Illegal charter

[avbug]

What exactly is it that you're laughing about?

No, the FAA isn't just getting around to this...the FAA has actively been prosecuting illegal charters for a very long time. However, the FAA has also provided additional means to report such events, and has provided additional funding and a fresh mandate to actively pursue the offenders.

It's not a laughing matter.

 

[doog]

When Mr. Smith pays his buddy Al to take him to Yazoo City in his Bonanza, he knows he's not chartering from a legitimate service. He's paying his buddy Al. Whether he knows it's legal or not is really irrelevant. Whether someone else does, and uses the hotline or other venue to report this illegal operation, is very much relevant, as well as proper.

It's Mr. Smith's Bonanza? If so it sounds like a legit part 91 op, no?

 

[avbug]

If it's Mr. Smith's Bonanza, then obviously the situation would be irrelevant to the discussion. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about an illegal charter.

 

[doog]

If it's Mr. Smith's Bonanza, then obviously the situation would be irrelevant to the discussion. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about an illegal charter.

Got it... you used the subject pronoun as the direct object, indicating it was Mr. Smith's Bonanza... now what if Mr. Smith rents the aircraft from a third party?

 

[NuGuy]

What exactly is it that you're laughing about?

No, the FAA isn't just getting around to this...the FAA has actively been prosecuting illegal charters for a very long time. However, the FAA has also provided additional means to report such events, and has provided additional funding and a fresh mandate to actively pursue the offenders.

It's not a laughing matter.

Hiya Avbug,

I agree %100. Been doing this for almost 20 years now. FAA "hot button" issues wax and wane, but the one constant over the years has been the issue of illegal charters.

Woe betide ANYONE who gets close to this with the FAA. If they even get a sniff of something, they will come after you with a powerful will.

Nu

 

[Daveman]

Avbug, no laughing matter at all, hence the purple upside-down smile.[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One review of South Florida’s Yellow Pages and FAA records indicated that 14 of the companies listed were operating a charter business illegally.”

Now that's a laughing matter!
[/FONT]

 

[avbug]

now what if Mr. Smith rents the aircraft from a third party?

That really depends, as insufficient information is provided. The FAAwill ultimately make the determination. If Mr. Smith is attempting to get around the requirements of Parts 119 and 135, he may be up the creek. Or he may be okay.

Individuals have attempted unsuccessfully to circumvent the requirements of Part 135 by calling the flight a training flight or "flight instruction," as well as all other manner of loophole and sideways logic. It seldom holds water.

The FAA takes this seriously.

 

[gret]

Here is a link to a great overview of the matter-

http://www.aviatorservices.com/aircraft_usage_reimbursements.htm

The fact is, flying Part 91 with a corporate aircraft is almost impossible today with corporate allocations of the aircraft expenses, tax rules, personal use by executives, etc.

One company, I don't remember the name, had a product that they were pitching. It was called 91+ or 91plus?

 

[Daveman]

Here is a link to a great overview of the matter-

http://www.aviatorservices.com/aircraft_usage_reimbursements.htm

The fact is, flying Part 91 with a corporate aircraft is almost impossible today with corporate allocations of the aircraft expenses, tax rules, personal use by executives, etc.

One company, I don't remember the name, had a product that they were pitching. It was called 91+ or 91plus?

David M. Hernandez, Esq......

is not the FAA. The FAR/AIM are the rules we have to follow.

 

[outtahere]

So Mr. Smith being the pax could not rent an airplane and then hire his own pilot (Al)? That would seem to be legal, at least I hope it is since I owned a business offering pilot services, and did this quite frequently. What say you avbug (Mr. FAA)?

 

[avbug]

I'm not the FAA, and again, insufficient information is given.

 

[Daveman]

I'm not the FAA, and again, insufficient information is given.

And I'm not Sid Vicious! and nothing seem's the same?

 

[CaptSeth]

Here's a scenario: Private pilot rents plane with instructor for business trip, receives legitimate instruction during flight. Legal or 134.5?

What if Private Pilot sends plane back to base with instructor and remains away on trip? Does a drop-off change the picture? I had a student get refused from an FBO in another region due to this.

 

[McNugget]

Meaning what, exactly?

Only that the illegal charters have a better record than your company....the one that rejects after V1 and crashes on farmhouses.

 

[avbug]

I haven't and won't discuss my employer in respect to this subject, and I also won't discuss ongoing investigations (about which you are clearly ignorant).

Your comments are out of line.

The safety record of illegal charters is really irrelevant, as well as unknown, and therefore any comparison you might make is inappropriate and deeply flawed. Furthermore, illegal charters are wrong simply because they are illegal.

Here's a scenario: Private pilot rents plane with instructor for business trip, receives legitimate instruction during flight. Legal or 134.5?

Again, insufficient information is provided. The private pilot is acting as PIC for the trip? Then there's no issue. More information is needed.

 

[blesko]

Two words folks, operational control. TAG got was the victim here a year or so ago. Gotta find out how the flights operated before you go.

 

[McNugget]

Your comments are out of line.

No they aren't, unless you want to provide evidence to the contrary.

 

[avbug]

Wow, that was a professional post. Hopefully it wasn't your best effort.

The FAA exists to oversee, regulate, and to promote aviation. Illegal charters do nothing to promote aviation, safety, or the industry. Illegal charters bypass the tremendous expense, effort, and compliance that legitimate operators undergo. Illegal charters cheat everyone, and ignore the rules and regulations established for the safety of the public.

One who operates an illegal charter is a criminal.

The FAA grants pilot privileges. It is not a right. It is a privilege, just like driving privileges. The FAA also grants privileges which permit one to carry others or property of others, for hire. One who elects to operate outside the regulation is deserving of enforcement, which is a charter function of the FAA...the same organization which estabishes the regulation, and provides the privileges and the means of obtaining and keeping them. It does so on the authority of an Act of Congress.

Perhaps you see respect for the regulation and for the industry as equitable to performing lewd public sexual acts on federal property, but you're likely the only one. Reporting illegal operators has nothing to do with unusual affection for the FAA or for anyone else; it has to do with protection of the industry.

When you feel that you can speak at a level greater than a 14 year old, do try again, won't you?

 

[CaptSeth]

Again, insufficient information is provided. The private pilot is acting as PIC for the trip? Then there's no issue. More information is needed.

Actually, that does help to some degree.

 

[McNugget]

Wow, that was a professional post. Hopefully it wasn't your best effort.

The FAA exists to oversee, regulate, and to promote aviation. Illegal charters do nothing to promote aviation, safety, or the industry. Illegal charters bypass the tremendous expense, effort, and compliance that legitimate operators undergo. Illegal charters cheat everyone, and ignore the rules and regulations established for the safety of the public.

One who operates an illegal charter is a criminal.

The FAA grants pilot privileges. It is not a right. It is a privilege, just like driving privileges. The FAA also grants privileges which permit one to carry others or property of others, for hire. One who elects to operate outside the regulation is deserving of enforcement, which is a charter function of the FAA...the same organization which estabishes the regulation, and provides the privileges and the means of obtaining and keeping them. It does so on the authority of an Act of Congress.

Perhaps you see respect for the regulation and for the industry as equitable to performing lewd public sexual acts on federal property, but you're likely the only one. Reporting illegal operators has nothing to do with unusual affection for the FAA or for anyone else; it has to do with protection of the industry.

When you feel that you can speak at a level greater than a 14 year old, do try again, won't you?

Wow, avbug took an online course at humpty-diddle....

Go fall off your soapbox and get back to flying rubber dog$hit out of Hong-Kong...if you can keep it on the runway, that is.