Part 91 Charter?

[Eric]

Is there such a thing as charter opportunities that aren't part 135? I keep hearing about frineds who are flying charter that don't meet 135 vfr or ifr minimums. Am I missing something here?

To clarify, they are flying passengers on demand, not dead legs. Sole manipulator.

 

[Rick1128]

Eric, As far as the FAA is concerned there is NO such animal as Part 91 charter. They consider it bootleg charter. If caught your 'friends' are in a great deal of trouble. If they want careers in aviation they need to be careful. It will follow them around for many years. A pilot locally was caught by the FAA recently. She was flying the excess baggage, without a 135 ride in an aircraft not on the operator's certificate. Even that is considered charter. The dust hasn't setled from that one yet.

 

[maverick_fp00]

If somebody owns a plane and you fly it, that's Part 91.. I know plenty of guys that do that.

 

[Snakum]

"If somebody owns a plane and you fly it, that's Part 91.. I know plenty of guys that do that."


What?!

Don Carty owns a buncha airplanes. Are they part 91?

You might wanna pull out that Jeppesen FAR/AIM Captain Maverick. Things may have changed a little.

Minh

 

[C-5 MEM]

I agree with snakum. Is that flying illegal going to be worth it in the long run. Last month a pilot here in Memphis flying passengers around in a local flight school plane was ramped and found out to be flying 134 1/2. Besides the fine, there looking at criminal charges.

 

[Rick1128]

The original question was Pt 91 CHARTER. And I believe that has been answered. It makes no difference if you own the airplane or not, if you operate an aircraft and have people pay for use of the aircraft with pilot for transportation from point A to point B except as provided in the FARs for shared costs and instruction, it is charter. And requires an appropriate operators certificate.

If someone hires you to fly their aircraft under Part 91, it is called 'Pilot Services' and is a legal operation under Part 91. As long as you hold at least a Commercial and Instrument with appropriate class rating.

One thing to be careful of is that sometimes an aircraft owner will hire a pilot to fly his aircraft and then charge someone for use of his aircraft with pilot. That is charter.

These are the diffinitions that the FAA will use to determine if you are legal or not.

 

[maverick_fp00]

There is a couple here in Panama City that own a Navajo. Just about every weekend they go to Shelbyville, TN. They have their own pilot that brings them wherever/whenever they want to go. That's all Part 91 in my book... I'm not trying to be a smarta$$, but if I'm wrong, seriously, let me know.

 

[I.P. Freley]

I built the bulk of my pre-121 ME time in a Chieftain flying Pt 91. A local company owned the airplane and had a contract with my flight school to "operate" the it for them... We kept the airplane in our hangar and fired it up and flew them wherever they wanted to go, more or less on-demand.

If that's not 91 charter, I don't know what is. And... If it's "illegal", there are a couple of dozen former employees of that flight school who are now airline pilots who are in quite a bit of trouble, myself included.

 

[tdvalve]

"If that's not 91 charter, I don't know what is. And... If it's "illegal", there are a couple of dozen former employees of that flight school who are now airline pilots who are in quite a bit of trouble, myself included."

Mr Freley, what you describe are not charter flights. Apparently, the operation was a corporate or private operation and was clearly in accordance with Part 91. To put it simply, operating under Part 91 is much like operating a private or corporate automobile. The vehicle operator needs a valid license plate and the driver needs a valid drivers license. But, if someone is charged for transportation in the automobile, the operator needs a commercial operators permit, commercial insurance, and a commercial license plate. The driver needs a commercial drivers license and must meet all other requirements that might apply to a taxi. There's really not a whole lot of gray area surrounding Part 91 vs 135.

 

[Rick1128]

Thank you Tdvalve for explaining the difference a little more clearly than I managed to do.

Be careful where and how you use the word charter. When the FAA hears about things like that they tend to over react. And who will they hear it from? Most likely your competitors?

While there is no difinition of charter within FAR Parts 1, 119 or 135, it is normally considered by the FAA that a company that holds themselves out for hire to provide common or noncommon carriage is conducting charter flights. Operating an aircraft for an owner, for the owner's personal use, is considered Part 91. No matter who operates the aircraft.

 

[Publishers]

Issues

"Holding yourself for Hire"

The general concept here is when you hold yourself out to hire to the general public you are chartering.

First, the aircraft owner hiring a professional pilot out for pilot services is just that and Part 91. You have sold pilot service not charter.

Corporations often have agreements between themselves on a shared expense basis for use of each others aircraft. That is not charter either.

I also had debates with the FAA about whether the return flight where you have dropped passengers off is 135. I claimed that it ceased being a charter when the passenger part was complete. They upheld my position.

Therefore only the part where you have passengers or freight is legitimately charter 135 rules.

 

[Flymach2]

Hi...

Operations that constitute common carriage are required to be conducted under Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Parts 121 or 135.

Private carriage may be conducted under FAR Parts 125 or 91, Subpart D.

Operations conducted under FAR Section 91.181, which permits certain charges to be made, may also be subject to these guidelines , particularly the "time sharing" provisions of FAR section 91.181(c)(l).

Carriage for hire which does not involve "holding out" is private
carriage. Private carriers for hire are sometimes called "contract carriers."

Private carriage for hire is carriage for one or several selected customers , generally on a long-term basis.

The number of contracts must not be too great, otherwise it implies a willingness to make a contract with anybody. A carrier operating pursuant to 18 to 24 contracts has been held to be a common carrier because it held itself out to serve the public generally to the extent of its facilities. Private carriage has been found in cases where three contracts have been the sole basis of the operator's business.

Regards

 

[Rick1128]

Mach2, You might want to look at Part 119. Private carriage also called noncommon carriage is defined providing a third party with air transportation on a contract basis. If an operator is doing so they must hold either a 135 certificate if operating aircraft with less than 20 seats and/or a payload of 6000 pounds or less. Or hold a Part 125 certificate if above the fore mentioned limits. Some 91 operators have been required to have a Part 125 certificate when operating Part 121 type aircraft. Most corporate operators have gotten a waiver from this requirement.

The term 'Charter' denotes that you are holding yourself out for common and/or noncommon carriage. It raises red flags with the FAA. When operator A provides a pilot for owner B, for B's own use. Business or pleasure, it is Part 91. Where it can get interesting is when B rents his aircraft to person C with a pilot. That is charter. It makes no difference if you knew or not. More than one pilot has found themselves in trouble with the FAA over this. When you provide pilot services you need to do 'due diligence'. Ask about insurance requirements. Who is going on the flight. Etc. The certificates you protect are your own.

 

[Flymach2]

Hi...

Rick, I know Part 119. I don't disagree with you, I was just posting AC 120-12A for those who had forgotten the difference between non-common and common carriage.

As you had mentioned earlier, the term "charter" is in itself a term that simply defines an on-demand operation which couldn't be conducted under Part 91.

If there is ever a question on the legality of a flight or flight operation....best to just ask....before the flight is in progress.

Regards

 

[TXCAP4228]

Exceptions to 135?

I have heard that under limited circumstances a commercial pilot can operate under part 91 (ie, no 135 certificate, no 135 flight time requirements etc...). This looks like the perfect thread to ask how that works.

My understanding was that if the flight is doesn't go more than 50 miles from the home airport and there is no point to point carriage of passengers (ie, the departure and arrival airport are the same) there's no problem. An example would be photo flights or sightseeing.

1) Is this correct?
2) Where could I find details in the FARs?

Thanks for the help.

 

[boxcar]

TXCAP4228

Your info is generally correct, but the distance limit for sightseeing flights is 25 statute miles. See FAR 119.1(e).

 

[501261]

"I keep hearing about frineds who are flying charter that don't meet 135 vfr or ifr minimums. Am I missing something here? "- Eric


Remember those flight time requirements for 135 are for PIC, all you need to be an SIC under 135 or 121 is a commercial (i.e. 250 hours) and have passed the appropriate check rides.

 

[Eric]

501261

When you refer to 'appropriate checkrides'--is there a 135 SIC checkride?

I believe this guy was flying right seat in a Barron. In order for him to log SIC, wouldn't it have to specify in the company's op specs that a person was required in the right seat, otherwise the plane doesn't require a second pilot?

Can anyone, like Airnet's program, write their op specs to require two pilots, or is there an approval process? I've heard that Airnet went to the FAA to validate their SIC program.

Thanks for everyone's input.

 

[Rick1128]

SIC's

Yes there is a SIC checkride. But the funny thing is, is that is the basicly the same as the PIC checkride. You will cover most of the same things. Accourding to the guidance I was given by the FAA, an SIC checkride does not require Steep turns, a circling approach, instrument TO, rejected TO, Inflight powerplant failure, Engine out ILS, coupled approach or no-flap landing.

For the SIC to log SIC in a light aircraft, he must be required for that flight. According with 'Letter of Interrutation' issued by FAA legal, An SIC is required if the company assigns him to that flight. And therefore can log the time. There is no required change to the 'Ops Specs'. And most operators would not want that changed due to lose of flexability. Also the FAA issues 'Ops Specs', the operator does not write them.

Eric, the issue you raised about Airnet validated their training, has to do with changes in their training program. Most likely they didn't have any reference to SIC training in their light aircraft programs.

And the reference to SIC minimums, be aware that an operator's Operations Manual can have higher stated minimums as well as their insurance.

 

[cvsfly]

The Ops Specs that I have seen really don't directly refer to the make up of a flight crew. 90% of Ops Spec are automatically generated by the issuing FSDO. There are some that the operator requests and some where the operator has some input to the wording (i.e. A008 Operational Control). My current experience is with a "basic" operator and previously with a small air ambulance and also with a scheduled 135 freight operator. Ops Specs for companies operating large, turbojet or transport category equipment may have additional insight. The requirement for an SIC operating IFR in an aircraft (regardless of aircraft certification) is contained in 135.101. Most operators with aircraft equipped with the proper autopilot apply for Ops Spec A015 in order to operate in lieu of an SIC for operational flexibility (in a BE58 it is almost a neccessity due to weight restrictions). This does not prevent an operator from using an appropriately qualified SIC when they have this authorization. It may be prudent to in the event the autopilot becomes inoperative at an out station. To return IFR, you need an SIC. In order to use an SIC, your training program (basic operator or above) needs to allow for SIC training procedures, the SIC must complete those training modules (your CRM and SOPs should be developed here), he will take a 135.293 checkride and be issued an 8410 that states he is SIC qualified. From his base month, his next training event will be in 12 mo (vs 6 mo. for PIC - 135.297). Ops Spec A007 will be issued (at least with a basic operator or less) to list by name PICs, SICs, Chief Pilot, etc. Your flight log will indicate the command position of each pilot. Your Operations Manual will also spell out the expected duties of PIC, SIC, etc. I haven't considered the 135 VFR scenario- don't care to. And when you dead head back on a Part 91 leg, I' sure that would start an arguement. I feel in that case the PNF would not have any legal loggable time unless you you explore a CFI/safety pilot scenario. There are legitimate uses, determined by regulation - FARs, Ops Spec, Inspectors handbook, for SICs and allows for the legal logging of that time. Any other pilot who does not meet the SIC requirements above, but who are "hired" / allowed to occupy a pilot position on a temporary request are nothing more than an observing passenger. PICs and operators must be very careful when allowing for this. Technically that "pilot" can't participate in or touch anything. The customer should also be briefed on this. There is a liability issue (even though it may be the insurance company requiring a second pilot). As far as the FAA is concerned, they would be very interested to find a participating SIC who is not qualified. Some understand the scenario and don't press the issue as long as that pilot is not an active participant in the flying duties.