Compensation

[weilke]

You may also interest your friends in your side business: that of selling the world's best tasting gumdrops, which may sell for only (4 hours x wet rental of your plane of choice) to experience.

.....or little cups of sticky sweet orange juice.

 

[Henning]

Here's a question...in what situation(s) would the FAA actually even pursue an issue like this. Assuming it was a cash transaction b/t pilot and passenger and they both have their stories in line, how would the FAA be able to prove anything anyway?

When the 135 operator across the ramp keeps seeing you leave with different people and come back alone, that's typically when the problems start.

 

[Henning]

Originally Posted by Unregistered
Some of us have employment situations where we are regularly asked if we have violated any laws, and where we are tested by use of devices which measure our involuntary responses to these questions. And even some more of us are of the disposition to worry about such things, which puts us at a natural disadvantage when taking these kinds of tests. And we work for employers who would take a very dim view of breaking Federal Regulations - regardless of how murky, poorly defined, subject to administrative interpretation, or generally stupid they are.

Just another possible reason people might care.

The two jobs I had to poly for I laughed and admitted 'hell yes, more than I probably realize', still got both gigs.

 

[Fearless Tower]

If the pilot had his own DC-3 and made one trip hauled the same people in that one trip and burned the same total amount of fuel(random assumption) he would have been legal?
Makes sense to someone. And justifies a larger plane.

That's it!!!!

That right there's my ticket to convince my wife we need a DC-3!!!

Ooooohh....I can here them P&W 1830's sucking down my bank account now!

 

[denverpilot]

And if it weren't for a bunch of nimrod pilots dreaming up ways to get around the intent of the rule over the years, we wouldn't have so many chief counsel opinions to deal with.

Disagree. A number of the worst opinions have come about, not because the pilot was attempting to get around anything, but because they were dumb enough to ask the Chief Counsel's office instead of letting the sleeping dog lie.

 

[cowman]

So, do I take it that common purpose means if I want to go somewhere for fun or whatever and my friend wants to do the same, they can give me some gas money?

What if my friend lives somewhere along the route and their airport happens to be a reasonable place to stop for fuel/human needs along the way? Can they hop in and pay a share of the fuel for the rest of the trip.... assuming we are going to the same place/event?

 

[Dead Stick]

Probably not. The question is whether you and your passenger had a "common purpose" for the trip, which the FAA defines as a need to be at the same destination on the same date. It seems from your post that you crafted your plans to match your passenger's, and that makes it appear as though you did not have a common purpose for the trip. If this ever came to the attention of the FAA, I suspect they'd be asking some questions about whether you had reason to be in Rapid City on that date, and if not, to tell you that you were not legal to accept that money. The fact that you just flew there, dropped him off, and flew right home would probably convince them that you were flying an illegal charter operation.

Definitely not. Expenses may be shared only on a pro rata per seat basis. Since the passenger wasn't in a seat on that leg, the passenger can't share the expenses of that leg.

I suppose the FAA, if they ever got involved in this situation, could in theory consider that additional compensation beyond what is legal (if any compensation at all was legal -- see Question 1). However, the odds of that ever actually becoming an issue are pretty slim -- they'd have you pretty well fried over the drop-off trip already and wouldn't need more to make their case.

As always with questions like this, the odds of the FAA finding out are pretty slim, and depend mainly on whether your passenger complains to them about the flight, or if word of you accepting that money gets around to a local charter operator who resents cut-rate illegal competition. In any event, if this did come to the FAA's attention, the investigating Inspector would probably ask some questions, and on finding out that you've only done this once, and were not straight on the rules, and are a new Pvt Pilot, give you a stern lecture on the situation and drop it at that point -- but make a note of it so if your name comes up again in a similar situation, s/he will know you had been educated and warned.

In summary, what you did was probably illegal but not likely to land you in deep water as long as it was done from ignorance and only once. Learn the rules on this, go, and sin no more.

Take the birthday gift, enjoy it and never bring this up again and as Ron said, go and sin no more.

 

[Skylane81E]

So, do I take it that common purpose means if I want to go somewhere for fun or whatever and my friend wants to do the same, they can give me some gas money?

What if my friend lives somewhere along the route and their airport happens to be a reasonable place to stop for fuel/human needs along the way? Can they hop in and pay a share of the fuel for the rest of the trip.... assuming we are going to the same place/event?

They can only pay for the time they were in the plane.

I'll tell you how I handled the situation when it happened to me, had to take a friends mother to Florida last minute, as the destination wasn't a hub I could beat the airlines. (And eliminate any need for a rental car)

My friend and I flew her down, dropped her off and then headed back to Georgia where I picked up a dog for a Pilots N Paws flight and returned to Cincinnati.

No money changed hands, there was no common purpose.

 

[supernovae]

In the future, you might consider refusing ALL compensation for taking your friends flying to exotic locales like South Dakota.

You may also interest your friends in your side business: that of selling the world's best tasting gumdrops, which may sell for only (4 hours x wet rental of your plane of choice) to experience.

Reminds me of the Meade Wine sellers.. "Buy this beautiful bottle holder for $25.00 and get the wine for free!"

 

[kimberlyanne546]

I think people get the fear put in them by reading message boards.

And facebook. I posted something aviation related which I thought was awesome and got a private message from a person who used to be very in the know in regards to the FAA. Quoting regs etc. I know for sure I did nothing wrong however I guess according to the FAA I did wrong.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

And no, it was not related to compensation. But it just backs up this anon poster and this thread and the don't ask don't tell theory.

POA, my website, and facebook used to all be places I'd love to go to. Now I'm overly cautious or scared or simply don't post at all. My original intent was to help other pilots. It took time and money to do and now I'm just not so sure anymore.

 

[RotorAndWing]

And facebook. I posted something aviation related which I thought was awesome and got a private message from a person who used to be very in the know in regards to the FAA. Quoting regs etc. I know for sure I did nothing wrong however I guess according to the FAA I did wrong.

Where you actually contacted by the FAA , or just by one of the wannabe Inspectors on the board?

 

[Everskyward]

I had been a pilot for about 25 years before I ever posted or read anything on a pilot's web board and, although I have learned quite a bit, I have also been surprised at how people worry about and pick at every little thing. It's different hangar flying in a virtual hangar than it is in a real one.

 

[Sac Arrow]

And no, it was not related to compensation. But it just backs up this anon poster and this thread and the don't ask don't tell theory.

POA, my website, and facebook used to all be places I'd love to go to. Now I'm overly cautious or scared or simply don't post at all. My original intent was to help other pilots. It took time and money to do and now I'm just not so sure anymore.

Now you know why I'm Sac Arrow.

 

[Henning]

I had been a pilot for about 25 years before I ever posted or read anything on a pilot's web board and, although I have learned quite a bit, I have also been surprised at how people worry about and pick at every little thing. It's different hangar flying in a virtual hangar than it is in a real one.

Truth right there.... When I started flying the Internet was in the realm of universities and the government and my instructors/advisors/mentors were a bunch of QBs, mostly WWII and Korea vintage pilots as well as a few Vietnam pilots who had survived their combat tours. Their attitudes and teachings where much different from what I see here.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Now you know why I'm Sac Arrow.

I've known that for a long time. And I understand why you do that.

 

[Henning]

Now you know why I'm Sac Arrow.

I've always posted under my real name, ******* use fake names, mostly because they think it protects their identity which proves they are stupid.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

I had been a pilot for about 25 years before I ever posted or read anything on a pilot's web board and, although I have learned quite a bit, I have also been surprised at how people worry about and pick at every little thing. It's different hangar flying in a virtual hangar than it is in a real one.

Yes and when I tell some of them I have a website they get pretty scared. Funny - 50 of us local pilots attend a huge event but none of us are allowed to speak of it? Barely a secret.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Where you actually contacted by the FAA , or just by one of the wannabe Inspectors on the board?

PM sent.

 

[Sac Arrow]

I've always posted under my real name, ******* use fake names, mostly because they think it protects their identity which proves they are stupid.

Think about it for a second. You are duct taped to a wooden chair at the FSDO's office, and the examiner is holding a pair of wires and asking you questions:

"Did you uh, violate FAR 91.119 on or about February 24, 2009 by flying nine hundred and five feet above a congested area?"

"No."

"Quote: 'Yeah, I few 905 feet above San Francisco' -Author, Sac Arrow, message #495, date stamp 2/24/09 reference http://www.arrowdudesofamerica.com. Did you write that?"

"Yes."

"So, you lied in your post?"

"No."

"You just said you wrote that."

"Yes, that was a fictional event performed by a fictional character. You asked me if I, Roderick P. Longman, busted that FAR. Rod Longman would never state that he violated a FAR."

"Oh, uh. Okay. Thanks for your time."

 

[Henning]

Think about it for a second. You are duct taped to a wooden chair at the FSDO's office, and the examiner is holding a pair of wires and asking you questions:

"Did you uh, violate FAR 91.119 on or about February 24, 2009 by flying nine hundred and five feet above a congested area?"

"No."

"Quote: 'Yeah, I few 905 feet above San Francisco' -Author, Sac Arrow, message #495, date stamp 2/24/09 reference http://www.arrowdudesofamerica.com. Did you write that?"

"Yes."

"So, you lied in your post?"

"No."

"You just said you wrote that."

"Yes, that was a fictional event performed by a fictional character. You asked me if I, Roderick P. Longman, busted that FAR. Rod Longman would never state that he violated a FAR."

"Oh, uh. Okay. Thanks for your time."

For you they will spend an extra 10 minutes tying you to your IP address and the rest goes exactly the same.