If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
preparing for commercial oral and practical
"buttman" wrote in message ups.com... On May 11, 8:08 pm, Jose wrote: Expect to get a lot of questions about the limitations of a commercial pilot operating under part 91 (i.e. what you cannot do w/o being 135). Expect some of those situations to get pretty complicated (i.e. you start out on a local photography flight, the photographer asks you if you'll drop him off at point X rather than back at the airport). I take it the answer would be no. But what about you start out on a local photography flight, you get diverted and have to land. As it turns out, this is near where the photographer needs to be, so he decides not to fly back when the reason for the diversion ends? Jose My guess would be since the passenger is paying for a photography flight, not a charter flight, it should be allowed. The only way for it to be illegal would be if the passenger paid for the flight, knowing he would land somewhere else. Since the diversion was incidental, I don't think it could be considered common carriage. I don't do that kind of flying, so I'm not totally sure. There are 4 rules that determine whether a flight is common carriage or not. 3 of these rules are very clear cut (people or property, from place to place, for hire) and the last one (holding out) is really vague. Basically if the FAA says you're holding out, you're holding out. I believe there's an AC published (AC 120-12A)that goes into detail what is holding out. To quote it directly, "the issue is the nature and character of the operation". So if the pilot was doing an honest diversion, it should be OK. If the pilot was doing a **WINK** **WINK** "diversion", he would get in trouble. At least thats how I see it. On this one I agree with you. As a former student pilot, and presumably a future student pilot and then private pilot, I have no expectation of ever having this particular discussion with a DE. However, there are a few parallels in debates regarding the sharing of expenses and of business vs commercial flying: and some of those can become esoteric to the point of becoming ridiculous. A lot could also depend upon the personality of the examiner and any recent cases and guidance he may have received. Quite a long time ago, I was sitting in the (then) local airport restaurant and one of those present, who I believe was primarily a charter pilot, related a story about his oral exam for either instrument or commercial. It was long and convoluted, if true, and he was sent back for further study a couple of times--until he happened to answer a question with something like "I will have to look that up." According to the story, he then passed the exam. Given the plausible and uncommon situation described above, plus a moment of greater insight than I usually display, I might try to dance around the question with something like: "Well, if I was the pilot, I would have decided where to land based upon safety of flight and whatever services might be needed while on the ground; and I think that it would be unwise to attempt to force him/her back into the airplane. Can you offer any guidance in case anything similar ever occurs?" Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Oral exam place and questions | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 34 | April 18th 07 06:12 PM |
Commercial rating: complex aircraft required aircraft for practical test? | Marc J. Zeitlin | Piloting | 22 | November 24th 05 04:11 AM |
Oral Exam Prep -- recommendations and recollections | Nicholas Kliewer | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | November 15th 04 05:00 PM |
Private Pilot Oral | Pete | Piloting | 9 | December 2nd 03 05:41 PM |
CPL/IR/MULTI ORAL | Ian Leslie | Piloting | 2 | July 11th 03 09:32 PM |