Starting a shoestring 135 operation

wilkersk

wilkersk

Pattern Altitude
Joined
May 21, 2015
Messages
2,417
Location
Puget Sound
Display Name
Display name:
KennyW
There are 23 air-taxi services in Washington state. 4 are big name operators in Seattle, 2 are air ambulance services, the rest are scattered about the state. And, only 3 small operators would most likely serve the airport closest to me.

Assuming I had Comm/CFI/II, and an IFR capable C-180 What do you think it would take for me to start up as a 1 plane operator specializing in northwest Washington and Vancouver, BC area?

I see myself doing air-taxi, BFRs and tailwheel endorsements.

This is a total pipe-dream. I know there must be a lot of barriers to entry and the regulation and insurance are probably prohibitive. But I'd like to hear your thoughts anyway. Let 'er rip!
 
Last edited:
A ton of money and time. 135 IFR mins if you wish to fly IFR, 135 VFR mins if you are only going VFR.
 
The hard part is getting everything in place (procedures, specs, maintenance requirements, etc.) required to submit for a 135 certificate. Then the cert is specific to the named airport and listed aircraft. Drug screens, Chief Pilot designation, etc., lots of bureaucratic foo faw.
 
At one point in history single pilot, single airplane operations were allowed to operate without a manual and avoid some other requirements. Not sure if it's still that way, but even with that relief there still are significant FAA hoops to go through.
I also believe most single engine air taxi ops are limited to VFR.
 
It would be easier to try to get on someone else's 135, of course you'll have to meet 135 requirements, drug program, checkrides, conformity check on the plane (how long ago were the hoses replaced, how long ago was the engine overhaul, etc).

But yeah, you could do it, but you'd be better off getting on someone else 135.

Even buying a existing 135, without a 135 background you'll need someone to act as chief pilot, you'll need a mx guy, GOM, etc.
 
What about just doing CFI/II stuff. I once got my flight review from a guy who operated a C-170 and advertised by word-of-mouth. That seemed like something that would be fun to do.
 
The process for a single plane, single pilot operator certificate is considerably simplified compared with a 'basic' 5-pilot or full 135 certificate.

What you need is time and money. It costs nothing to send your pre-application letter to the FSDO and go for the 'this is what we need from you' meeting.

Do you already own the plane ?

http://www.air-compliance.com/Single_Pilot_135_Certification.php

(not an endorsement of the company, but the info they put on the public part of their site spells out the differences between the levels of certificates)
 
weilke said:
The process for a single plane, single pilot operator certificate is considerably simplified compared with a 'basic' 5-pilot or full 135 certificate.

What you need is time and money. It costs nothing to send your pre-application letter to the FSDO and go for the 'this is what we need from you' meeting.

Do you already own the plane ?

http://www.air-compliance.com/Single_Pilot_135_Certification.php

(not an endorsement of the company, but the info they put on the public part of their site spells out the differences between the levels of certificates)
Click to expand...

Thank you very much. You've given me a great deal of useful info here!

I don't own the airplane, yet. I'm probably 2 years from buying my airplane, no matter which way I go. I want to get a little seasoning as a CFI with a local FBO before I do anything else.
 
wilkersk said:
I don't own the airplane, yet. I'm probably 2 years from buying my airplane, no matter which way I go. I want to get a little seasoning as a CFI with a local FBO before I do anything else.
Click to expand...

The flying is the easy part. Finding enough paying customers to pay the insurance and maintenance bills is going to be the bigger challenge.



I believe you need to have 'control' of a plane of the type you want on your certificate at the time of the formal submission. This can by either by owning the plane or by holding a lease.

Depending on the FSDO, there can be several years delay between your initial letter of intent and the issuance of the of the operating certificate. The single-pilot should be faster than a 'basic' or 'full' as there are fewer opportunities for the inspector to require revisions of the submitted manuals. Still, they tend to be very short on staff and each operations inspector has multiple certificates (135,141) to attend to. A new submission may not be the top priority if he is behind on performing required site inspections on his active certificates.
 
James331 said:
It would be easier to try to get on someone else's 135, of course you'll have to meet 135 requirements, drug program, checkrides, conformity check on the plane (how long ago were the hoses replaced, how long ago was the engine overhaul, etc).

But yeah, you could do it, but you'd be better off getting on someone else 135.

Even buying a existing 135, without a 135 background you'll need someone to act as chief pilot, you'll need a mx guy, GOM, etc.
Click to expand...

He's asking about a single pilot/single airplane certificate. the requirements are quite a bit less.
 
RotorAndWing said:
He's asking about a single pilot/single airplane certificate. the requirements are quite a bit less.
Click to expand...
spot on. I've had a couple friends do it, and the fsdo was helpful and the paperwork didn't seem all that unreasonable. Not at all the FAA bogeyman you read about on the internet. What sunk those guys was not the government, it was simple economics. There just aren't that many people who need a $2000 ride to the next state.
 
I have a few friends with single pilot 135 ops. They get by but to do so they've made relationships with guide operations and lodges so they have a dependable revenue stream, which is the cornerstone of any business plan. They also have retirement incomes so 135 isn't their only paycheck. One word of caution, if you think you want to fly air taxi a 180 won't be your best tool. You'll be over gross with any multi-passenger load in most 180s. A 185 would be better suited but most operators who use 185s do so for ski ops. 206s rule the air taxi business in Alaska. Good payload and big access for freight and gear loading. Figure out your target market and what will suit it best at the highest profit margin. 135 isn't a feel-good hobby, it's business.
 
Last edited:
Who do you think your customer is going to be ?
Fishing trips into BC ?
Business travel around the state ?
Some form of government contract you can get in on ?
 
wilkersk said:
There are 23 air-taxi services in Washington state. 4 are big name operators in Seattle, 2 are air ambulance services, the rest are scattered about the state. And, only 3 small operators would most likely serve the airport closest to me.

Assuming I had Comm/CFI/II, and an IFR capable C-180 What do you think it would take for me to start up as a 1 plane operator specializing in northwest Washington and Vancouver, BC area?

I see myself doing air-taxi, BFRs and tailwheel endorsements.

This is a total pipe-dream. I know there must be a lot of barriers to entry and the regulation and insurance are probably prohibitive. But I'd like to hear your thoughts anyway. Let 'er rip!
Click to expand...

The Air Taxi is the only tricky part. The BFR/CFI work requires no Operating Certificate. For a single person/pilot SE operation, there is a somewhat relaxed procedure for getting one, however Insurance and aircraft compliance still need to be established. Commercial insurance is going to be about 900-1000% of what business/personal insurance would be.

As for the aircraft, it's best if you can find one that is on a current 135 certificate. The biggest hassle is establishing all the documentation. If it's already on a cert, the documentation already exists.
 
If you're thinking IFR operations with a single-engine airplane, you should take a look at 14 CFR 135.163:
(f) For a single-engine aircraft:
(1) Two independent electrical power generating sources each of which is able to supply all probable combinations of continuous inflight electrical loads for required instruments and equipment; or
(2) In addition to the primary electrical power generating source, a standby battery or an alternate source of electric power that is capable of supplying 150% of the electrical loads of all required instruments and equipment necessary for safe emergency operation of the aircraft for at least one hour;
Click to expand...
While a glass-panel Cirrus meets that off the assembly line, it would take a major alteration to a Cessna 180 to meet those requirements.
 
JHW said:
There just aren't that many people who need a $2000 ride to the next state.
Click to expand...

I've seen these types of threads a ton, and everyone always talks about the regulatory difficulties. I immediate think about the customer acquisition challenges. Cost aside I would think perceived safety would be the top of the list for people getting in small airplanes.... unless you live in Alaska.
 
I started a 135 operation with a King Air A90. BUT, I had one customer who signed up for 40 hours/month. Break even was about 35.

Going into Canada is another story altogether. It took me about two years AFTER I had my US 135 certificate to break into Canada.
 
kgruber said:
I started a 135 operation with a King Air A90. BUT, I had one customer who signed up for 40 hours/month. Break even was about 35.

Going into Canada is another story altogether. It took me about two years AFTER I had my US 135 certificate to break into Canada.
Click to expand...

As a U.S. flag carrier getting permission to come in and out, or to operate within Canada under Canadian cabotage rules?
 
Henning said:
As a U.S. flag carrier getting permission to come in and out, or to operate within Canada under Canadian cabotage rules?
Click to expand...
You need to have approved (by Transport Canada) ops specs to operate in Canada 135. Cabotage, no way for a US operator.
 
I am a flight coordinator for a Part 135 operation - we fly into CA all the time with a [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canada Foreign Air Operator Certificate.


[/FONT][/FONT]
 
Gypsy said:
I am a flight coordinator for a Part 135 operation - we fly into CA all the time with a [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canada Foreign Air Operator Certificate.


[/FONT][/FONT]
Click to expand...
Ok, but that had to be approved by Transport Canada, right?
 
Ron Levy said:
If you're thinking IFR operations with a single-engine airplane, you should take a look at 14 CFR 135.163:
Click to expand...

He will not be doing IFR with a 180 out of BVS, Cessna 180s don't come with de-iced equipment.

Alaskan pilots do it all the time vfr with Cherokee 6-300. on 1 pilot on demand certificates.


Single pilot ops are a lot different than the rules you are reading.
 
When do you need 'DOT authority' ?
 
I seem to recal we could transport within Canada as long as we were the ones bringing them in, and out. In other words, we could bring folks from New York to Toronto, overnight, then transport the same people to Winnepeg, sleep, the back to New York. Same pax originating and ending in U.S.
 
Henning said:
As a U.S. flag carrier getting permission to come in and out, or to operate within Canada under Canadian cabotage rules?
Click to expand...

Focus Henning, he will not be a flag carrier. that's part 125.
 
Tom-D said:
Focus Henning, he will not be a flag carrier. that's part 125.
Click to expand...

He will certainly be US flag if the plane has an N-Tail. Every vessel and aircraft is flagged. My question was in regards to if he was trying to attain another cert/start another service in Canada, or if he was talking about being able to go back and forth.
 
Henning said:
He will certainly be US flag if the plane has an N-Tail. Every vessel and aircraft is flagged. My question was in regards to if he was trying to attain another cert/start another service in Canada, or if he was talking about being able to go back and forth.
Click to expand...

First of all, "Flag Operations" are Part 121. 121 operations fall under Supplemental, Domestic and Flag.

There is no such thing as a Part 135 Flag operation, period.
 
RotorAndWing said:
First of all, "Flag Operations" are Part 121. 121 operations fall under Supplemental, Domestic and Flag.

There is no such thing as a Part 135 Flag operation, period.
Click to expand...

There you go, changing terms indiscriminately again. Henning said US flag. You changed it to US Flag. There's a difference.
 
RotorAndWing said:
First of all, "Flag Operations" are Part 121. 121 operations fall under Supplemental, Domestic and Flag.

There is no such thing as a Part 135 Flag operation, period.
Click to expand...

Note I did not use Flag Carrier (proper noun) but rather flag, a common noun referring to U.S. registration.
 
We have to file Canadian APIS and request clearance with CANPASS (crew must call, not flight ops). We cannot fly a trip that originates AND ends in Canada, but we may, for example, fly MKE to Thunder Bay, clear CA customs, then on to another airport that is not a port of entry. We can deadhead back to the US, or we can deadhead to CA to pick up passengers and fly back to the US. There is no require to "clear out" of CA, just US customs to return. US requires a clearance for departure, but not necessarily an inspection. In other words, we sometimes fax over the Gen Dec, and CBP faxes back a stamped one. No need to stop before departure.
 
Henning said:
Note I did not use Flag Carrier (proper noun) but rather flag, a common noun referring to U.S. registration.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Henning, when you look at it in context you are splitting hairs. It's clear to me at least you were not making a distinction between "F" and "f".
 
Kritchlow said:
Yeah, Henning, when you look at it in context you are splitting hairs. It's clear to me at least you were not making a distinction between "F" and "f".
Click to expand...

Really, so whatever you want to read into something is what I meant? Interesting.
 
Henning said:
Really, so whatever you want to read into something is what I meant? Interesting.
Click to expand...
I'm not dissecting every word like so many people here do. I just read the statements at face value. I'm telling you how I interpreted your comments. Others may have a different opinion.
 
Kritchlow said:
I'm not dissecting every word like so many people here do. I just read the statements at face value. I'm telling you how I interpreted your comments. Others may have a different opinion.
Click to expand...

I don't feel it's a dissection of words. In aviation certain words take on meaning, and when used incorrectly leads the reader into some false assumptions.

For instance, calling a Cessna 150 with a US registration a "flag carrier" is wrong. Calling a Part 135 Air Carrier a "flag carrier" is also wrong as it isn't covered in regulations.
 
Last edited:
Kenny,

Take a look on our website www.freightrunners.com and you will see our Air Carrier Certificate dating back to 1985 (that was one C207 delivering freight). We now have 24 aircraft, freight and passenger). I think you can do anything you set your mind to! Don't let others stop you from achieving your dream. Best of luck!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top