Wanted Private Gazelle Hire close to Melb...

[Adrian Lewer]

Hi all the title pretty much says it all. I am after a Gazelle for around 4-5 hours to do a flight to apollo bay for a photo shoot of a property. the Aircraft I use to use was sold and is no longer available to hire.

 

Have been on to the Ballarat aero club 3 times in the last 2 days and have got the run around so not happy.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Tyabb have two club AC - long road trip but you fly down over the Heads, so there's some catch up

 

 

[Guest brentc]

There was one at Barwon Heads from memory.

 

If this venture is of the commercial kind, best not be mentioning it on here!

 

 

[BLA82]

If this venture is of the commercial kind, best not be mentioning it on here!

Adrian isn't trying to sell anything, he was only asking where to Hire a plane from, what he does with it has no bearing on this thread.Lets not get carried away here:loopy:

 

 

[Guest brentc]

a flight to apollo bay for a photo shoot of a property

Read into the post what you like.

 

Whilst I'm sure Adrian has honourable intentions, the wording of the post makes it sound commercial.

 

Personally I'd write something like how I'm heading down to take some photos of a mate's place. A 'photo shoot' sounds like something you do for money.

 

Just my interpretation.

 

 

[BLA82]

Point taken but I think it's just a case of Political Correctness Overload:loopy:

 

If that was the case hallf the posts on this forum would have to be re worded, there are multible members who are level 2's and make comments about there trips away to work. Theres a difference between writting about what you are doing and actually advertising. Lets keep these threads politics free.

 

I don't think in anyway Adrian has even come close to breaching this sites codes etc

 

 

[Guest brentc]

I wasn't referring to site codes etc, no problems there. Don't worry Adrian, I'm just just using your post as an example.

 

It's something that needs to be brought to light more frequently, using your RA-Aus aircraft for hire and reward.

 

Your L2 example above no doubt refers to the Maj Millard posts in which an aircraft is used for work purposes to service aircraft out in the country.

 

This would in fact be ok as it's not used for hire or reward but rather for the personal transportation of the mechanic and as long as that service is not being charged for, then no problems - not commercial.

 

Using an RA-Aus aircraft for the purposes of a photo shoot where you are paid for the photos would indeed be considered hire and reward, both for RA-Aus and GA. In the GA world you would need to operate with a commercial licence and AOC.

 

We were dicussing this at work today.

 

If my company as a Computer firm decided to buy a Cessna Caravan as a corporate aircraft, I could as a PPL fly that aircraft with company personnel on board as the aircraft is not being used for hire or reward.

 

Another good example is aircraft dealers say like Cirrus. The Cirrus Australian dealer principle flies all over the country demonstrating aircraft to customers but not with a CPL!

 

You know those traffic choppers operating over Mel & Syd reporting to the news stations? Note that in a single engine helicopter you cannot fly at night commercially, but you can privately. You may have noticed that these choppers fly at night when doing their traffic monitoring? How you ask? Because they are being operated privately and not for hire or reward.

 

It's a grey area and something to keep in mind.

 

Sorry for the thread drift.

 

 

[BLA82]

Brent,

 

I apologise about my speal, now you have put it like that I can see where you have come from.:thumb_up:

 

I will admit I have learned somthing:blush:

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

He didn't say it was aerial photography, what if he flew over to Apollo Bay, got out, took photos, flew back home and then sold the photos?

 

That would just be personal transportation to get to the job site?

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

You know those traffic choppers operating over Mel & Syd reporting to the news stations? Note that in a single engine helicopter you cannot fly at night commercially, but you can privately. You may have noticed that these choppers fly at night when doing their traffic monitoring? How you ask? Because they are being operated privately and not for hire or reward.

I can see how that would work for shooting footage for use only by the station that owns the helicopter. But stations very often SELL this footage to other users. The moment they do that, wouldn't the flight become reward?

If they can get away with that, there is no reason why you couldn't as a photographer hire a plane (or have a friend - who is not being paid for it - hire and fly it for you) and shoot and sell images.

 

Or is the distinction that in the case of the helicopters, you shoot first and then try to sell it, where as in the latter case someone hired you to do the shoot?

 

But then again, for certain events (think Olympics opening), they would sell live coverage to other users before they fly.

 

Hmmm, very grey indeed, it seems!

 

 

[turboplanner]

No, very black and white if you want to retain your licence, check the Air Leg, definitions etc.

 

 

[Adrian Lewer]

Holy snapi'n duck poo batman, gave u guys an inch and you went a mile ;) yes brent you are right I should have worded it a bit better. Just tried to keep it simple and not give a life story.

 

I have a mate who is a proferional photographer who wants to shoot some pics of the apollo bay area. He has offered to pay costs equivelent to half or full, no proffit ( which ever is leagal ) ;).... At my most convenient time and place. This bloke is a good friend and has been flyingbwith me before but would like to take his big lense with him for some good shots.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Adrian, I'm withdrawing my advice regarding availability of aircraft

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Well Adrian, that would be considered commercial. Hence my comments earlier. If the photos are to be sold for profit, then the flight is of the commercial type.

 

 

[Adrian Lewer]

The pics are not for sale. He has a personal interest in the area. I am of the understanding that you can ask for half of the cost of the aircraft, this is what I do for anyone who flys with me. I pay half and they pay half ?

 

Turboplanner hope I did not offend you, was only having a joke about giving an Inch Etc...

 

 

[turboplanner]

No, that's OK Adrian, but you gave me a potential legal problem and I had to fix it fast.

 

There are two issues - one is the threat to the PIC licence, the other, potentially a lot more painfull is the public liability should someone be injured. A Quadriplegic passenger with around $7 million compensation on the table is quickly going to bring out the full details of any arrangement.

 

 

[Adrian Lewer]

Ah good have been thinking all day I got up ya goat, yep understand, will have to have a think about a few things and get back to the other party, But for now can not see any problem with the arrangement, as long as it is for 1/2 payment, no reward as per the rules. will do some more research.

 

 

[Guest drizzt1978]

Wait a minute, what if you take a mate for a fly then he takes you out for a five course dinner and three cases of beer....a trip to the casino and gives you four rabbits that he shot....

 

Isnt that just returning the favour....

 

heheheh

 

Can somebody move this to the "Political Maelstrom" thread.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

My understanding is that they are allowed to pay every cent the flight costs, plus expenses you make (such as overnight stays) as long as you don't get paid for your services. They moment they pay you, you need a CPL and a VH aircraft.

 

But the whole "doing something with the aircraft that might possibly make *somebody* money even though the PIC isn't being paid" thing has got me puzzled. Seems an enormous grey area.

 

Photographers shoot stuff they like all the time to build their portfolio. Then one day someone comes up and says: "I am looking for a shot of such and such" and the photographer thinks: "hang on a minute, I might just have what you need" and makes a sale.

 

 

[Guest Orion]

This is an interesting discussion.

 

Quick search of CASA points to CAR 206(1).

 

This lays down the framework however seems to be a bit lacking on definitions.

 

Discusses Aerial work with prescribed activities clearly including Aerial Photography.

 

Also discusses carriage of cargo or passengers for hire or reward.

 

However i can't find a definition of what constitutes commercial purpose can anyone point me in the right direction.

 

Definition is all important when reading and interpreting legislation

 

For something to be "commercial" well you could write books on the subject in fact there are plenty. Whats commercial to one person is private to another. The Income Tax Acts and supporting case law are probably our best guide as to commerciality as in revenue law the distinction between commercial and non commercial is very important in determining if a transaction is subject to tax so over the years a lot of focus has been placed on this point in the courts.

 

Its difficult to see how an isolated act of aerial photography no matter what is earned could be considered commercial as the act lacks the necessary repetitive or systemized nature of a commercial activity. Note that the picture (pardon the pun) changes if you carry someone who does the photography. In that case it falls under the carriage of cargo or passenger for reward.

 

Basically just because one person carries out an activity and its deemed commercial doesn't necessarily mean that a different person who does the same thing will automatically be considered to be carry on a commercial activity. Its always based on the particular facts or circumstances.

 

Cheers

 

Orion

 

 

[Guest brentc]

If he's not selling the pics, then no problem.

 

When you said he was a 'proferional photographer' (I assumed professional, meaning in pursuit of payment).

 

 

[tangocharlie123]

Hire or reward

 

Thanks for this thread but I have the same sort of dilemma.

 

The company I contract for allows travel time of say $50ph plus fuel for any thing outside the metro area. if I embark on a 500km journey this would take 5.5 hours and around 50 lt fuel. total around $330. if I was to take my plane I would be able to complete my journey in 3 hours do I charge the road rate or the flying rate which costs $50 running per hour. $180 difference in my pocket. Just because I fly there. Does this mean that I will be penalized and run the risk of loss of certificate.

 

will do the run tonight back to brisbane for the day. by Car

 

Happy easter to all

 

 

[Guest Orion]

Interesting point

 

in this circumstance you are being paid travel money on a hourly rate regardless of mode of transport.

 

Don't see how you flying your own plane from point a - point b would be commercial purpose in this case

 

doesn't appear to be aerial work and theres no carriage of passengers or cargo for risk or reward.

 

seemsto fall outside definitions

 

any other takers ?

 

 

[skydog]

seems logical

 

Seems logical enough and is the cost of getting to work I suppose but "commerce" is still at play here , ie money transacted.

 

Maybe it too is subject to being commercial hire.

 

I better go look up the CAO`s, hate those things, very hard to findthe right section.

 

 

[Barefootpilot]

The easiest way to find this out is to call up Casa 131 757 and ask! Just ask for a Flying Operations Inspector and tell him the story. When you do this though make sure you take note of him or her name and the outcome because not everyone (even in Casa) agree's on the interpratations. So if they give you the green light go ahead! Casa are not (always) out to get you so make use of them! even if we are RAA!

 

Adam.