Ownership and passengers

John Galban wrote:
I think the point that Elliott was trying to make is that there a
few restictions on a private pilot flying someone for any
non-commercial reason, as long as the pilot pays for the cost of the
flight. Does that sound reasonable? I know it doesn't count, but
I've asked several local FSDO inspectors and they agree with that
interpretation.

Thanks, guys!
Now I have an excuse to tell mother why she shouldn't hide money in my
house when I fly her home after flying her around. She knows I won't
accept it if she hands it to me, so she puts it someplace that I will
find it after a couple days or weeks. Parents... sneaky, aren't they?

As a
private pilot you are certainly allowed to provide transportation to another
person, provided no compensation is paid, regardless of whether you would
have otherwise undertaken the flight.

This is certainly NOT the case. The FAA has repeatedly struck down ride
share operations that involve no money changing hands (not pilot compensation,.
not even expenxes). There are two things the FAA has interpretted that throw
a monkey wrench into things: non-monetary compensation (such as the accrual
of flight time), and carrying passengers in air commerce (not a private vs. commercial
issue but a part 91 vs. 135 one).

Yesterday I planned to fly to a meeting that was 105 nm away. I was
going to take a colleague with me. I was not planning on asking him
to pay 1/2 my flying expenses, but I was planning on turning in my
mileage and tiedown fee for reimbursement, as I would otherwise have
driven my car to the meeting and turned in that mileage.

Is this legal?

(BTW, my company nixed the idea on liability concerns. They want a
waiver for next time but were otherwise in favor of the idea.)

Best,

Greg Hopp
Cols, OH.

Greg Hopp wrote:

Is this legal?

Yes.

George Patterson
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect. - Linus Torvalds, speaking about Linux.

Greg Hopp wrote:

As a
private pilot you are certainly allowed to provide transportation to another
person, provided no compensation is paid, regardless of whether you would
have otherwise undertaken the flight.

This is certainly NOT the case. The FAA has repeatedly struck down ride
share operations that involve no money changing hands (not pilot compensation,.
not even expenxes). There are two things the FAA has interpretted that throw
a monkey wrench into things: non-monetary compensation (such as the accrual
of flight time), and carrying passengers in air commerce (not a private vs. commercial
issue but a part 91 vs. 135 one).


Yesterday I planned to fly to a meeting that was 105 nm away. I was
going to take a colleague with me. I was not planning on asking him
to pay 1/2 my flying expenses, but I was planning on turning in my
mileage and tiedown fee for reimbursement, as I would otherwise have
driven my car to the meeting and turned in that mileage.

Is this legal?


Yes.

In article , Greg Hopp
wrote:
Yesterday I planned to fly to a meeting that was 105 nm away. I was
going to take a colleague with me. I was not planning on asking him
to pay 1/2 my flying expenses, but I was planning on turning in my
mileage and tiedown fee for reimbursement, as I would otherwise have
driven my car to the meeting and turned in that mileage.
Is this legal?
(BTW, my company nixed the idea on liability concerns. They want a
waiver for next time but were otherwise in favor of the idea.)

Gregg, back in the late 1980's early 1990's, NBAA (National Business
Aircraft Association) created a package of documents and advice that
explained how to approach you company officials and obtain permission
to use and be reimbursed for use of personal aircraft for business
related travel. I don't know if they still offer it, but you may want
to contact them. If they don't have anything you can use, contact me, I
still have one or two buried somewhere in a box that I can give you.
Do you fly out of Don Scott?

When you say they "nixed" the idea, do you mean they refused to
reimburse you for that trip? Not sure why they would not pay your
mileage as if you drove your car. Maybe you meant they were not in favor
of you using that mode of transportation.

I'm curious to what waiver language they want. If they want you to
promise not to sue them while traveling on business using your plane, I
would look at the particulars to be sure they were very specific and
detailed. You may not want to absolve them of any and all liability in
the fine print.

I find it curious that some company insurance policies exclude coverage
on you while you pilot your airplane. However, chain smokers, skydivers,
people who drive race cars and demolition cars as hobbies, and other
high risk activities are covered. At the same time, these very policies
usually double your coverage if you fly commercially on business. It
seems odd, but I am not in the business of calculating risks. The
private pilot thing appears to be outdated prejudice rather than
objective risk number crunching.

Good Luck,


Mike



EDR wrote:
In article , Greg Hopp
wrote:

Yesterday I planned to fly to a meeting that was 105 nm away. I was
going to take a colleague with me. I was not planning on asking him
to pay 1/2 my flying expenses, but I was planning on turning in my
mileage and tiedown fee for reimbursement, as I would otherwise have
driven my car to the meeting and turned in that mileage.
Is this legal?
(BTW, my company nixed the idea on liability concerns. They want a
waiver for next time but were otherwise in favor of the idea.)


Gregg, back in the late 1980's early 1990's, NBAA (National Business
Aircraft Association) created a package of documents and advice that
explained how to approach you company officials and obtain permission
to use and be reimbursed for use of personal aircraft for business
related travel. I don't know if they still offer it, but you may want
to contact them. If they don't have anything you can use, contact me, I
still have one or two buried somewhere in a box that I can give you.
Do you fly out of Don Scott?


__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

For what it's worth, the Canadian regs perspective on the subject can be
found in CARs Part IV - Personnel Licensing & Training, subpart 1, Division
VI item 401.28. Just follow the link:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/REGSERV...01e.htm#401_28
and go down half the page.

Fly safely,
Ross
"Once you're up in the air always make sure you can fly another day..."

"Roger Long" om wrote in
message ...
The FAA is looking for two things when considering the question of whether
a
private pilot was carrying a passenger(s) legitimately. One is evidence
that the passenger is incidentally aboard on a flight that was going to
take
place anyway. Second is that the pilot and passenger have a shared
interest
in the objective of the flight.

In the case of co-ownership, such as in a partnership or flying club (with
stock), would there not be a presumption of shared interest?

For example:

Strictly speaking, if a friend not involved with your aircraft said. "I
need
to go to Podunk on Saturday, how about flying me up there?", the flight
would be questionable if you had no prior intent or independent reason to
fly there.

However, if a co-owner said, "I need to go to Podunk on Saturday and I
can't
fly PIC until I finish this medication, how about flying me down?, I
would
think that your co-responsibility for the aircraft management and
maintenance and similar factors would make this OK.

If you co-owner said, "I need to be on Podunk on Saturday and my wife
would
like to meet me on Saturday, how about flying her up and we'll have
lunch?",
I would think that would be OK even though it would be questionable in the
case of a non-co-owner.

Anyone care to predict what the FAA would (or should) say? Assume costs
shared properly according to seat occupancy.
--
Roger Long