TIF or Joyflight?

[Powerin]

Looking at the website of a flying school that had a recent fatal accident, I was a little concerned at how TIFs were being advertised there. There was the TIF where you took the controls, but you could also choose to sit back and enjoy the wonderful sights of a "scenic TIF". It doesn't take much reading between the lines to see what's being offered.

 

On the one hand I'm happy for as many people as possible to enjoy flying and perhaps go on to learn to fly. But on the other hand there are companies that have to employ CPLs and go through the cost of having certified aircraft and the red tape involved in having an AOC to legally be able to conduct "joyflights", and the public has a reasonable expectation that when they go on a flight it is conducted safely and legally.

 

How common is the practice of "Scenic TIFs"? I have a feeling it could bite the RAAus hard if investigations showed it to be common practice...especially when overseas tourists are feeling the sudden urge to see what learning to fly in Australia is like.

 

 

[turboplanner]

This one will be investigated by ATSB and the implications you're referring to will go up the CASA chain, which already has shown it can be extremely tough on operations which treat safety regulations as a challenge.

 

It's also a salutory lesson for any RA operation which might think of playing the double meanings game - there are millions of dollars at risk when things go wrong, as they sometimes do when you least expect it.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

This was a hot issue back in the mid-late 1980s when ultralight flying schools were first getting 'properly' established and I had three bases for my school, two were reasonably close to holiday destinations so just as a result of our normal TIF advertising for people who might be interested in flying we received a large proportion of enquiries from people who were just on holiday and wanted to go for a flight in an ultralight.

 

At the time we were under constant close scrutiny from DoA/DCA/CAA due to some rather cheeky TV coverage and features which appeared to show us doing all sorts of aerobatics. I'm sure we couldn't have been because aeros aren't permitted, I think they must have just spun the cameras around a lot but we never did find out because the TV station somehow mislaid the films ...

 

Anyway - rather than incur further wrath and the inconvenience of more time wasted in 'investigations' I approached our Dept Regional Inspector for a determination of what exactly a TIF constituted and what was required when advertising them. The answer was simple and clear cut and was to be found in the old ANRs, so I expect it's somewhere in the new CASRs also.

 

Initially it was pointed out to me that there was a perfectly good joyflight operation near one of our bases (Gold Coast - it was Bruce McGarvie's Tigermoth Joyflights operating out of the Surfers Paradise Raceway). I explained that we always referred wannabe joyflighters to them anyway as Bruce was a good and supportive friend but a good proportion of the enquirers wanted the open air ultralight experience that our Drifters offered - and in the example in the OP above you'd need to go RAA if you wanted to fly in a gyro because there aren't any Commercial gyros available.

 

Our DoA bloke then directed me toward the TIF's definition in the ANRs and pointed out the differences between a TIF and a joyflight (a joyflight is a charter operation). In short the charter op requires an AOC, Comm pilot, Chief Pilot, Carrier's Insurance etc whereas a (GA) TIF requires an AOC, Comm Pilot with Instructor Rating, Chief Flying Instructor etc. The requirements for an AUF (as it was then) TIF were not the same as the ANR specified GA one, but were deliberately essentially similar, just that the requirements for the Flying Training Facility were a little different.

 

The important things that came out of my enquiry to DoA in regard of the discussion here though is that there is (was) no defined requirement for the conduct/content of a TIF and particularly there is (was) no requirement for the Introducee to handle the controls. IIRC TIF stands for Training Introduction/ory Flight (not Trial Introduction Flight as was often advertised) and it was up to the CFI and Instructor to decide or recommend what would be covered during the flight.

 

The only absolute requirement for justifying the flight as a TIF rather than a joyflight was that the person was being taken flying because they had an interest in learning more about what was entailed in learning to fly. It was perfectly acceptable for them to take a seat and go flying doing nothing more than observing and taking in the scenery, if that was in any way helping them to decide whether they like the sensation of being in the air, for example. As DoA pointed out to me, how could someone who has never flown in a small aircraft before know whether they might want to learn to fly except by going for a fly, and why not do so with an instructor in case they might like to see what it felt like to control the aircraft. This latter may not be offered by a Comm Pilot on a joyflight of course.

 

Lastly I asked about people who sometimes came back for another TIF without having signed up for training. It was pointed out to me that there was nothing in the ANRs restricting the number of TIFs someone could have (or be given).

 

All this was 'back then' so there may have been some changes introduced, some of the instructors on the forum might be able to enlighten us further about the current position?

 

 

[frank marriott]

Should an action be taken against an operator for conducting commercial charter in the name of a TIF I would like to get some money on the likely outcome of a court proceedings.

 

If joy flights were intended they would be specified. Oh, hang on, they are they are called charter. So when charter is not permitted then the answer should be obvious. Making excuses doesn't cut when everything gets formal.

 

The wording of advertising can suggest intent.

 

 

[metalman]

Sounds like a common sense answer HITC , I've heard a lot of to and fro over this and it seems to come down to judging the motives of the potential student at the time of the flight,

 

Matty

 

 

[DrZoos]

However having just read the web site I can see a possible very different intention in the marketing:

 

http://flightsports.com.au/

 

Scenic Trial Introductory Flights:

 

Experience the exhilarating and uplifting experience of open air flight. At Yarra Valley FLIGHTSPORTS you can soar like an eagle in a microlight or experience the excitement and agility of the gyrocopter. Low level flying and unobstructed views allow you to fully enjoy the spectacular scenery below.

 

We have a range of scenic routes available for your Trial Introductory Flight, including:

 

• Dixons Creek
   
   
  
• Healesville
   
   
  
• Mt Dandenong
   
   
  
• Warburton
   
   
  
• The Cathedral Ranges
   
   
  
• Eildon
   
   
  
• A coastal flight via Frankston to Portsea
   
   
  

 

 

Gift Certificates:

 

Treat someone you love to an UPLIFTING experience. Gift vouchers available starting at $80.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

However having just read the web site I can see a possible very different intention in the marketing:http://flightsports.com.au/

Scenic Trial Introductory Flights:

If that's all they say then they're pretty safe except as I mentioned before it's a Training Introduction/Introductory Flight, not a Trial.

 

Based on the determination I received from DoA they would be sailing a bit close to the wind with their web advert but having described it as an Introductory Flight rather than a Joyflight it plainly has to be an introduction to something, and that distinction was what was seen as important by the Regulator. If they advertised it as a Training Introduction Flight then there'd be no question of the intent and they'd be on even safer ground.

 

There is no problem with having gift vouchers and receiving an Intro flight as a gift or surprise as many people say "Gee I'd love to do that" when seeing an ultralight fly over, for example, and that is sufficient indication of interest to justify having an Introduction to it.

 

 

[frank marriott]

"it's a Training Introduction/Introductory Flight, not a Trial."

 

Not that the term makes much difference to the discussion but CASA call it a Trial [at least now, DoT may have had a different opinion]. Also it is "instructional" - read into that whatever you like but it doesn't suggest senic flight to me.

 

I am not aware of an actual printed definition.

 

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Stages in becoming a pilot

 

The first step in taking up flying, as a career or just for pleasure, is to undertake a Trial Instructional Flight, or TIF, at a licensed flying club or training organisation. ...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Playing semantics isn't going to work on this one after the Melbourne Herald Sun published this morning that it was a 15 minute fight "to see the devastation of the bushfires", removing all doubt over what it was.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Playing semantics isn't going to work on this one after the Melbourne Herald Sun published this morning that it was a 15 minute fight "to see the devastation of the bushfires", removing all doubt over what it was.

Well...that's that then, when the herald sun publishes something it simply cant be wrong can it?

 

I see this as a storm in a D cup. Providing the school advertises sensibly then anything more is superfluous.....Flight in a small plane is a pretty unique experience and one that cant easily be achieved without actually doing it. Asking if someone intends to fly or not in the future is like asking someone if they like weightlessness in space...most have absolutely nothing against which they can reference a response.

 

I'd be pretty safe however in betting that there have been occasions when someone went for a TIF as a means to see the scenery and ended up learning to fly!

 

Please lets not give CASA any ideas of where they need to stick their nose........those that fly to look at scenery provide the instructors with a part of their income so that when they are doing your and my BFR they don't have to charge us for the whole loaf and bottle of vegemite, just a part of it!

 

Comparing a one aeroplane instructor against a full AOC covered charter business is bit of a stretch IMHO, charter has a much wider breadth than scenery flights that overlap TIF's because there isn't and cant sensibly be a black and white line.

 

Andy

 

 

[turboplanner]

Yeah why not fan the flames and show them there's an entrenched problem around Australia

 

 

[Bluedog]

However having just read the web site I can see a possible very different intention in the marketing:http://flightsports.com.au/

Scenic Trial Introductory Flights:

 

Experience the exhilarating and uplifting experience of open air flight. At Yarra Valley FLIGHTSPORTS you can soar like an eagle in a microlight or experience the excitement and agility of the gyrocopter. Low level flying and unobstructed views allow you to fully enjoy the spectacular scenery below.

 

We have a range of scenic routes available for your Trial Introductory Flight, including:

 

• Dixons Creek
   
   
  
• Healesville
   
   
  
• Mt Dandenong
   
   
  
• Warburton
   
   
  
• The Cathedral Ranges
   
   
  
• Eildon
   
   
  
• A coastal flight via Frankston to Portsea
   
   
  

 

 

Gift Certificates:

 

Treat someone you love to an UPLIFTING experience. Gift vouchers available starting at $80.

My TIF this time last year I was taken over my town so I could enjoy the scenery of our lake and surrounding areas, while I had a fair bit of time on the stick and rudder (just basic straight and level, and turns (although it's fair to say I felt like I was flying myself!)). While I won't speculate on the above schools intentions, it was clear that the views that could be seen up there were a big part of what gets a lot of potential students back to our school for more lessons.

 

That combined with my instructors very good (IMO) interaction with me, and making me feel at ease, is why I'm still flying

 

 

[DrZoos]

I do agree that we should not fan any flames for casa to extinguish

 

 

[SDQDI]

My TIF this time last year I was taken over my town so I could enjoy the scenery of our lake and surrounding areas, while I had a fair bit of time on the stick and rudder (just basic straight and level, and turns (although it's fair to say I felt like I was flying myself!)). While I won't speculate on the above schools intentions, it was clear that the views that could be seen up there were a big part of what gets a lot of potential students back to our school for more lessons.That combined with my instructors very good (IMO) interaction with me, and making me feel at ease, is why I'm still flying

Exactly.

I thought the whole idea of advertising was to butter things up and make it look inviting no matter what it is, so I don't see anything wrong with advertising "scenery" alongside the TIF. As long as it is made clear to said customer that it definitely is a tif. I also don't see anything wrong with the customer choosing the direction or location of the tif after all I thought the idea of a tif was to get more people interested in learning to fly and what better way of doing that than showing them what their house or town looks like from up there:spot on:. I can still remember my tif I was so impressed by it that I made my wife and dad go for one too.

 

But I can also see how this can be seen as such a grey area but remember if there were no grey areas in life we wouldn't have any lawyers around and how sad would that be:wink:

 

 

[skeptic36]

Tif or joy flight ? Who cares. Surely if the motivation is a joy flight, the recipient is as safe or safer if they go up with an instructor instead of the average recreational pilot.

 

Having read the blurb on the website I think it's going to be tough to prove wrongdoing, assuming anybody wants to......

 

Just my worthless opinion.

 

 

[Thirsty]

There's nothing in the regs to say you can't conduct a joy flight - you just can't be paid for it. Take anyone you like for a joy flight so long as, at a maximum, you share the costs and all is good.

 

 

[metalman]

Playing semantics isn't going to work on this one after the Melbourne Herald Sun published this morning that it was a 15 minute fight "to see the devastation of the bushfires", removing all doubt over what it was.

Wow your right, the newspapers will really hang the lot of us now,,,,,,,,this could be bad publicity ,,,,,,,,and for the record starting a new thread with a different name of a thread to somehow make it different to the other ,then publicly bagging the deceased is pretty low rate

 

 

[Powerin]

Wow your right, the newspapers will really hang the lot of us now,,,,,,,,this could be bad publicity ,,,,,,,,and for the record starting a new thread with a different name of a thread to somehow make it different to the other ,then publicly bagging the deceased is pretty low rate

Yeah....sorry. I was genuinely curious and a bit concerned. I started a new thread to hopefully start a discussion separate from recent events, but failed.

 

 

[coljones]

From a safety perspective is there any reduction in safety due to a TIF or a joy-flight masquerading as a TIF? Presumably the PIC in a TIF is a qualified instructor and meets all the requisite safety requirements whereas anyone can give a friend a joy flight but, at the max, share costs. As safety is paramount the TIF as joy flight ticks all the boxes with me. Or have I missed something?

 

 

[djpacro]

Insurance status is different so only need to consider when something goes wrong.

 

 

[Downunder]

Hang me for this, but if joy flights under the guise of TIFF's occur and help support a training facility so those that genuinely want to train to pilot an aircraft can do so, then go for it I say.

 

We talk about the demise of airports and training facilities. Do we really want to see an FTF go broke knocking back some dude with a fist full of dollars wanting to "have a look around" on a slow day with not much training happening?

 

The more people that fly irrespective of their motivations keeps aviation alive.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You wouldn't be hung, but you could be charged with manslaughter if you killed your passenger.

 

The definition of a Joyflight is usually a flight for which money is charged, and has its origins in the 1920's where pilots would buy an aircraft and travel the country like gypsies offering "Joyflights" for cash.

 

Taking a friend or interested party up for a flight is not a Joyflight, so there's nothing to stop you doing this in Recreational Aviation.

 

There is no provision within RAA regulations for commercial activities, so you can't charge for a flight beyond 50/50 sharing of costs and you can't fly for business purposes, so you can't advertise and conduct "Joyflights".

 

The aircraft which prompted this thread operated in GA.

 

In GA there is provision for commercial activities, but it requires an elevation of safety by:

 

• Skill level, knowledge and experience of the pilot in the form of a Commercial Pilot's Licence (CPL)
   
   
  
• An AOC (Air Operators Certificate) which provides and extensive safety platform from facilities to maintenance to operating procedures to safety procedures.
   
   
  

 

 

There may be other requirements I've missed. Once you have a suitably compliant airfield, facilities, aircraft and qualifications, you can advertise and conduct Joyflights and other commercial operations which you are qualified for.

 

The TIF always was a Trial Instructional Flight, directly related to and Instructor and potential student to gauge whether there was a future in learning to fly, and involves the potential student operating the controls over a period long enough to make an assessment - usually not less than 45 minutes. While a successful TIF can be entered in the logbook as dual TIF, the formal training curriculum starts with the first lesson.

 

These requirements also came out of the wild west days where joyflights sometimes became charter flights and a lot of innocent passengers were killed.

 

In recent times I've noticed around five people losing their licences for either failing to comply with the AOC requirements, or on two occasions after excited passengers posted their videos on Youtube. In one case it seems a pilot has lost his rights for life. So CASA have been taking things very seriously.

 

One of the reasons I imagine CASA are paying so much attention is that a person taking a joyflight has an expectation that all safety standards he's come to expect from airlines and commercial operations will be met. When this duty of care is not met, all the people involved are open to a public liability claim for negligence. Where they knew they were not complying, and someone is injured or killed the matter becomes a crime and they can be charged right up to the level of manslaughter.

 

So given you are talking about FTF's (RAA term) operating joyflights under the "guise" of TIFs, line 1 applies - I wouldn't go there under any circumstances for any reason whatsoever.

 

 

[Phil Perry]

It's interesting that most people I speak to here in the UK, ( those who are attempting access to your shores anyway ) think that they can continue flying the way they do here in GOOD OLE ENGLUND. . . . . I've been trying to tell them for months that Australia's attitude to aircraft and flying is NOT. . . .what they might think,. . . they seem to believe that the Ozzies are really laid back and relaxed about everything . . . .Hmmmmm,. . . they were a long time ago when I liveed th ere ( well, . . .reasonably so I thought,. . .) but NOW,. . .from what I've recently read on this forum, I think they will have a nasty shock, . . .ie there appears to be a regulation against everything you want to do if it concerns aviation. . . . . I mean,. . .arguments about what does and what does not constitute a tria instructional flight,. . . .? what the fook is that all about, . . .what a load of bowloks,. . . . for heaven's sake, if it is INSTRUCTIONAL. . . then that's what it is.. . . .if it is a bloody JOY FLIGHT JOLLY then that's what that is as well.

 

Why the plays on words ? ? ? ? Does this mean that the Australian Authorities make the Chinese, Greeks or French look really helpful by comparison,. . . .?

 

It looks like you guys have got a right mess out there, and I hope you can get it sorted before I come back home for a flying holiday. . . . . Otherwise I might be grounded in me Holden Kingswood. . . . .

 

Kind regards,. . . . . Phil

 

( Naturalized Australian Citizen )

 

 

[Powerin]

for heaven's sake, if it is INSTRUCTIONAL. . . then that's what it is.. . . .if it is a bloody JOY FLIGHT JOLLY then that's what that is as well.Why the plays on words ? ? ? ?

Because you aren't allowed to take people for paid "joy flights" in RAAus. The ONLY commercial activity allowed is training. All paid flights in RAAus must be instructional, trial or otherwise. And that's where the play on words comes in. TIFs are starting to be called "Scenic TIFS". Can an instructional flight be promoted and advertised as scenic?

I think most here thought that was fine and that it was OK for a school to try and make as much money as they could. I'm probably stupid for thinking otherwise. It's all great when things go well. The school makes money and the customer is happy. But my reason for starting this thread was what happens when the proverbial hits the fan and deaths are involved? Will a Coroner and a Judge think a "Scenic TIF" is within the bounds of the law? Perhaps they will.

 

The play on words was my worry. If it's a trial instructional flight then that's what you call it, because that's all you are allowed to do in RAAus. The general public also needs to know that that's exactly they are getting when they sign up for a ride.....sorry, instructional flight. They are NOT getting a joyflight with a properly registered company, in a certified aircraft maintained to commercial standards, with a commercially trained and licensed pilot.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I don't think there is any confusion really - just SOME operators operating illegally and trying to confuse others. Some people will always try to push the envelope [even though they know better] similar to the selling of "seats" on scheduled flights and calling it charter when they are not licenced for RPT - generally doesn't last long before they are spending their money defending an action in court - and it doesn't take an incident/accident for that to happen.