common carriage" certificate.

The "owner" is the "operator". If you rent the airplane with pilot included, the FAA sees this as "common cariage" and requires the common carriage certificate.

So, your pax would have to rent the airplane, not including you, and get that documented, ie., a rental agreement making it plane..I mean plain, that the rental was without a pilot. Aquiring a pilot would be a private affair. Like a chauffer to drive your car.

 

[minitour]

ah HAH...

so then all I'd have to do is be "insurable" for the FBO's insurance...which has nothing to do with the Regs...or am I still lost?

Oh well...I'm off to look at part 125. Thanks for the help

-mini

 

[midlifeflyer]

Obviously, I can rent the plane and pay my portion (PPL stuff) and all is well.

I'm going to stay out of the questions about at what point do you become an operator and whether any FBO would be willing to rent an airplane =solely= to a non-pilot.

But watch out for that PP sharing stuff. It's not necessarily true that "all is well". If you are not also going to the wedding or have another legitimate personal reason for flying to that airport, you can't lawfully share the expenses since, as the FAA Chief Counsel has said, "the only allowable share-the-costs operations are those which are bona fide, that is, joint ventures for a common purpose with the expenses being defrayed by all passengers and the pilot."

Also remember the basic rule in this area: If you're thinking, "Now, if we work it =this= way..." it's probably wrong.


BTW, for type of aircraft think about the mission (how many, how far, and how much) and just choose one that will do it while keeping the passengers comfortable.

 

[bigD]

Also remember the basic rule in this area: If you're thinking, "Now, if we work it =this= way..." it's probably wrong.

Even if you feel that you have all the FAR's covered, ask yourself this - would you feel comfortable talking candidly to an FAA guy about this flight? I'd bet not (I certainly wouldn't).

 

[JAFI]

Part 125 is for aircraft of 20 seats or more.

Part 119 is where a commercial operator goes for this question. See propilot.com, the subject has been beat to death. Flight time can also be compensation.

Grandmothers have been know to just "give" money to their children. You figure it out. Don't hold out, don't CHARGE money until you are legal to do so. Enjoy the flight, pick a comfortable aircraft for her, pick a nice day so she can look out the window and enjoy the view.

 

[nosehair]

Mini, I have to chime in with all the "Naysayers". While it may look legal to a "real" lawyer (not an FAA lawyer), there are many cases of SOME FAA Inspectors who live by the rule, "IF it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, then it is a duck". In other words, if he thinks it should have been under a 135 certificate, then he will initiate an investigation, and ....well, you fill in the ending.