CPL Pilot doing commercial work in a 19- rego aircraft - is it legal ?

[kaz3g]

Very hard to define commercial. I used to use a C172 with the window open for photographic work.Very good for the job too.I ferried workers from Rocky, back to Brisbane at the end of a job, I didn't charge them anything so it was not a commercial flight, Our employer covered 3/4 of the cost as there were 3 of them.

I beg to differ, Yenn. The law will give the word its ordinary meaning and you can look that up in the Macquarie Dictionary.

 

I also suggest your ferry flights did not meet CAR 2(7A)(d) because the costs must be shared equally between each of the persons on the flight, not paid by their employer.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I beg to differ, Yenn. The law will give the word its ordinary meaning and you can look that up in the Macquarie Dictionary.I also suggest your ferry flights did not meet CAR 2(7A)(d) because the costs must be shared equally between each of the persons on the flight, not paid by their employer.

 

Kaz

Like I said, it's all ok until you're standing in court.

 

 

[djpacro]

I dunno Kaz, I thought that there was another law where Yenn, as an employee of the company, could be paid by the company to ferry other employees around as a private op.

 

 

[planedriver]

Did someone mention that Aus is now over-regulated?.

 

There's always at least two sides to story, but it seems that is the way we are heading.

 

 

[facthunter]

All this uncertainty is a result of rules that are unclear to ordinary people and subject to many different opinions as a result. It would be helpful if the intent of a rule was spelled out to aid understanding of what the aim of the particular rule is, and more plain language used instead of legalese. Misunderstandings should be avoided in AVIATION. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

DJPACRO. No the ferrying of people while paid by an employer would definitely be illegal. Unless I held a commercial licence.

 

 

[aro]

No the ferrying of people while paid by an employer would definitely be illegal. Unless I held a commercial licence.

That's what I answered when I was asked that question by the testing officer when I did my PPL test. However, it is wrong, according to the testing officer. If the aircraft is provided by the employer and the employer does not charge anyone to be on the flight, it comes under CAR 2(7)(v) i.e. a private operation:

 

(v) the carriage of persons or the carriage of goods without a charge for the carriage being made

 

I think this must be a favorite question.

 

However, if you own the aircraft and the employer reimburses you 3/4 of the cost, you are charging for the carriage so it is not private. CAR 2(7A) doesn't apply if it is the employer not the persons on the flight paying you.

 

Most of the confusion seems to come from people applying "the vibe" rather than looking up the actual rules. PPL and RAA are restricted to private operations (plus a couple of additional restrictions for RAA). Private operations are defined in CAR 2(7)(d):

 

(d) an aircraft that is flying or operating for the purpose of, or in the course of:

 

(i) the personal transportation of the owner of the aircraft;

 

(ii) aerial spotting where no remuneration is received by the pilot or the owner of the aircraft or by any person or organisation on whose behalf the spotting is conducted;

 

(iii) agricultural operations on land owned and occupied by the owner of the aircraft;

 

(iv) aerial photography where no remuneration is received by the pilot or the owner of the aircraft or by any person or organisation on whose behalf the photography is conducted;

 

(v) the carriage of persons or the carriage of goods without a charge for the carriage being made other than the carriage, for the purposes of trade, of goods being the property of the pilot, the owner or the hirer of the aircraft;

 

(va) the carriage of persons in accordance with subregulation (7A);

 

(vi) the carriage of goods otherwise than for the purposes of trade;

 

(vii) flight training, other than the following:

 

(A) Part 141 flight training (within the meaning of regulation 141.015 of CASR);

 

(B) Part 142 flight training (within the meaning of regulation 142.015 of CASR);

 

© balloon flying training (within the meaning of subregulation 5.01(1)) for the grant of a balloon flight crew licence or rating; or

 

(viii) any other activity of a kind substantially similar to any of those specified in subparagraphs (i) to (vi) (inclusive);

 

shall be taken to be employed in private operations.

 

It doesn't appear too confusing to me if you look at the actual regulation.

 

 

[djpacro]

... (vii) flight training, other than the following:.... It doesn't appear too confusing to me if you look at the actual regulation.

Yep. My flight training business from which I earn taxable income is a private operation.

[red750]

Too out of date for Xavier's operation, but just a query re vertical and oblique aerial photographs. Where does Google Earth fit in all this? I can zoom in and see where my bins were located (when the image was captured), and which car was in the driveway. You can count how many solar panels were in the area on the day of capture, and you can zoom right down to Street View and see the houses/shops etc. A great way to plan a drive to parts unknown. I can even see my daughter on her school crossing (she's a crossing supervisor), face blurred of course.

 

 

[kaz3g]

I dunno Kaz, I thought that there was another law where Yenn, as an employee of the company, could be paid by the company to ferry other employees around as a private op.

I think the catch here is that it must be the employer's aircraft but I won't hang my hat on that.

 

Kaz

 

 

[kaz3g]

Thanks ARO, that was what I was just looking at again, too.

 

I think Yenn was a bridge too far because it was the employer who paid him.

 

Kaz

 

 

[MikeBravoYanky]

VH Exp might be the most suitable category for specialist work. Getting mods approved for "normal" VH is time consuming/practically impossible. Nev

VH Reg Experimental aircraft can be used for commercial aerial work with the appropriate CPL and AOC.. Answer to a question put to Mick English of CASA head office.. (in court)..

 

 

[djpacro]

i guess that question had a very specific context? The rules are clearly explained in a series of ACs.