Private Pilot holding out

[JAFI]

....you should add a dictionary.

I have one. This is what happens when you are too tired to use one.

 

[JAFI]

If it sounds like 135, acts like 135, or suggests 135, at best you will get a visit from your local FSDO, at worst you will get to experience a Transportation Department or NTSB Judge and day in court.....

 

[Tired Soul]

I design a website that lists aircraft for rent & pilots willing to day rate.
The customer selects the aircraft (rents directly from the owner), selects the pilot(s) and pays them directly.
All pilots would be commercially rated.
Is this safely legal?

No it's not. That's a perfect example of "common carriage", which you're not supposed to do on a CPL.

 

[midlifeflyer]

This is my proposal:
I design a website that lists aircraft for rent & pilots willing to day rate.
The customer selects the aircraft (rents directly from the owner), selects the pilot(s) and pays them directly.
All pilots would be commercially rated.
Is this safely legal?

The vesting of what the FAA calls "operational control" of the aircraft is something high-priced aviation attorneys deal with in the Part 91 corporate setting. They charge big bucks to put together structures and agreements to put the right authority in the right place at the right time.

Oversimplifying, it means the authority to say how its used, where it goes and to be responsible for what happens to it.

The "who rents the airplane" and the "are you providing both plane and pilot" questions that talked about a lot online, are variations on the same theme.

Still oversimplifying, in your proposal, it means that the renter must have operational control. If the owner (as opposed to the renter) or the pilot or you have operational control, it's gray charter with a 135 violation.

Doable (assuming it's viable)? Maybe. Maybe not.

Is this a =real= proposed business model or just a hypothetical? If a real business model, go get that high-priced aviation lawyer for advice.