Alternatives to expensive charters

G

Gordon Freeman

Pre-Flight
Joined
Nov 7, 2019
Messages
71
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
Display Name
Display name:
GordonF
I'm trying to get my brother-in-law a way to hop from Denver to Telluride, but - naturally - the only option are expensive Air Carrier charters that run turboprop and jet services in the $5k price range for a relatively short flight.

So, just kind of thinking out-of-the-box here. Any and every CFI is technically a commercial pilot. Now, to be in compliance of FAA regulations, a person can hire a commercial pilot to fly them, but the aircraft needs to be rented (or owned) by that person separately.

Is there an online resource that would pair up local CFIs/commercial pilots willing to do flights-for-hire, and recommend aircraft owners willing to rent their plane for the trip?

Or am I missing something here? I called some flight schools in the Denver area, but most won't rent an aircraft unless you're a pilot yourself, or are signing up for lessons with them.

I'm just thinking, rent a Skylane (or similar), and hire a commercial/CFI pilot, and pay them by the hour.

I know a recent "app" from a Silicon Valley entrepreneur tried to make use of private pilots who own their aircraft to provide air taxi services, only to be shut down (naturally). But with recent furloughs, there are thousands of commercial pilots who probably wouldn't mind making some extra cash so long as their clients rent the aircraft separately.

Perfectly legal, but untapped market it seems.
 
The as long as their clients rents the aircraft separately part is where the wheels fall off on it. You will have an extremely difficult time finding someone who will rent an aircraft to someone who intends to be a passenger.
 
If you are hiring both the plane and pilot, that requires a Part 135 operation.
Making it a flight lesson makes it ‘legal’ but a thinly veiled way around the regs. Especially if it is a one way XC ‘lesson’. :cool:
 
DGlaeser said:
If you are hiring both the plane and pilot, that requires a Part 135 operation.
Click to expand...
I believe this is incorrect. Pilot services is a part 91 op. Who supplies the airplane (pilot vs passenger) is what makes the difference.
 
Buy a plane and befriend a pilot. By the time you take a few flights, you will have made up for the cost of a few charters (depending on the plane you buy). Then even if you sell it at a loss, you will still be ahead cost-wise and have been legal?
 
DGlaeser said:
If you are hiring both the plane and pilot, that requires a Part 135 operation.
Making it a flight lesson makes it ‘legal’ but a thinly veiled way around the regs. Especially if it is a one way XC ‘lesson’. :cool:
Click to expand...

If I rent from company A, and hire pilot B who has no relation to company A that does not require a 135 cert.

If I rent from Company A and Company A says I can only hire Pilot B, then Company A needs to have a 135 cert.

Company A however rarely lets an unaffiliated pilot B fly their planes.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
Buy a plane and befriend a pilot. By the time you take a few flights, you will have made up for the cost of a few charters (depending on the plane you buy). Then even if you sell it at a loss, you will still be ahead cost-wise and have been legal?
Click to expand...
Should be legal. Whether or not you end up ahead of the game cost wise is an entirely different matter.
 
Aboslutely. When most people think private charter, they think turboprop, private jet. In those instances, planes like that can rarely (if ever) be rented by an outside pilot who's not affiliated with the company. But it should be fairly straightforward to rent a Skylane/Bonanza/Cirrus, and a commercial pilot separately.

Regulation isn't the obstacle. Sounds like insurance is? Although if I know anything about the insurance industry, they're always up to make an easy buck.

Just seems like no one's thought of this before. Easy and (relatively) affordable for-hire air taxi. You the client rent a plane with one of our partners, and we provide you with a list of available commercial pilots rated for that plane.

Even with the appropriate insurance, a $400/hr Skylane rental with pilot sounds like a great deal. Just my 2 cents.
 
It most cases I bet it is NOT the insurance companies, but a policy of the flight school/FBO - or they just chock it up to insurance without verifying it. I asked to see the insurance policy once because they said xyz couldn't be done due to insurance. It wasn't excluded, and after we looked into it - it was then allowed.
 
Gordon Freeman said:
But it should be fairly straightforward to rent a Skylane/Bonanza/Cirrus, and a commercial pilot separately.
Click to expand...
Should be, but it isn't.

Regulation isn't the obstacle. Sounds like insurance is?
Click to expand...
Correct, but I suspect its also the flight schools themselves. They don't want the hassle or liability of doing anything that even sniffs of 135 ops.

Just seems like no one's thought of this before.
Click to expand...
Its definitely been though of by many individuals before.

Easy and (relatively) affordable for-hire air taxi. You the client rent a plane with one of our partners, and we provide you with a list of available commercial pilots rated for that plane.
Click to expand...
And that's the problem. It kind of fails the looks like a duck smells like a duck test for part 135 operations.

The intent of the pilot services reg is to allow for a company or individual to source an airplane (own or lease generally) and then hire a pilot as an employee to do all the flying for them. Creating a business whereby the general public can source a plane and hire a pilot on-demand for one trip only screams of an air-taxi operation. And air-taxi is a 135 op as it should be. Its very rare, but single engine piston 135 operations do exist. The rates will be better than a turbo prop but they'll still likely be a lot more than the cost of rental time and pilot fees.
 
Denver to TEX isn't a milk run, I would be very nervous putting someone in a single engine piston for that trip unless I know the pilot very well.
 
Any decent mountain experienced pilot can fly that route...I have done it a number of times.
 
EdFred said:
It most cases I bet it is NOT the insurance companies, but a policy of the flight school/FBO - or they just chock it up to insurance without verifying it.
Click to expand...

In most cases I bet you are wrong. My commercial insurance policy clearly states I may only rent my aircraft to pilots and student pilots.
 
dmspilot said:
In most cases I bet you are wrong. My commercial insurance policy clearly states I may only rent my aircraft to pilots and student pilots.
Click to expand...

and if the credit card has grandma's name on it, who rented it?
 
Congratulations, you've re-invented Blackbird. Current FAA status, questionable. Doesn't look like they're doing that any more.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
Its definitely been though of by many individuals before.

And that's the problem. It kind of fails the looks like a duck smells like a duck test for part 135 operations.

The intent of the pilot services reg is to allow for a company or individual to source an airplane (own or lease generally) and then hire a pilot as an employee to do all the flying for them. Creating a business whereby the general public can source a plane and hire a pilot on-demand for one trip only screams of an air-taxi operation.
Click to expand...

And the FAA is wise to the work arounds. The FAA reviews those leases often, to ensure the operation is on the up and up. It's not as simple as walking in the door and waving your credit card.

There have been hundreds of people who thought they had found a way around Part 135 through some cute interpretations of the regulations. The FAA has shut down nearly every single one of them. Remember the FAA is the judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to the FARs. It's not your interpretation that matters, but theirs.

And I don't disagree with that. Part 121/135 are there for the safety of the average Joe traveller, the person that doesn't know the difference between a Cessna and a Boeing. Without those regs, you would have tons of operators that operate ragged out, unairworthy aircraft being flown by untrained and unqualified pilots for pennies on the dollar.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I believe this is incorrect. Pilot services is a part 91 op. Who supplies the airplane (pilot vs passenger) is what makes the difference.
Click to expand...
I meant, but didn’t say explicitly, that getting the plane and pilot from the same business entity requires Part 135. My bad.
If the passenger brings (or owns) the plane, any commercial pilot can do the flying.
 
I still think the lack of market demand would keep this sort of thing from going anywhere even if the FAA allowed it.
 
I think it would also be a liability nightmare if anything ever got bent.
 
FormerHangie said:
I still think the lack of market demand would keep this sort of thing from going anywhere even if the FAA allowed it.
Click to expand...

I disagree. If the FAA allowed it, someone would do it at a competitive price. I think we would see rental agencies and commercial pilots organize in an "Open Airplane" sort of model where they'd have one checkout that covers multiple airplane providers. That isn't a "we're supplying the pilot" model, more like "the pilot must be acceptable to our insurance and those with a checkout are." A Many-to-Many model (passenger rented airplanes to commercial pilots) is probably a legitimate part 91 operation, but nobody has pursued it because the FAA has shot down so many similar type organizations that included private pilots.

There is absolutely demand for sub 1k cost flights, especially for multiple passengers at once. I once looked at a charter going CLT to AVL and was quoted $3500 in a SR22 for the 30 minute / 79 nm flight, part 135. I know the actual airplane cost is under $200/hr and the pilot is getting paid peanuts. Does the rest go to complying with 135 requirements or simply to pad their pocket because they charge premium prices and lose the non-millionaire business?

Beyond that, I also think there's a market for longer point to point flights that save time. I live 20 minutes from my preferred airport with a 5000x100 runway and there is frequently a similar airport near locations I travel to. But for work travel I have to get up at 6 am, drive 45 minutes into the city, be there at least an hour before the flight because you never know what TSA :rolleyes: is going to pull, fly, spend an hour+ on a layover, fly again, deal with rental cars and then frequently drive an hour out of town to get where I'm going - 7-8 hours of travel, then a full work day on top of that? Mondays suck, but the charter alternatives are thousands of dollars.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
Its definitely been though of by many individuals before.
Click to expand...
Well, it's jets, not a Skylane but, for example... Dupage Aviation Dry Jet Leasing.

I don't have an opinion on legality but two quick points.
  • Their FAQ is very interesting, including their answer to the question, "Can you give me a price o a trip?" "No. Dupage Aviation operates in accordance with AC 91-37B. This means that we simply lease you the equipment. We do not maintain operational control, supply fuel or any member of the flight crew. Only a charter company can quote you all-inclusive trip rates and you will always find those costs far exceed the costs of dry leasing yourself!"
  • This is not under the FAA radar. This operation is subject to the "Truth in Leasing" regs which means, every dry lease they sign with a new customer get sent to the FSDO and the FSDO gets a phone call at least 48 hours before the first flight under a new lease.
 
bflynn said:
There is absolutely demand for sub 1k cost flights, especially for multiple passengers at once. I once looked at a charter going CLT to AVL and was quoted $3500 in a SR22 for the 30 minute / 79 nm flight, part 135. I know the actual airplane cost is under $200/hr and the pilot is getting paid peanuts. Does the rest go to complying with 135 requirements or simply to pad their pocket because they charge premium prices and lose the non-millionaire business?
Click to expand...

There is a lot more expense to running a 135 airplane than direct operating expenses and pilot salary.
 
Groundpounder said:
There is a lot more expense to running a 135 airplane than direct operating expenses and pilot salary.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course there is. Does that add up to $3000 per flight hour more? Or is that a price that comes from their target market being the top .01%?
 
bflynn said:
Yes, of course there is. Does that add up to $3000 per flight hour more? Or is that a price that comes from their target market being the top .01%?
Click to expand...

Recovery costs are probably a *%$^&#$*, just like R&D from pharmaceuticals
 
bflynn said:
Yes, of course there is. Does that add up to $3000 per flight hour more? Or is that a price that comes from their target market being the top .01%?
Click to expand...

Was the airplane in CLT? Repo costs would be rolled into that quote as well. Plus you have to pay a dispatcher, and a mechanic, and plenty of other administrative costs.

And yes, there is some profit built in as well, but probably not as much as you think. You could have always tried to negotiate a lower rate.
 
bflynn said:
I know the actual airplane cost is under $200/hr and the pilot is getting paid peanuts. Does the rest go to complying with 135 requirements or simply to pad their pocket because they charge premium prices and lose the non-millionaire business?
Click to expand...
The actual airplane cost is way more than $200/hr. Its a $600k asset. That cost has to be recouped. Insurance on a 135 op is going to be significantly higher than a privately owned/flown SR22. The operation is going to have a brick and mortar base of operations that needs to be paid for along with keeping the lights on and phones working and office staff paid. I think they'd be making way less profit on that flight than you believe.
 
bflynn said:
I disagree. If the FAA allowed it, someone would do it at a competitive price. I think we would see rental agencies and commercial pilots organize in an "Open Airplane" sort of model where they'd have one checkout that covers multiple airplane providers. That isn't a "we're supplying the pilot" model, more like "the pilot must be acceptable to our insurance and those with a checkout are."
Click to expand...
I think you'd have a hard time finding an insurance company willing to write a policy with a 'one checkout and done even if checked out at another company' type open pilot clause. And if you could find it, I think the cost would be astronomical.

And very first time one of those 'one checkout and done' pilots kills someone, it would all vaporize in a cloud of lawsuits.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I think you'd have a hard time finding an insurance company willing to write a policy with a 'one checkout and done even if checked out at another company' type open pilot clause.
Click to expand...

I don’t know, but Open Airplane already does it for private pilots.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
The actual airplane cost is way more than $200/hr. Its a $600k asset. That cost has to be recouped. Insurance on a 135 op is going to be significantly higher than a privately owned/flown SR22. The operation is going to have a brick and mortar base of operations that needs to be paid for along with keeping the lights on and phones working and office staff paid. I think they'd be making way less profit on that flight than you believe.
Click to expand...
So when you rent an SR-22 for $250/hr they aren’t accounting for all that stuff?
 
Where can you rent a -22 for $250/hr?

The only -20s around go for $300-$400 hr.
 
There was an incident that occurred many years ago when I was still a student pilot. I was also in the business of maintaining and repairing data center UPS systems. One day I found myself in Danbury, CT, working on a broken UPS that supported extremely critical loads, and I was unable to find the part it needed anywhere.

After much searching, that evening I found that a colleague in Atlanta had the part. He took it to Delta air freight, and early the next morning it was on a Delta flight to Westchester County Airport. While the flight was in the air, I went to DXR and a flight school based in a FBO.

An instructor agreed to take me on a training flight to HPN, ostensibly to brush up on the technical skills involved in flying in and out of a busy towered airport near NYC's airspace. He also agreed a brief bathroom stop at the Delta air freight terminal would be a good idea.

I was back on the ground in Danbury by 11 AM, and had the UPS running by 1:30 PM. It was a nice day for flying.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top