Ferry flights

T

tomdee

Guest
Is it legal to fly ferry flights for hire with only a Private pilot license? According to Sec 61.113 paragraphg (b) through (g) of the FAR/AIM as long as the flight is incidental to that business or employment a Private pilot can be compensated as a ferry pilot. Am I mis-reading this and is it necessary to hold an IFR & Comm license to ferry planes for pay? I have ferried VFR aircraft for private owners, but what about flights for an aircraft dealer?
 
It is not legal to ferry airplanes for compensation with a private pilots license. Ferrying an airplane is only incidental to the business of a commercial pilot. That is my opinion on the matter--and I wouldn't do otherwise until I heard from someone smarter than me.
 
I don't see where that Sec even refers to commercial pilots as the heading reads:
"Private pilot privileges and limitations. Paragraph (b) simply states "A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: etc.

I know what people may think this implies, but nothing is mentioned here about holding a commercial certificate. SOme may have "heard" that it does not pertain to being paid for services, but it certainly seems to say that to me. What would be the point of even putting this in if it were not a stimpulation that states when a Private pilot may be compensated.
 
tomdee said:
Is it legal to fly ferry flights for hire with only a Private pilot license? According to Sec 61.113 paragraphg (b) through (g) of the FAR/AIM as long as the flight is incidental to that business or employment a Private pilot can be compensated as a ferry pilot. Am I mis-reading this and is it necessary to hold an IFR & Comm license to ferry planes for pay? I have ferried VFR aircraft for private owners, but what about flights for an aircraft dealer?
Click to expand...

What that is there for is if you're a mechanic or work for a repair station/shop, aircraft broker....and you have a PPL, you can ferry planes around for customers. If the business IS ferrying airplanes, you need a commercial certificate (but no type ratings are required). It revolves around the word "incidental". I did a lot of flights under that premis on my PPL while working for a repair station. BTW, in this application, ferry just means to reposition the aircraft with only required flight crew, and is not dependant on a "Special Flight Permit" aka Ferry Permit.

NOTE: This is strictly on the FAA end of requirements, insurability is a whole 'nother subject... Just because you're legal, doesn't make you insurable.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
It is not legal to ferry airplanes for compensation with a private pilots license. Ferrying an airplane is only incidental to the business of a commercial pilot. That is my opinion on the matter--and I wouldn't do otherwise until I heard from someone smarter than me.
Click to expand...

No, ferrying airplanes is incidental to aircraft mechanics, aircraft brokers, aircraft painters,
aircraft upholstery shop employees..... Ferrying airplanes is primary to business for a commercial pilot. Incidental means that the business is not the operation of the aircraft. If I advertise as a Ferry pilot I need a CPL, If I advertise paint jobs and I'll even come get your plane to get your paint shop business, that can be done on a PPL.
 
Last edited:
Even flying a plane from Point A to Point B without pay but logging the time can still require a commercial ticket. The time logged can be considered compensation for services rendered.

About the only area possible for a private ticket is as Henning described. The one area I find questionable would be the sale of an airplane... the salesman could certainly fly the plane to a new location under the incidental rule. But, a manufacturer or dealer could not hire a person with only a private ticket with their sole purpose being to deliver a plane to the customer or dealer.
 
tomdee said:
I don't see where that Sec even refers to commercial pilots as the heading reads:
"Private pilot privileges and limitations. Paragraph (b) simply states "A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: etc.

I know what people may think this implies, but nothing is mentioned here about holding a commercial certificate. SOme may have "heard" that it does not pertain to being paid for services, but it certainly seems to say that to me. What would be the point of even putting this in if it were not a stimpulation that states when a Private pilot may be compensated.
Click to expand...

A private pilot may get paid for doing work that involves flying airplanes. Airplane sales, repair station work, flying to a business trip and getting paid your regular rate all qualify under this exemption.

The difference is if you're going to be paid to be a PILOT (as opposed to being a salesman, engineer, repair station worker), you need a commercial certificate.

Ferrying airplanes, where someone asks you to fly their airplane for them, means you're providing PILOT services, and thus requires a commercial cert. And while it's perfectly fine for a PPL working for a repair station to pick up your airplane to take it to the shop, and bring it back, it would NOT be ok for him to take it from one place to another place not in conjunction with the repair work that is being done for you. It's also not legal for a repair station to hire a PPL AS A PILOT. The PPL can be a mechanic, an avionics tech, a manager, probably even a janitor, but his primary job cannot be flying.

And as Henning says, insurability is a whole different story. I know of dumb private pilots and cheap owners who hire them to ferry their airplanes, and as long as nothing goes wrong, they only have to worry about the FAA hearing about it and pursuing a certificate sanction. Bend the airplane and they'll be looking at that plus all the financial fun of probably not being covered by the insurance, which means no coverage for the loss of the airplane, injuries, or god forbid the carful of nuns you crashed into.
 
Thanks for all your input. Been working on my IFR anyway, but came across this while reviewing the FARs and it seemed contradictory.
 
KennyFlys said:
Even flying a plane from Point A to Point B without pay but logging the time can still require a commercial ticket. The time logged can be considered compensation for services rendered.

About the only area possible for a private ticket is as Henning described. The one area I find questionable would be the sale of an airplane... the salesman could certainly fly the plane to a new location under the incidental rule. But, a manufacturer or dealer could not hire a person with only a private ticket with their sole purpose being to deliver a plane to the customer or dealer.
Click to expand...

That is correct, however, if that person works as an employee of the manufacturer/broker/dealer... sweeping floors, making coffee, answering phones, washing airplanes... then they are eligible to do so under a PPL.
 
I may be wrong on this, but just repeating what I was told. Another way a PPL can be compensated would be a law enforcement officer that flies the department aircraft on an as needed bases. His primary job is law enforcement, but only flies now and then and does not carry passengers for hire. He is not being paid as the pilot, but as a police officer.
 
Henning said:
That is correct, however, if that person works as an employee of the manufacturer/broker/dealer... sweeping floors, making coffee, answering phones, washing airplanes... then they are eligible to do so under a PPL.
Click to expand...
You got an FAA Counsel opinion or an NTSB O&O on that? It sounds way too close to the line based on past FAA interpretations of the rule and the Chief Counsel's past statements about making the strictest possible interpretations of this rule. I just don't see how flying a customer's plane is "incidental" to one's job of sweeping floors or answering phones. It's my understanding that the "incidental" exception is for folks whose non-flying jobs must be performed somewhere other than the home office (e.g., salesman, computer installer, on-site trainer, etc), so they can fly a plane to get to the job site. In fact, I'm pretty sure the FAA Counsel has said in writing that it doesn't matter what your job description says, you can't be getting paid while flying a plane unless you have to be somewhere else to do your "real" job.
 
Dean said:
I may be wrong on this, but just repeating what I was told. Another way a PPL can be compensated would be a law enforcement officer that flies the department aircraft on an as needed bases. His primary job is law enforcement, but only flies now and then and does not carry passengers for hire. He is not being paid as the pilot, but as a police officer.
Click to expand...
Public flying is a whole different animal - like you say, the pilot may only require a private cert. But I'd bet the risk management types are going to typically require sufficient experience that he'd have no problem getting a commercial cert even if one wasn't required.
 
Ron Levy said:
You got an FAA Counsel opinion or an NTSB O&O on that? It sounds way too close to the line based on past FAA interpretations of the rule and the Chief Counsel's past statements about making the strictest possible interpretations of this rule. I just don't see how flying a customer's plane is "incidental" to one's job of sweeping floors or answering phones. It's my understanding that the "incidental" exception is for folks whose non-flying jobs must be performed somewhere other than the home office (e.g., salesman, computer installer, on-site trainer, etc), so they can fly a plane to get to the job site. In fact, I'm pretty sure the FAA Counsel has said in writing that it doesn't matter what your job description says, you can't be getting paid while flying a plane unless you have to be somewhere else to do your "real" job.
Click to expand...

"Hey, you! Grab your broom and go sweep the floor in Sheboygan, it's really dirty. Take the plane, it'll be faster, and since you're going anyway, take Jenkins with you!"
 
TMetzinger said:
Public flying is a whole different animal - like you say, the pilot may only require a private cert. But I'd bet the risk management types are going to typically require sufficient experience that he'd have no problem getting a commercial cert even if one wasn't required.
Click to expand...

Heck, the public flying doesn't even require a Private certificate. But, you're right on with the reality...
 
Several hunting guides that work remote hunting camps in Alaska are PPL and have no other means of transportation other than aircraft, they pick up customers at ANC and transport them to the camps and hunting areas. they are paid as hunting guides and the flying is incidental to the hunting.

It was upheld by NTSB but I'm too lazy to look it up.
 
NC19143 said:
Several hunting guides that work remote hunting camps in Alaska are PPL and have no other means of transportation other than aircraft, they pick up customers at ANC and transport them to the camps and hunting areas. they are paid as hunting guides and the flying is incidental to the hunting.

It was upheld by NTSB but I'm too lazy to look it up.
Click to expand...

I think the bolded phrase is the key here. -Skip
 
Dean said:
I may be wrong on this, but just repeating what I was told. Another way a PPL can be compensated would be a law enforcement officer that flies the department aircraft on an as needed bases. His primary job is law enforcement, but only flies now and then and does not carry passengers for hire. He is not being paid as the pilot, but as a police officer.
Click to expand...

He doesn't need an airmans certificate at all, same as military pilots don't.
 
NC19143 said:
Several hunting guides that work remote hunting camps in Alaska are PPL and have no other means of transportation other than aircraft, they pick up customers at ANC and transport them to the camps and hunting areas. they are paid as hunting guides and the flying is incidental to the hunting.

It was upheld by NTSB but I'm too lazy to look it up.
Click to expand...
I don't think your laziness has anything to do with your inability to find the relevant case, because I don't think there is such a case. In fact, the underlying principle flies directly opposite the NTSB's decision in Administrator v. Murray, in which they said that the rules were violated when a PPL was used to fly people who had paid to attend a Super Bowl party on Put-in-Bay Island to the island -- the argument that the transportation was incidental to the party was unavailing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top