Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Illegal charter

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
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.
 
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?
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
Perhaps I should marry by boot to your behind.
 
CaptSeth said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Since you like to pontificate, let's hear about the rejected T/O after V1. We'll wait while you get a bottle.:)
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 said:
The FAA is serious enough about it, they've opened an illegal charter hotline. From the AIN Online email newsletter...
Click to expand...
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.
 
avbug is standing-by, 24/7, to take your call.
 
McNugget said:
avbug is standing-by, 24/7, to take your call.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
McNugget said:
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.
Click to expand...

If so, Pot, meet Kettle. :rolleyes:

Judging by some of your posts and attempts at humor, this could quite easily describe you as well.
 
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.
 
Amish RakeFight said:
If so, Pot, meet Kettle. :rolleyes:

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

You are so right, rakefight! I'll be sure to take your advice to heart, and change my ways.
 
avbug said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
gret said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yes, and we've been waiting for many years for even one such case.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom