Illegal charter

[avbug]

You seem to be at the same profesional level of decorum, yourself. Perhaps you two are married.

 

[McNugget]

Perhaps I should marry by boot to your behind.

 

[blesko]

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.

If its under 61 instruction, its a little less grey since there's a lesser degree of documentation required to persue the rating. If its a part 141 school, depending on where the student is in his/her training, it might be acceptable as well. If the student is stage I, pre solo maneuvers, this will be flagged by the FSDO if the approproiate documentation is completed and lesson plan is signed. If the student is in stage III, X-C stuff, you can more easily get away with this and sign if off as a legitimate cross country.

 

[avbug]

Perhaps I should marry by boot to your behind.

Ah...riiiiight. Put down the bottle and step away from the keyboard. Somebody hasn't been getting their nap, apparently.

 

[Daveman]

Ah...riiiiight. Put down the bottle and step away from the keyboard. Somebody hasn't been getting their nap, apparently.

Since you like to pontificate, let's hear about the rejected T/O after V1. We'll wait while you get a bottle.

 

[avbug]

Doesn't seem pertinent to this thread now, does it? It's not. Further, as the subject of an ongoing investigation, discussion about that would be unprofessional and speculative; not going to happen.

If you wish to start a separate thread discussing rejected takeoffs and the purpose of V1, by all means do so.

 

[McNugget]

Since you aren't a moderator, nobody really cares what you think about what is pertinent to the thread.

Go away, wanna-be Sky-Cop.

 

[avbug]

You've certainly contributed to the thread in a meaningful, and adult manner...much in the same way a kindergartner contributes to nap time by spilling his juice and graham crackers. Once again. Thanks for your input. Feel free to return in 10 or 20 years when you elect to grow up.

 

[McNugget]

Too bad you won't address the fact that you are a know-it-all who doesn't know anything. You have zero credibility, and spend your pathetic, miserable little life on internet forums trying to be smarter than everyone else. Obviously, it is because nobody listens to you in real life. The sum of your worthless, condescending, belittling posts must be far greater than your total flight time.

 

[avbug]

You won't be contributing in a meaningful manner to the thread, then?

Very well.

 

[CitationUltra]

The FAA is serious enough about it, they've opened an illegal charter hotline. From the AIN Online email newsletter...

WOW. This is a situation that the FAA has known about for years, but has done nothing. Now, suddenly, it is a big deal, and their response is to open a snitch line, so that they can encourage people to inform on the operators that they already know about. Great initiative.

 

[McNugget]

avbug is standing-by, 24/7, to take your call.

 

[CitationUltra]

avbug is standing-by, 24/7, to take your call.

Perhaps, but this is just window-dressing. This "134" flying has been going on for years, undermining the legitimate certificate holders who spend thousands per year on compliance, only to watch paying passengers being flown by the 134 operators. They've done nothing about it, and it is still going on.

And it's not the guy with the Bonanza that's the problem, it's the company with the Learjet and the Falcon and the Citation. They are the ones taking the revenue away from companies who have made substantial investments in infrastructure, equipment and compliance.

 

[avbug]

WOW. This is a situation that the FAA has known about for years, but has done nothing. Now, suddenly, it is a big deal, and their response is to open a snitch line, so that they can encourage people to inform on the operators that they already know about. Great initiative.

The FAA has been actively prosecuting this for years. Decades, in fact. For a number of years now, it's been a hot topic for enforcement action. The hotline is just one additional tool for obtaining information on violators.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Too bad you won't address the fact that you are a know-it-all who doesn't know anything. You have zero credibility, and spend your pathetic, miserable little life on internet forums trying to be smarter than everyone else. Obviously, it is because nobody listens to you in real life. The sum of your worthless, condescending, belittling posts must be far greater than your total flight time.

If so, Pot, meet Kettle.

Judging by some of your posts and attempts at humor, this could quite easily describe you as well.

 

[gret]

It isn't only the FAA that is interested, it is also the IRS. It doesn't appear the two agencies are fully up to speed on exchanging data, but they soon will be.

http://www.wileyrein.com/docs/publications/13124.pdf

One high profile flight department conducting flights for compensation getting tagged by the FAA is all they need to bring a lot others in line.

 

[McNugget]

If so, Pot, meet Kettle.

Judging by some of your posts and attempts at humor, this could quite easily describe you as well.

You are so right, rakefight! I'll be sure to take your advice to heart, and change my ways.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

You are so right, rakefight! I'll be sure to take your advice to heart, and change my ways.

No need to. But I find it funny that you have the audacity to spout such hypocrisy.

 

[CitationUltra]

The FAA has been actively prosecuting this for years. Decades, in fact. For a number of years now, it's been a hot topic for enforcement action. The hotline is just one additional tool for obtaining information on violators.

That sounds good from an FAA public-relations standpoint, but in fact they haven't been "prosecuting" this at all. It goes on blatantly today, perpetrated by aircraft operators the FAA has known about for years. I can recall no major prosecutions or civil penalties levied against non-certificate holding private aircraft owners for flying pseudo-charters.

 

[CitationUltra]

It isn't only the FAA that is interested, it is also the IRS. It doesn't appear the two agencies are fully up to speed on exchanging data, but they soon will be.

http://www.wileyrein.com/docs/publications/13124.pdf

One high profile flight department conducting flights for compensation getting tagged by the FAA is all they need to bring a lot others in line.

Yes, and we've been waiting for many years for even one such case.