Why can't private pilots fly for hire?

douglas393 said:
They lie about their occupation!:wink2:
Doug
Click to expand...

:yes:

Their occupation is set up to pay them to lie... I am sure there have been some lawyers who have ended up needing medical help and some doctor, who had been sued for malpractice gave "less then their all" to save them... Headlines would read " attorney dies while awaiting treatment";).

Karma is hell sometimes..:yesnod:
 
Jay Honeck said:
In another thread, I marveled at the gymnastics some poor guy was going through to find a ride to Wyoming. The convoluted FAA rules banning private pilots from receiving compensation of any kind for flying are really quite amazing.

Which begs the question: Why? What historic event, or train of events, led the FAA to take away our ability to charge -- or be voluntarily compensated -- for providing a valuable service?

Sent from my Nexus 7
Click to expand...

Wow!!! This one has a direct answer, "The day the music died", that crash wrought all this.
 
It's even simpler than that. The FAA doesn't like money changing hands in part 91 ops. That basic concept pre-dates Holly by ~50 years.



Henning said:
Wow!!! This one has a direct answer, "The day the music died", that crash wrought all this.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
It's even simpler than that. The FAA doesn't like money changing hands in part 91 ops. That basic concept pre-dates Holly by ~50 years.
Click to expand...

Understood,Doubly so at the PP level, however previous to that accident there was little distinct legislation on the matter and even less enforcement on small plane owners with a CPL making a living with it; this was the catalyst that brought down the house to define things and enforce them at the Air Taxi level even.
 
Last edited:
How so? Holly's accident pilot was commerical rated.

Henning said:
Understood,Doubly so at the PP level, however previous to that accident there was little distinct legislation on the matter and even less enforcement on small plane owners with a CPL making a living with it; this was the catalyst that brought down the house to define things and enforce them at the Air Taxi level even.
Click to expand...
 
Jay Honeck said:
In another thread, I marveled at the gymnastics some poor guy was going through to find a ride to Wyoming. The convoluted FAA rules banning private pilots from receiving compensation of any kind for flying are really quite amazing.

Which begs the question: Why? What historic event, or train of events, led the FAA to take away our ability to charge -- or be voluntarily compensated -- for providing a valuable service?

Sent from my Nexus 7
Click to expand...


"Why ask useless questions? How deep is the ocean? How high is the sky? Who is John Galt?”
 
SONICMASD said:
"Why ask useless questions? How deep is the ocean? How high is the sky? Who is John Galt?”
Click to expand...

Why ask? Because it's good to know how we went from "Here" to "There", if for no other reason than future prevention.

Without getting too far into Spin Zone territory, I would submit that your question perfectly illustrates the current political situation in America. Apathy has led us to a point where things that were once thought to be absurdly, unquestionably unacceptable are now commonplace and totally accepted.

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
I have a question about "goodwill compensation"
(Pardon the scenario, but I actually know someone who did something VERY similar to this)

A guy with a PPL meets a girl and agrees to take her on a first date in his flying machine. She gives him a kiss at the end of the date.

Was he compensated?

They later got married and today have several children together.

He still flies and they are still married. He is the sole breadwinner.

Do the children from that marriage meet the FAAs definition of "compensation"?
 
Jaybird180 said:
I have a question about "goodwill compensation"
(Pardon the scenario, but I actually know someone who did something VERY similar to this)

A guy with a PPL meets a girl and agrees to take her on a first date in his flying machine. She gives him a kiss at the end of the date.

Was he compensated?
Click to expand...

Yes.


They later got married and today have several children together.
Click to expand...

The FAA does not take negative consequences into account.

Do the children from that marriage meet the FAAs definition of "compensation"?
Click to expand...

There may been some issues with 'holding out' in that scenario. Time to write the chief counsel to obtain another restriction on what we can and cannot do.
 
While holding out is prohibited, the rules on putting out do not include any of the restrictions on imputed compensation.
weilke said:
Yes.




The FAA does not take negative consequences into account.



There may been some issues with 'holding out' in that scenario. Time to write the chief counsel to obtain another restriction on what we can and cannot do.
Click to expand...
 
ChrisK said:

I think what you're trying to say here is that a commercially rated pilot can go rent an airplane and fly a passenger for compensation. It is my understanding that a commercially rated pilot can't do this without running afoul of Part 135, unless that commercial pilot is being compensated for a waived activity ([FONT=ariel, helvetica, sans-serif]f[/FONT][FONT=ariel, helvetica, sans-serif]light instruction, nonstop sightseeing flights, ferry or training flights, crop dusting, seeding, spraying, and bird chasing, banner towing, aerial photography or survey, fire fighting and powerline or pipeline patrol, etc). Given that a commercial pilot is prohibited from receiving anything that the FAA is deemed compensation for transporting someone from point A to point B, I think that saying "just take a commercial pilot ride" doesn't really address the concerns listed here.

I would actually be perfectly fine if they made Part 135 certification easier and less costly for single pilot owners, or if they had a standard around commercial pilots being allowed to be "compensated" for transport, even if the commercial pilots had to meet Part 135 standards to receive such compensation. In my mind the biggest difficulty there is certifying the AIRCRAFT to Part 135 standards. I can't just go rent a plane as a qualified commercial pilot and get reimbursed to fly someone to a business meeting we're both going to (or receive any other form of compensation - i.e. "hour building").
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Actually I said nothing of the sort.. I made a query to a "relatively" high time private pilot why he wouldn't choose to demonstrate proficiency at the commercial level.

Some people log hundreds of hours of progressive experience and learn from every one of them. Some log the same few hours over and over again and never mature their skills. Obtaining the instrument or commercial demonstrates proficiency to a higher level of precision, and in the case of commercial, the MINIMUM level of proficiency the FAA expects of people holding themselves out to fly for money.

I'm well aware of the 135 requirements, but I wasn't talking about that. Yet.
 
I agree that a proficient highish time pilot should be able to demonstrate this level of proficiency :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top