Ferry Pilot Question

NC19143 said:
The FAA will make no asumptions, they will have facts when they come for your certificate. they will have proof of the violation because Bob Hover taught them a lesson they won't soon forget.
Click to expand...
I don't know that story about Bob Hoover.
 
KennyFlys said:
Since tail number registration is of public record, that information can be easily had. If it doesn't match the name on the airman certificate and there doesn't appear to be a reasonable tie to a club or school as registered, it may draw some attention during a ramp check. It's then followed by questions of how that particular pilot came to be flying this aircraft. One wrong statement could nail ya.

I'm not saying that would indeed happen. But, the potential is there.
Click to expand...

Ramp checks to part 91 small aircraft are pretty few and far between. Unless there is something going on that the feds want to clamp down on. How many people on here have actually gotten one.

BTW, when getting ramp checked, Pilot certificate, Medical, Aircraft Registration, & Airworthiness certificate. Also as little talking as possible. Everything that you say will be held against you. Just be pleasant and friendly.

I have only gotten them on 135 (CE421 &402) and large aircraft part 91 (B737 & Gulfstream) operations. The 737 & Gulfstream ramp checks were tied into airport security checks. I had them walk up one day and want to ramp a Challenger that I was flying. When I told them it was part 91 they turned and walked away. They didn't even want to take down any information.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I can see why the FAA wants a commercial for time building because for a time builder flight time really is compensation (but what if it doesn't get logged?). For these other cases, it seems kind of silly.
Click to expand...

I agree, it does seem kinda silly. As for hours I have nearly 2,000 hours so building VFR time in a single engine RV-9A is not a goal. ;) The goal is a nice cross country trip just for the fun of flying. I'll call it "Geico's Contribution to Boost the Economy Trip". :D

Good points from all corners. I appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
How much could the gas and a hotel possibly cost? I'd just buy the gas and enjoy the trip.
 
LearDriver said:
Ramp checks to part 91 small aircraft are pretty few and far between. Unless there is something going on that the feds want to clamp down on. How many people on here have actually gotten one.

BTW, when getting ramp checked, Pilot certificate, Medical, Aircraft Registration, & Airworthiness certificate. Also as little talking as possible. Everything that you say will be held against you. Just be pleasant and friendly.

I have only gotten them on 135 (CE421 &402) and large aircraft part 91 (B737 & Gulfstream) operations. The 737 & Gulfstream ramp checks were tied into airport security checks. I had them walk up one day and want to ramp a Challenger that I was flying. When I told them it was part 91 they turned and walked away. They didn't even want to take down any information.
Click to expand...
There are a couple on here that I know of, and I've witnessed an FAA inspector hanging at the small GA airport for a day ramp checking everybody. They're pretty much non-events as long as you have your ID, medical, and pilot certificate on you and the plane has its documentation. Only person who got busted that day is someone without his medical.

During a typical ramp check they're not going to find this sort of activity.

I'm not saying that this is to be taken as carte blanche to engage in activity that you know or have reason to believe is prohibited.

I'm also not saying that I agree with the FAA's interpretation of "compensation", because it isn't what a reasonable and prudent person would conclude the regulations meant without doing a lot of law checking or looking on boards like this. However, that's what the FAA say it is, and so that's what it is. They get to make the rules and interpret them the way they want.
 
LearDriver said:
BTW, when getting ramp checked, Pilot certificate, Medical, Aircraft Registration, & Airworthiness certificate. Also as little talking as possible. Everything that you say will be held against you. Just be pleasant and friendly.
Click to expand...

And don't forget government-issued photo ID, these days. CFR 61.3(a) requires it be on your person.
 
KennyFlys said:
I don't know that story about Bob Hoover.
Click to expand...

After a 3 year fight Bob Hover proved them wrong, 2 FAA agents said he was incapable of flying and removed his medical. he proved them wrong and got it back.

It was a bad PR day for the FAA, the internal message traffic was to the point, do not violate until you have proof in hand.
 
jesse said:
How much could the gas and a hotel possibly cost? I'd just buy the gas and enjoy the trip.
Click to expand...


ME Too..

then I'd bill him for a List of discrepancies.
 
Remind me how the law got this way....in contrast to all the other forms of transportation?

It seems when laws get ridiculous, they get ignored an awful lot more.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Remind me how the law got this way....in contrast to all the other forms of transportation?

It seems when laws get ridiculous, they get ignored an awful lot more.
Click to expand...

I assume guys like me just doing it for fun is one thing, but guys ferrying planes for a living looking for "seams" in the regs is another.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Remind me how the law got this way....in contrast to all the other forms of transportation?

It seems when laws get ridiculous, they get ignored an awful lot more.
Click to expand...

Yep.

I would guess this policy came about as a result of a time-building private pilot or three taking "free" ferry gigs, doing something dumb, and bending airplanes.
 
Let'sgoflying!;406536It seems when laws get ridiculous said:
The laws and rules exist on the books for a reason. My thoughts on this ferry pilot issue would be that it comes under the area of a commercial operation. Plain and simple because you are receiving some type of compensation for your efforts.

If what your looking at is for further reasoning as to why it is not looked upon as acceptable by the Feds is that private pilots usually get into troubles that commercial level pilots don't. Not to say that they don't find their own troubles to get into. Everyone is capable of that.
Click to expand...
 
flyingcheesehead said:
1) Let's say Geico has all of the minimum flight time he needs for any certificate he wants - As in, ATP minimums of 1500 TT, 500 XC, 100 night and 75 instrument - Then he's obviously not getting much by simply logging time. Would that make it OK? Now, let's say he doesn't even log it. Would that make it OK?
Click to expand...
You can still log it for currency, thus, the flight time still has value.
2) I've gotten some free flight time (it's OK, I have my commercial, but let's just say I didn't for the purposes of this question) from my flying club, ferrying our airplanes to another airport for the purpose of having maintenance performed. I am an equity owner in the club, so technically I own a 1/30th share of all 3 airplanes. I may be flying the plane which is going for maintenance, or I may be flying the chase plane bringing the maintenance plane's pilot back (or taking them up to retrieve the plane after mx) - does it make a difference? Since I'm part owner of the planes, and am thus paying something indirectly towards their upkeep relieve me of the need for a commercial certificate?
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter who owns the plane. All that matters is whether or not the PIC pays the direct cost of the flight. If not, then that's discounted flight time, and that's compensation for pilot services.
3) Let's say I'm a volunteer for a non-profit organization that owns an airplane. I've put a lot of work into said organization, and this plane needs to be promoted at airshows. Now, flying to airshows is certainly legal as long as I'm doing the promoting at the airshow and not just using the plane for to & from transportation, but what about getting checked out in the airplane beforehand?
Click to expand...
You still have to pay the direct cost of all flights you make in that airplane. Simply being a non-profit isn't enough to get past 61.113, and even being a charitable organization isn't enough for you to receive compensation in the form of free flight time in return for your services. The only exception would be charity airlift flights conductd under 91.146 -- 61.113(d) allows PP's to do that within certain restrictions outlined in 91.146.
I can see why the FAA wants a commercial for time building because for a time builder flight time really is compensation (but what if it doesn't get logged?). For these other cases, it seems kind of silly.
Click to expand...
As noted by others, if such things had not been abused in the past by time-builders, the FAA wouldn't be so concerned by it.
 
LearDriver said:
If what your looking at is for further reasoning as to why it is not looked upon as acceptable by the Feds is that private pilots usually get into troubles that commercial level pilots don't. Not to say that they don't find their own troubles to get into. Everyone is capable of that.
Click to expand...

Here we go again!!!!!!!!!
 
NC19143 said:
You have already stated that is not a violation until he excepts compensation for the flying.

so how can it be illegal if no money is changing hands for flying?

There are no rules saying he can't fly his friends aircraft, any where, at any time, for any reason, and leave it any where the owner wants.
Click to expand...
Easy -- the FAA Chief Counsel has issued interpretations saying that the flight time itself is compensation, and even that in some cases (when there is a prior/existing business relationship between the parties involved), the goodwill created constitutes compensation even if the pilot pays all the costs.
The only thing a CP can do the PPL can't is charge for the service. So, as we both have said earlier, as long as he pays the expenses for the trip he can do this.
Click to expand...
Exactly. But that's not quite the same as saying "no money is changing hands for flying."
and I've said earlier he can get his money back by being paid for some thing else. sweeping the hangar, counseling services. etc.
Click to expand...
...as long as there is no quid pro quo involving the pilot services. The money paid must be for that alternate service, and if it appears excessive for that service (say, $200 for sweeping out someone's T-hangar), and the FAA finds out, the sweeper/pilot is toast. More than that, the attempt to conceal the transaction would be treated as evidence of willful intent, and the penalties will be more severe.

All this said, unless the FAA finds out, they won't care. How would they find out? Let's say you provide such a ferry service, and prang the plane. The FAA Inspector doing the investigation (the NTSB almost always delegates light GA accidents to the local FSDO to investigate) goes back up the trail checking fuelings (they do that on a lot of accident investigations) and find out the owner, not you, paid for the gas at each fuel stop. Or, you delay en route for weather, and the owner, being very annoyed that you've not delivered the plane as agreed, complains to the FAA that he didn't get his money's worth from you. BTW, that's one of the two big ways faux charter cases happen -- the passengers complaining to the FAA about not getting what they paid for. Either way, it's "Adios, amigo."

So, "You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"*

*"Dirty Harry," HJ & RM Fink, 1971.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Is being a ferry pilot for a friend "illegal"?

Our local Saturday morning "hanger flying crew" came up with a dilemma for me where one did not exist before. :rofl: Thanks guys. :rolleyes: :rofl:
Click to expand...

Listen to your friends. They're very smart and trying to keep your
butt out of trouble. ;-)
 
Ron Levy said:
...as long as there is no quid pro quo involving the pilot services. The money paid must be for that alternate service, and if it appears excessive for that service (say, $200 for sweeping out someone's T-hangar), and the FAA finds out, the sweeper/pilot is toast. More than that, the attempt to conceal the transaction would be treated as evidence of willful intent, and the penalties will be more severe.
Click to expand...

Ron, how would the FAA ever "prove" (and what's the burden here anyway) that a pilot was being "compensated" (reimbursed for costs incurred) if the two parties involved claim that the money that changed hands was purely a gift from the owner to the pilot and wasn't directly tied to the flight. Let's also assume that the pilot paid all operating costs himself and only later received a "gift" from the owner. It seems to me (potentially due to my ignorance of the subtleties of the law) that a "quid pro quo" requires that the money be in return for the service. I believe that I'm free to give a fellow pilot any physical or financial assistance I choose and as long as the value doesn't exceed $12000 per year the IRS won't care. Let me also stipulate that there's no written record of any deal between me and the pilot and that I can truthfully claim that I've given money to other pilots in the past "just to help them out". Would the FAA likely prevail in any attempt to tie the gift (assuming they even had a way to prove it existed, cash is kinda hard to trace in the amount we're talking about) to the flight as compensation? How would they do that if I the owner insisted that it wasn't compensation for the expenses of the flight?

It seems to me that as long as the owner maintains his story in the event of a crash there wouldn't be anything the FAA could use to hang the pilot.

On a related note, there were several times when my father paid the FBO at his airport for gas put in my airplane as a way of "helping me out" when I had flown my family there for a visit. This is of course a bit different in that I owned the plane and wasn't delivering it to my dad, but you could say he benefitted from me bringing my familiy to him. Would you think the FAA would interpret this as "compensation" for me?

Or how about the many times I've been given an opportunity to take the controls of a fellow pilot's airplane for a while? If the airplane type isn't one I've already logged a lot of time in, I usually try to put the time in my logbook both for the "keepsake" value as well as on the off chance that the record might prove useful someday. Is that "compensation" by subsidized flight time"? Certainly there's no way the FAA could ever prove that I didn't contribute my share as I often do, but I doubt that I'd have any way to prove I did either. Would you ever log "free time" if you didn't have a commercial certificate and at least a class II medical?
 
lancefisher said:
Ron, how would the FAA ever "prove" (and what's the burden here anyway) that a pilot was being "compensated" (reimbursed for costs incurred) if the two parties involved claim that the money that changed hands was purely a gift from the owner to the pilot and wasn't directly tied to the flight.
Click to expand...
You ever heard of the "duck test"? "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck"? Read enough enforcement cases, and you'll realize ALJ's can hear a duck quacking a mile away, and the standard of proof is "more likely than not," aka the "51% test," not "beyond a reasonable doubt." I'm sure many folks get away with this, but if they're caught, they're toast.
On a related note, there were several times when my father paid the FBO at his airport for gas put in my airplane as a way of "helping me out" when I had flown my family there for a visit. This is of course a bit different in that I owned the plane and wasn't delivering it to my dad, but you could say he benefitted from me bringing my familiy to him. Would you think the FAA would interpret this as "compensation" for me?
Click to expand...
I think the quid pro quo here is a bit too hard for the FAA to prove. Frankly, I really don't see one -- you think the FAA will go after you saying your accepted a charter from your dad to fly your family to him? Gifts between family members just don't get their attention unless one of the family members complains to the FAA. Your dad likely to do that? And if your dad does blow the whistle on you, either you scared him so bad he thinks his grandkids are in danger (in which case the FAA probably should be involved), or you have a serious problem in your relationship with him (in which case somebody needs counseling).
Or how about the many times I've been given an opportunity to take the controls of a fellow pilot's airplane for a while? If the airplane type isn't one I've already logged a lot of time in, I usually try to put the time in my logbook both for the "keepsake" value as well as on the off chance that the record might prove useful someday. Is that "compensation" by subsidized flight time"?
Click to expand...
Compensation for what? There's no quid pro quo here. Remember -- compensation involves the exchange of one thing of value for another thing of value. Unless there is that exchange, there is no compensation.
Would you ever log "free time" if you didn't have a commercial certificate and at least a class II medical?
Click to expand...
No problem logging free time without CP/II -- as long as there is no quid pro quo, like delivering someone's airplane somewhere.

Bottom Line: It's not the free flight time -- charity is entirely legal as long as it comes without strings. If it really is "free," there's no problem. It's the exchange of pilot services in return for something of value, i.e., making that unpaid-for flight time conditional (no longer really "free") on you doing something for the other person, which is prohibited without CP privileges. As Hannibal the Cannibal said, "Quid pro quo, Agent Starling, quid pro quo." Avoid the quo, and you can have the quid. Exchange quid for quo, and the FAA will break out the good chianti and fava beans.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
3) Let's say I'm a volunteer for a non-profit organization that owns an airplane. I've put a lot of work into said organization, and this plane needs to be promoted at airshows. Now, flying to airshows is certainly legal as long as I'm doing the promoting at the airshow and not just using the plane for to & from transportation, but what about getting checked out in the airplane beforehand?
Click to expand...

You still have to pay the direct cost of all flights you make in that airplane. Simply being a non-profit isn't enough to get past 61.113, and even being a charitable organization isn't enough for you to receive compensation in the form of free flight time in return for your services. The only exception would be charity airlift flights conductd under 91.146 -- 61.113(d) allows PP's to do that within certain restrictions outlined in 91.146.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute - The flights to the airshows can be flown for free by a private pilot, can't they? If said private pilot is going to the airshow anyway to promote the airplane...
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Wait a minute - The flights to the airshows can be flown for free by a private pilot, can't they? If said private pilot is going to the airshow anyway to promote the airplane...
Click to expand...
I don't see how the PP can avoid paying the direct cost of the flight. If you know of an FAA legal interpretation to the contrary, I'd like to hear it.
 
If the private pilot is a salesman for an airplane manufacturer (or reseller), then he can certainly ferry a demo plane to an airshow, and be paid while doing it, as it's incidental to his business role. He can even be a temporary employee if he's going to be selling during the show (talking with folks, etc). He can't be employed and paid only to ferry the airplane.

Make sense?
 
TMetzinger said:
If the private pilot is a salesman for an airplane manufacturer (or reseller), then he can certainly ferry a demo plane to an airshow, and be paid while doing it, as it's incidental to his business role. He can even be a temporary employee if he's going to be selling during the show (talking with folks, etc). He can't be employed and paid only to ferry the airplane.

Make sense?
Click to expand...
A salesman must have 200 hours total time per 61.113(f).
 
Everybody just go out and get your 2nd class medical and take your Commercial check rides just to make sure there's no ambiguity.

There, problem solved.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Frankly, Ted, that post does not help.
Click to expand...

You clearly misinterpreted it if you thought it was supposed to. :)

This is beaten so far into the ground so many times, and going back to Geico's original post, it's a matter of people making a big issue out of something where there shouldn't be.

It's the kinds of responses in this thread that are why I stopped asking questions (and posting stories about pretty much anything I do at all) on this forum. I may as well just pretend I know everything like a lot of others do (or, better, try to figure out the question based on the FAR/AIM I carry with me), because that will be more productive than wading through what I get fed if I actually ask a question here.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
because that will be more productive than wading through what I get fed if I actually ask a question here.
Click to expand...
What you get fed, is generally, technically correct. If you don't want to do the technically correct thing..Well--I guess--that is your call.
 
KennyFlys said:
A salesman must have 200 hours total time per 61.113(f).
Click to expand...

The way I always read that was that a demo flight with a customer in the airplane required 200 hours. A ferry flight isn't a demo flight, nor (in my opinion only) does a demo routine like the flybys at OSH come under this rule.
 
jesse said:
What you get fed, is generally, technically correct. If you don't want to do the technically correct thing..Well--I guess--that is your call.
Click to expand...

If you can get agreement on the matter, which is a fairly rare occurrence.
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't see how the PP can avoid paying the direct cost of the flight. If you know of an FAA legal interpretation to the contrary, I'd like to hear it.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm going based by what you have posted here in the past - That if the *person* needs to get to the *place* regardless of the method, that it's OK if they take the plane.

The difference is, in this case the *plane* needs to get there too. You could argue that since the pilot had to go to the airshow to man the booth anyway, that it was OK if he took the plane - But you could also argue that since the plane had to get there regardless of the presence of any pilot that it's not OK. I don't know of any interpretations on that one in either direction.
 
The FAA has issued an Interpretation "Flight Time Is Compensation" I have it in PDF form someplace on my other computer's hardd rive. If I find it I will Post it.

I have seen a few private pilots in Bangor, Maine busted for ferrying without a Commercial Certificate. The actions taken by the FAA are severe and Usually a 709 Ride "CFR 44709"

One pilot I know that had this happen to still has not passed the oral part of the 709 on the FAR's and his certificate is revoked till he passes the 709 ride!
 
TMetzinger said:
The way I always read that was that a demo flight with a customer in the airplane required 200 hours. A ferry flight isn't a demo flight, nor (in my opinion only) does a demo routine like the flybys at OSH come under this rule.
Click to expand...
If you're part of the sales team and flying an aircraft into the airshow for your own demonstration purposes, it should count under the same rule. If you fly it in and then leave it behind... I'd have to say a rule has been broken.
 
KennyFlys said:
If you're part of the sales team and flying an aircraft into the airshow for your own demonstration purposes, it should count under the same rule. If you fly it in and then leave it behind... I'd have to say a rule has been broken.
Click to expand...

where does the rules say you must make the return flight?
 
NC19143 said:
where does the rules say you must make the return flight?
Click to expand...
Another sales member could make the return flight. But, if you fly it in then leave... that can't be anything but a ferry flight. It at least opens the door for a looksee.
 
Ron Levy said:
Easy -- the FAA Chief Counsel has issued interpretations saying that the flight time itself is compensation, and even that in some cases (when there is a prior/existing business relationship between the parties involved), the goodwill created constitutes compensation even if the pilot pays all the costs.
Exactly. But that's not quite the same as saying "no money is changing hands for flying."
...as long as there is no quid pro quo involving the pilot services. The money paid must be for that alternate service, and if it appears excessive for that service (say, $200 for sweeping out someone's T-hangar), and the FAA finds out, the sweeper/pilot is toast. More than that, the attempt to conceal the transaction would be treated as evidence of willful intent, and the penalties will be more severe.

All this said, unless the FAA finds out, they won't care. How would they find out? Let's say you provide such a ferry service, and prang the plane. The FAA Inspector doing the investigation (the NTSB almost always delegates light GA accidents to the local FSDO to investigate) goes back up the trail checking fuelings (they do that on a lot of accident investigations) and find out the owner, not you, paid for the gas at each fuel stop. Or, you delay en route for weather, and the owner, being very annoyed that you've not delivered the plane as agreed, complains to the FAA that he didn't get his money's worth from you. BTW, that's one of the two big ways faux charter cases happen -- the passengers complaining to the FAA about not getting what they paid for. Either way, it's "Adios, amigo."

So, "You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"*

*"Dirty Harry," HJ & RM Fink, 1971.
Click to expand...

We've been agreeing along, read my post #34.

You are right, compenation is compensation, it does not mean money, favors are still compensation, same as a barter deal. but the FAA would have to see a reason the PP did it to seek favor or profit. That would peek their attention. as would a complant from anybody.

During a ramp check or questiong period with the FAA you must use the proper verbage, you once speak the word "Ferry pilot" and your busted.

You must use the verbage that you are using your friends aircraft with his permission.

What will trip up most PPL in this situation is the red (temp) registration you are going to hand the inspector, that is proof that this aircraft has just been sold. That will get the ramp inspectors attention in a heart beat.

This would be true even if you were not doing a ferry flight, such as touch and goes at your home airport with your friends new aircraft, that new red registration is going to flag the operation to the inspector, who's going to ask some questions he wouldn't normally ask.

normally friends do not do things for each other for favors, as they have nothing to gain from the deal. The FA does not see that as compensation, But a employee of a company doing things for the boss is another matter. that is what the FAA sees as compensation.
 
NC19143 said:
normally friends do not do things for each other for favors, as they have nothing to gain from the deal. The FA does not see that as compensation, But a employee of a company doing things for the boss is another matter. that is what the FAA sees as compensation.
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. I'll certainly do favors for friends without compensation. Unfortunately, the FAA and insurance industry are both making it very difficult to perform this sort of favor without risking a whole lot:mad3:.
 
gprellwitz said:
I don't know about that. I'll certainly do favors for friends without compensation. Unfortunately, the FAA and insurance industry are both making it very difficult to perform this sort of favor without risking a whole lot:mad3:.
Click to expand...

the association is the clue, the compensation will be very apparent.
 
When I sell my aircraft, the title changes,

And I deliver the aircraft, am I a ferry pilot?

If the new owner is in the aircraft returning to their home, but not rated to fly it, am I a Ferry pilot?

If I fly it to the new owner and then transfere title, am I ferry pilot?

there are ways to do this and not violate 61.?
 
NC19143 said:
When I sell my aircraft, the title changes,

And I deliver the aircraft, am I a ferry pilot?

If the new owner is in the aircraft returning to their home, but not rated to fly it, am I a Ferry pilot?

If I fly it to the new owner and then transfere title, am I ferry pilot?

there are ways to do this and not violate 61.?
Click to expand...
I can't see how flight involving exchange of ownership between the old and new owner would be an issue. I suppose an inspector could nitpick it but it's doubtful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top