Common vs. Private Carriage Scenarios

Trever Oakes

Trever Oakes

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
20
Display Name
Display name:
KimJongUncle
Hello everyone,

I am preparing to take my Commercial Pilot checkride in a month or two, and I am preparing for the oral. I know a big chunk of the oral is going over what a CPL can do and cannot do (i.e situations concerning if you can legally take a job offer or not). But I am having trouble figuring out a solid way to determine if a job can legally be accepted. I've looked around multiple training resources for situations as well as their answers. But I feel like for some of them, I've read very different answers. It seems like a pretty blurry subject. I'll list some common scenarios I have found throughout my search, and the answer I feel is right from what I have collected, and if I am wrong, please correct me. Feel free to throw some more examples out there, as I really want to grasp an understanding of this subject.

1. A local businessman reaches out to you and asks for you to fly him to a meeting. He will rent the aircraft to be used, and he will pay you. Legal?

In this situation, holding out is not a factor, as the businessman reached out to you (assuming he didn't see an ad, or find out because you have a reputation of doing flights like this). They are providing the airplane, so as far as I see, this falls under private carriage, and it can be done as long as aircraft maintenance requirements are met.

2. A local businessman reaches out to you and asks for you to fly him to a meeting. He asks you to rent the aircraft, and he will reimburse you as well as pay you for the flight. Legal?

In this situation, holding out still isn't a factor. However, he is asking you to provide the aircraft as well as yourself as a pilot, which falls under the scope of requiring an operating certificate because the pilot and aircraft are coming from the same source. So this flight is not legal unless an operating certificate is obtained.

3. Your family reaches out to you and asks if you will fly them to Florida in your aircraft. They will pay you to do so. Legal?

This one is a no, since you will provide the pilot and aircraft, you are essentially acting as an on-demand charter, which would require a 135 cert.

4. You own an aircraft, and want to charge people to give local tours which begin and conclude at one airport. You put up a sign that advertises these tours. Legal?

I'm a bit unsure about this one. Technically, you would be holding out to the public with your sign. But the operation does not fit the definition of common carriage, as it does not go from place to place. I am pretty sure this one is a no, but I am not sure of exactly why. I'm looking in part 119, but I don't believe it is one of the exclusions.

5. A businessman leases an aircraft, and wants you to fly his company employees to meetings. You will be paid for your services, but the employees will not pay for the flights. The company will cover all flight costs. Legal?

With only this information, it can be assumed that holding out is not a factor. The business is providing the aircraft by lease (which from what I have read, in terms of this subject, might as well mean that they own it). Since the aircraft and pilot are not coming from the same source, and the company is not profiting from the flights, this operation is legal, as long as maintenance requirements are complied with (side question; does anybody know where I can find these requirements? part 119?)
 
My examiner didn’t focus too much on various scenarios. He made sure I knew the definition, difference, and where to look/who to ask if I ever had a question about an operation.

Then we moved on to the next section of his questions.
 
I think you are confused about what "holding out" means. You as a commercial pilot can advertise your services to fly others in their airplanes or in their company’s airplanes for compensation. When the FAA talks about holding out they are talking about certificate holders who are engaged in private carriage "holding out" to the general public. That’s a completely different thing than the scenarios you are contemplating. There is a good discussion over at stackexchange.

Is it legal to do what your scenarios propose?
1. No. There are enough people that do this that it has a name Part 135 1/2. Still not legal.
2. NO. Just no.
3. You can share expenses just like a private pilot, if you planned to go anyway.
4. Yes. Provided you get a Letter of Authorization from the local FSDO. This is actually one of the things explicitly spelled out in Part 119— Nonstop Commercial Air Tours that you are allowed to do with your own airplane and a commercial certificate.
5. Yes. You are being paid for your commercial pilot services. Provided you have the appropriate medical, IFR rating, etc. you are good to go.

Holding out isn’t a factor in any of these scenarios since you don’t hold an operating certificate.
 
JScarry said:
Is it legal to do what your scenarios propose?
1. No. There are enough people that do this that it has a name Part 135 1/2. Still not legal.
....
5. Yes. You are being paid for your commercial pilot services. Provided you have the appropriate medical, IFR rating, etc. you are good to go.
Click to expand...

How are scenarios 1 and 5 different from each other? The way they are described by the OP is nearly identical (an employer provides an aircraft and wants to hire you to fly it). Both would be legal, if no shenanigans*. Why do you say that one is legal and the other isn't?


*"Shenanigans" include using your own aircraft for this, and trying to make it look on paper like the employer is "providing it" independently, through some convoluted scheme like making it available to a third party who turns around and makes it available to the employer, etc.
 
JScarry said:
3. You can share expenses just like a private pilot, if you planned to go anyway.
Click to expand...
I have yet to meet an FAA inspector who considers “family” to be an issue regardless of who’s paying the bill. Now if Uncle Bob won’t have anything to do with you otherwise, your family might be considered dysfunctional enough that he’d be considered the “general public”.

JScarry said:
Holding out isn’t a factor in any of these scenarios since you don’t hold an operating certificate.
Click to expand...
Holding out is actually the factor you’re primarily talking about...it’s not having an operating certificate that makes it illegal.
 
AggieMike88 said:
My examiner didn’t focus too much on various scenarios. He made sure I knew the definition, difference, and where to look/who to ask if I ever had a question about an operation.

Then we moved on to the next section of his questions.
Click to expand...
Same. My checkride was about 2 weeks ago. Guy even asked me if you don't know where do you look?

I said FAR/AIM. ... And he said, you can Google too.

Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk
 
ArnoldPalmer said:
Same. My checkride was about 2 weeks ago. Guy even asked me if you don't know where do you look?

I said FAR/AIM. ... And he said, you can Google too.

Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
So...where in the FAR/AIM would you look for the OP’s questions? ;)
 
The biggest problem with most of these discussions is the underlying assumption that so-called "private carriage" does not require one of these
PrivateCarriageOpCert.png


I wouldn't worry too much about more than understanding and being able to apply some basics - (1) the difference between a commercial pilot and a commercial operator; (2) your privileges as a commercial pilot; (3} being a commercial pilot doesn't automatically allow you to engage in flight for compensation or hire; and (4) there needs to be some specific regulatory authority to engage in a flight for hire "operation," such as one of the activities permitted by 119.1(e) or under a Part 135 operating certificate. Plus a basic understanding of what holding out means.

Go much beyond that and it gets really complicated. Is it a Part 91, Subpart F business operation? How about "flight department companies"? How about if all you get in return is some free flight time?

Truth is, most DPEs don't understand more than the basics either.
 
Last edited:
Trever Oakes said:
Hello everyone,

I am preparing to take my Commercial Pilot checkride … <snip>
Click to expand...
I think you will get more bang for the buck by thinking in terms of "operational control" rather than "holding out". "Holding out" can be pretty subjective where "operational control" is more obvious: Who's making the insurance payments, securing maintenance for the inspections, designating who is qualified to fly the plane? Apply that test to your scenarios and see how things shake out. A judge isn't likely to be fooled by a sham set-up where it appears all the customer is really buying is the transportation.
 
During my oral there was a very brief discussion of 135 operations and what I knew about them. My response was more less that I knew they existed but I didn't know too much about the specifics of them. He said that was perfect, that 135 operators are the ones who need to understand the fine points of 135 regs, not freshly minted commercial pilots. I don't know that we had much of a conversation about other pilot services/holding out/not holding out.
 
I find it interesting that there is no reference in the ACS to anything that really discusses how to determine what you can’t do with a newly-minted Commercial certificate. (Just make sure you can explain how commercial pilots can use Basic Med....that’s in there.)

Juliet Hotel said:
He said that was perfect, that 135 operators are the ones who need to understand the fine points of 135 regs, not freshly minted commercial pilots.
Click to expand...
True, but the OP’s questions aren’t “fine points of 135 regs”, they’re questions that very probably come up for Commercial pilots (or private pilots, for that matter) every day.
 
Last edited:
DPE: “What does the commercial certificate allow you do do?”
Me: “People can pay me to fly their plane.”
DPE: “Great. Let’s move on.”
 
MauleSkinner said:
Unfortunately the FAA doesn’t seem to agree, as it’s not listed in the ACS.
Click to expand...

References for individual tasks aren't and can't be exhaustive and all-inclusive. AC 120-12A is the document which clearly stipulates the FAA's view on holding out, common vs. private carriage, and many other elements which are directly related to commercial pilot privileges and limitations. It and other Advisory Circulars are fair game on the commercial pilot practical test.
 
"DPE: “What does the commercial certificate allow you do do?”
Me: “People can pay me to fly their plane.”
DPE: “Great. Let’s move on.”

The answer I got most often as a DPE was "fly charters, air taxi, etc." In most cases the commercial oral was the first time some applicants ever heard of Part 119. Let the air out of some dreams, at least temporarily. At the time, Part 135 operators would not consider anyone with fewer than 500 hours for an air taxi position.

Bob Gardner
 
Ryan F. said:
References for individual tasks aren't and can't be exhaustive and all-inclusive. AC 120-12A is the document which clearly stipulates the FAA's view on holding out, common vs. private carriage, and many other elements which are directly related to commercial pilot privileges and limitations. It and other Advisory Circulars are fair game on the commercial pilot practical test.
Click to expand...
Definitely some false advertising going on, then.
The References for each Task indicate the source material for Task elements. For example, in Tasks such as “Airport markings, signs, and lights.” (AA.II.C.K3), the applicant must be prepared for questions on any airport markings, signs, and lights presented in the references for that Task.
Click to expand...
 
Ryan F. said:
References for individual tasks aren't and can't be exhaustive and all-inclusive. AC 120-12A is the document which clearly stipulates the FAA's view on holding out, common vs. private carriage, and many other elements which are directly related to commercial pilot privileges and limitations. It and other Advisory Circulars are fair game on the commercial pilot practical test.
Click to expand...
Problem is, that 34 year old AC is severely outdated. Good explanation of holding out, but since it strongly hints that private carriage does not require an operating certificate, it is misleading.

Although focused on expense sharing, I think this year's AC 61-142, in combination with a good grounding in 119.1, is a far better source with a much better explanation of the difference between pilot privileges and operational privileges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top