POA Argument Time: Can a private pilot get paid to tow gliders?

SixPapaCharlie

SixPapaCharlie

May the force be with you
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
16,024
Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
Are there scenarios in which a Private pilot (non commercial) can receive compensation for flying an aircraft?
61.113 says there is. I recently flew a Sailplane and also a tow plane (Thank you @Lindberg for the amazing flight) and it appears that a private pilot may in fact be able to get paid to tow gliders.

I have consulted with a few people on this and it appears some really bright people are scratching their heads.
Sounds like a pilot with a private ticket can get a gig flying tow planes to pick up some hours and earn a little scratch on the side.
I was under the impression you couldn't be compensated with just a private ticket. What say POA?



§ 61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and
(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.
...
...
(g) A private pilot who meets the requirements of § 61.69 may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft towing a glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle.


What about banner towing? It isn't mentioned in the reg.
 
I guess someone could give it a test, post some youtube to get attention, and then see the FAA response:stirpot::eek2:
 
I got into this discussion a long time ago. Part of the more conservative reading of this is: Since logging time is a form of compensation, can you log time as a private pilot while flying a tow plane?

I'll have to dig out all the documentation I found on this that backs this up - but if I recall, FAA says you can't carry people or property for compensation or hire. And towing a glider doesn't qualify as carrying people or property for compensation or hire.

And yes, a PP can get paid to tow.


and the famous Umphres letter:


edit:

I *think* there was an unofficial ruling from an FAA official many years ago that said a PP can't tow for pay or for logging purposes and that caused a lot of problems for glider clubs that then had to find commercial pilots. This was unofficial, but taken to heart by a lot of people. Eventually FAA cleared things up and pulled references to that document. I don't know if I still have a copy or not. That was the "FAQ" referenced in the Umphres letter.
 
Last edited:
Isn't a banner property?
 
Salty said:
Isn't a banner property?
Click to expand...
Then wouldn't a glider also be?

So it seams you could actually get paid to tow people for compensation. They just can't be in the plane.
 
So lets say I buy a tow plane and a glider.
My friends could get in the glider and they could pay me to tow them to a nice little vacation?
Its a stupid premise but per the reg, would that be legal?
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
So lets say I buy a tow plane and a glider.
My friends could get in the glider and they could pay me to tow them to a nice little vacation?
Its a stupid premise but per the reg, would that be legal?
Click to expand...
One of them would have to have a glider cert or they would get in trouble. I guess you'd be free and clear though.
 
Banner towing is covered in 91.311, and you must have a waiver. And the waiver will list the pilots and aircraft that can be used. So for a private pilot to tow banners, you'd have to convince your FSDO that there's no compensation involved and he's qualified. I don't think that's going to happen.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
So lets say I buy a tow plane and a glider.
My friends could get in the glider and they could pay me to tow them to a nice little vacation?
Its a stupid premise but per the reg, would that be legal?
Click to expand...
That's only legal if you are towing a glider that's towing a banner.
 
You can tow hang gliders in a "heavy" ultralight and get compensated. That was a specific exception for part 103 that the US Hang Gliding association negotiated with the FAA. Was always an edge case, that got tipped over the edge when N numbers were required for our tow planes.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
So lets say I buy a tow plane and a glider.
My friends could get in the glider and they could pay me to tow them to a nice little vacation?
Its a stupid premise but per the reg, would that be legal?
Click to expand...
If you got one of those WWII troop gliders you could tow a lot of friends. Of course you'd need a C-47 to tow it...
 
The reg specifically says you can. If I recall correctly, it was added after a Chief Counsel interpretation saying no. At the time it was about the free flight time and fuel. The glider community pointed out that most glider tows were by private pilots.

Edit. I knew I had the reference somewhere. This 2010 Chief Counsel letter talks about the history and the result.
 
Last edited:
SixPapaCharlie said:
So lets say I buy a tow plane and a glider.
My friends could get in the glider and they could pay me to tow them to a nice little vacation?
Its a stupid premise but per the reg, would that be legal?
Click to expand...
Treating as a serious question, "per the reg" doesn't mean "we will be okay with a providing transportation masquerading as a glider tow." The FAA refers to this as a "sham" (English word). The entire area of illegal charter is filled with it. Sham dry leases; sham flight instruction; sham marketing demo flights. I must have used the word a dozen times in my illegal charter webinar a few weeks ago.
 
Glider club local to me is always looking for pilots. They pay per tow, and I believe they have an incentive to redeem your pay on glider rental/ tows. Always seemed like an interesting way to build time. Iirc they require private, glider, and 25hr tailwheel as they have a Pawnee.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Treating as a serious question, "per the reg" doesn't mean "we will be okay with a providing transportation masquerading as a glider tow." The FAA refers to this as a "sham" (English word). The entire area of illegal charter is filled with it. Sham dry leases; sham flight instruction; sham marketing demo flights. I must have used the word a dozen times in my illegal charter webinar a few weeks ago.
Click to expand...
In the sham cases, the sham thing usually isn't actually happening (or, like in the Warbirds case, is irrelevant). I don't know how you'd have a sham glider tow. You're either towing a glider or not. The reg doesn't address why you're towing a glider. And cross-country glider tows aren't uncommon when you need to get a glider and tow plane someplace. So the scenario isn't absurd on its face.
 
Lindberg said:
In the sham cases, the sham thing usually isn't actually happening (or, like in the Warbirds case, is irrelevant). I don't know how you'd have a sham glider tow. You're either towing a glider or not. The reg doesn't address why you're towing a glider. And cross-country glider tows aren't uncommon when you need to get a glider and tow plane someplace. So the scenario isn't absurd on its face.
Click to expand...
if a pilot provides the aircraft and crew(s) to fly persons or property from Point A to Point B, it’s generally considered to be a Part 135 operation. It Doesn’t matter if the mode of transportation is an airplane or a glider being towed by an airplane.
 
Lindberg said:
In the sham cases, the sham thing usually isn't actually happening (or, like in the Warbirds case, is irrelevant). I don't know how you'd have a sham glider tow. You're either towing a glider or not. The reg doesn't address why you're towing a glider. And cross-country glider tows aren't uncommon when you need to get a glider and tow plane someplace. So the scenario isn't absurd on its face.
Click to expand...
I was looking specifically at the "stupid premise" presented.

And I guess people can agree to disagree about whether a non-pilot business executive looking for an inexpensive charter is really planning to take on operational control responsibility and choosing their own pilot.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top