FAR question

[kc81900]

I haven't had my head into the FAR's in years I am hoping someone can help me. A friend of mine is a high school coach and is having an auction to raise money. He wanted to know if I could take someone flying. My question is this I am an ATP rated pilot is there anyway I can do a one hour flight for him to raise money. I was thinking if I rent the plane and pay for it myself and volunteer my time. He would auction the hour long flight off and keep all proceeds and I would just use the expense as a write off. Any ideas I know the part 91 part 135 rules have gray areas and I don't want to get in trouble with the feds.

thanks in advance

 

[Dr Pokenhiemer]

I think you will be okay as long as you don't charge for your services. Sounds like you would be donating your time--how your passenger ended up on the flight should not be an issue.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Unfortunately, it's a flight for compensation. The passenger is paying for the flight (although not to you - doesn't matter). This is the reason there is an exception that permits =organized= charitable flights in 61.113.

But, as a commercial pilot, so long as you limit it to a sightseeing flight, you are out of Part 135. See FAR 119.1. There is a catch, though. Here's my FAQ on it:

==============================
Sightseeing:

Sightseeing is one of those things that you can do as a commercial pilot without going the 135 route. But there is a regulatory catch: you need to have a Part 135-style drug program in place.

Sightseeing flights within 25 NM which start and end at the same airport are exempt from operator certificate requirements under 119.1(e)(2). But 135.1(a)(5) lists a group of Part 135 rules that apply to these flights. Those rules, contained in 135.249, 135.251, 135.253, 135.255, and 135.353 are the drug and drug-testing rules.

What this means is that you may do sightseeing flights under Part 91 with only a commercial pilot certificate and without a Part 135 operator certificate. But (and it's a BIG but), you must have an official Part 135 drug program in place. Ends up being cost-prohibitive for many.

(There may also be insurance issues for the FBO if you are using the airplane for a commercial operation other than flight training)
==============================

 

[Dr Pokenhiemer]

Sorry, but I still agree with me. You said you were renting the plane yourself and donating your time. Who cares? The fact that your passenger won a raffle drawing or had the winning bid in an auction is irrelevant. In fact, you onlly have to pay 1/2 of the rental. You may split the cost evenly as long as you pay your fair share and don't charge for your time. People here have a knack for making a mountian out of a mole hill.

 

[midlifeflyer]

That's okay. kc asked what the rule was. I simply answered the question based on the FARs say and how they've been interpreted by the FAA. What he or you choose to do with that infomtaion is not my conce

 

[mattpilot]

Q for midlife

Does the drug program only apply to 'guys' who operate a certain amount of flights/week or does it apply to all, even one time flights?

I'd look it up, but i'm out of the country at the moment with no FAR/AIM

 

[CFIse]

Q for midlife

Does the drug program only apply to 'guys' who operate a certain amount of flights/week or does it apply to all, even one time flights?

Not midlife - but it applies to everyone. If you want to operate a commercial sightseeing flight under the 119 exemption then you need a 135 drug program.

Of course soon you'll need a 135 certificate - thus removing the ambiguity....

 

[midlifeflyer]

CFIse is right. The only thing I'd add is that if you are doing sightseeing flights for an airport open house purposes or the 61.113(d) type flight, AOPA has an exemption for the testing.

I've never heard of it being used for auctioned flights, and the requirements make it pretty clear that they are talking about "events," but if you are a member, you might give them a call.

Another possibility. Do you have a CFI hiding among your ratings. None of the drug testing stuff applies to donating a introductory flight lesson. I do on eof two of those a year.

BTW, CFIse? That change to P{art 135 has been dangling around for about 2 years. I haven't heard anything since the first round of yelling and screaming. Is there something new happening with it?

 

[CFIse]

BTW, CFIse? That change to P{art 135 has been dangling around for about 2 years. I haven't heard anything since the first round of yelling and screaming. Is there something new happening with it?

You're right - I do keep hearing about it, but maybe I'm just behind in my magazine reading - but it got iced about 12 months ago and the FAA hasn't withdrawn it or pushed it forward.

If I was a nasty cynical person I'd guess they're waiting for a well publicised sightseeing accident to whip it back out and implement it, because, after all, "it's for the children".

 

[onthebeach]

Here we have a concise statement of the problem:

>>I haven't had my head into the FAR's in years <<

Have a nice day.

 

[kc81900]

everyone thanks for your replies to the last guy stating the problem is I haven't had my head in the FAR's. Sorry the best you could contribute is that. I am an Airline Pilot who flies only part 121 flights outside of my job I have a normal life. Sorry I attracted one idiot to post. To all the rest I appreciate your input.

 

[nosehair]

I was thinking if I rent the plane and pay for it myself and volunteer my time. He would auction the hour long flight off and keep all proceeds and I would just use the expense as a write off.

Hey, kc, you did good, man, only one idiot response. Most usually get more. Must be busy.

Anyway, you just need to get out of the "paying for the airplane" part. You can volunteer your time, or the airplane, but not both. That's when the FAA sees it as a need to be certificated. If the pax could think he/she is buying a ticket on public transportation. Even sightseeing. But if the auction is a ticket for time on the airplane, and the airplane only, and you volunteer your time, you should be safe.

 

[midlifeflyer]

If the pax could think he/she is buying a ticket on public transportation.

That's an extremely important point. These discussions often (and sometimes necessarily) get into minutiae of the regs, the cases, and the interpretations. But if you step back from those "trees" that one statement is what the whole forest is about, since these issues were first dealt with, probably before the time of the stagecoach: protection of the public from their own lack of knowledge about the business of transportation and their reliance on the assumption that someone who is offering flights for a fee has met with a higher qualification requirement than someone who is doing it just for personal reasons.

 

[viper548]

kc81900, It is very generous of you to donate your time and money to the auction. I don't think it would be a good idea to auction it as a 'flight.' I think if it were auctioned as an 'introductory flight lesson' it would sound better. Either way, call your local FSDO and ask them for help.

 

[igneousy2]

You could auction it as a flight...you would need to contact the FSDO to get permission.

If you are a flight instructor the introductory flight may be your easiest bet, howeve, when you do the auction you must make sure it is advertised and is very clear that it is a Flight Lesson.

The sight seeing exemption have been effectively eliminated as a possibility by the last big Reg rewrite a few years ago.

It may simply be easier to get a flight school to send an instructor with a plane over. You could offer the flight school to pay for the airplane if they provided the instructor. The flight school would benefit from the auction as an advertisement at the high school for students to consider a flying career. The person that wins the auction has a good possibility of wanting to continue flight instruction later. It's a win/win...you do something great for the school by donating. You will limit your liability (make sure it's a reputable school...not uncle Joe's poedunk flight school).

Later

 

[LNKav8R]

Ok, caution on the CFI intro flight...100 hour required, Birthcert reqd I think now (TSA), Not to mention the nightmare of liability. I know you're a very experienced pilot, just make sure you don't get something caught hanging out when you don't want it to...

 

[soarby007]

Here I go. Probably sticking my foot in my mouth again, and I'm sure to be corrected.

I always was told that the airplane can be rented separate from the pilot, and not be a part 135 violation. In other words a person conceivably could rent a Baron, then hire Joe to fly it and there is no 135 violation. Joe cannot be part of the deal in renting the airplane and it must be an arms length transaction. If a person is given free use of an airplane and the customer is only paying for the airplane, or the pilot in different deals, there is no 135 violation. Joe cannot rent an airplane and then charge for the whole deal himself.

I don't see the problem as a part 135 or 119 violation.

 

[ToiletDuck]

When in doubt just call the FSDO. They have no problem answering questions and it would give you a nice piece of mind too.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Problem is that asking an inspector at the FSDO about an FAR question is about the same as asking the cop on the street for an interpretation of the criminal statutes.

Calling the FSDO (1) usually just gets you the opinion of the "inspector of the day" (2) is at least as likely to get you a wrong answer as asking here.

The only time you can get piece of mind from an informal call to the FSDO is when they say "no, you can't" and you don't do it.

 

[ToiletDuck]

if you call the FSDO and get an answer doesn't that covery your arse?