"Matthew Waugh" wrote in message .com...
"Yossarian" wrote in message
et...
Hypothetical situation: I rent a plane and fly 2 friends to city A. I
drop
them off and fly back. If I pay 1/3 of the rental time and costs going
there and full amount of the return leg, that's legal, right?

What was your reason for going to city A? If all you did was drop them off
then your reason would appear to have been the transportation of your 2
friends. This makes it illegal. If you have a reason to go to city A and
take your friends along and they share the cost, that would be legal.

Mat


Actually, not only must you have a reason for going to city A, but you
must have a common purpose as well. There have been numerous NTSB
decisions in which the pilot paid only his share of the costs, but
because there was no common purpose (e.g., you are both going to see
a baseball game together) the flight was considered an unauthorized
Part 135 flight and thus the pilot was sanctioned.

In one example, NTSB Order EA-4306, a pilot was receiving multi-engine
flight instruction from a CFI. The (non-CFI) pilot on his own
arranged to share costs with two TV reporters who needed
transportation. The passangers paid only thier share of the costs.
Both the pilot and the CFI were found to be operating under Part 135
without proper certification and received suspensions of their pilot
certificates due to the fact that their was no common purpose. The
purpose for the pilot was to receive multi-engine training while the
purpose for the TV crew was to receive transportation. Even though the
CFI was unaware of the arrangement, it was determined that as PIC, he
was responsible for determining the purpose of the passangers, and
knowing that this would be an illegal flight (i.e., not asking
questions does not make you immune).

Other examples I've seen include pilots trying to apply the "shared
expenses" exception to parachute jump operations with the jumpper
paying thier share of the costs. I'm sure there are other examples
more closely resembling the transportation to city A scenario, but I
haven't made a concerted effort to look for them. However, the common
theme of all of these decisions is that the "shared expenses" exception
only applies when there is a "common purpose" among the pilot and
passangers.

Jeffery Hansen, CFI-A