Why can't private pilots fly for hire?

Jay Honeck

Jay Honeck

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
11,571
Location
Ingleside, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Jay Honeck
In another thread, I marveled at the gymnastics some poor guy was going through to find a ride to Wyoming. The convoluted FAA rules banning private pilots from receiving compensation of any kind for flying are really quite amazing.

Which begs the question: Why? What historic event, or train of events, led the FAA to take away our ability to charge -- or be voluntarily compensated -- for providing a valuable service?

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
Slippery slope.

Why have a commercial pilot license if alls ya need is a PPL? Why get a 135 cert if alls ys need is a plane?

The government regulates when regulation is deemed necessary to protect the public at large. This determination was made well after Wilbur and Orville...but not long after the first people started dying on the ground from planes hitting houses and the first passengers started dying on paid flights.
 
Apparently, it was there at the beginning of the government officially controlling flying. When did they do away with picture licenses.

Doug
 

Attachments

  • first_pilots_license.pdf
    180.7 KB · Views: 143
Replace 'plane' with 'car' and you realize how dumb the restriction on private pilots are.

I'm sorry sir, you are being charged with running a business illegally. You accepted money to pay for your car gas when your buddy needed a ride to work when his car broke down. You must have a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) and a taxi permit to get paid to provide taxi services.

But my buddy just needed a ride to work and I was out of gas!

Sorry doesn't matter, you provided a commercial service without the proper license and training we must protect the public from people like you. If we allow people like you to run amuck, then you are taking business away from legitimate taxi cab companies and endangering the public.

Now how stupid does that sound? You know if laws like this were enforced against everyday drivers there would be outraged backlash against the government. But as soon as you say airplane with a private pilot with way more training than any car driver it is illegal and considered acceptable.

If I took a passenger somewhere once in a while that paid for gas it isn't dangerous and I am not making a dent to commercial aviation services.

Sorry, just venting, this is one area that really bugs me as there is absolutely no common sense in these regulations.
 
Before accepting the license, MacCracken had
offered the honor to Orville Wright, promising to
waive the fee and examination. Wright declined
because he no longer flew and did not think he
needed a Federal license to show that he had been​
the first man to fly.
 
I think the FAA has substantial evidence to prove that they can't let this genie out of the lamp. Given an inch, the pilot population has demonstrated that they will take 20 miles and try for 50. On a micro basis I don't think the regs make much sense as written, especially since the case with the big last name, but the macro view is a bit frightening.

jrollf said:
Replace 'plane' with 'car' and you realize how dumb the restriction on private pilots are.

I'm sorry sir, you are being charged with running a business illegally. You accepted money to pay for your car gas when your buddy needed a ride to work when his car broke down. You must have a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) and a taxi permit to get paid to provide taxi services.

But my buddy just needed a ride to work and I was out of gas!

Sorry doesn't matter, you provided a commercial service without the proper license and training we must protect the public from people like you. If we allow people like you to run amuck, then you are taking business away from legitimate taxi cab companies and endangering the public.

Now how stupid does that sound? You know if laws like this were enforced against everyday drivers there would be outraged backlash against the government. But as soon as you say airplane with a private pilot with way more training than any car driver it is illegal and considered acceptable.

If I took a passenger somewhere once in a while that paid for gas it isn't dangerous and I am not making a dent to commercial aviation services.

Sorry, just venting, this is one area that really bugs me as there is absolutely no common sense in these regulations.
Click to expand...
 
For one it's regulation, our gov't loves that stuff

Secondly the logic is you need to demonstrate that you can fly for 250hrs without killing yourself before they will let you charge people for the provliage.

But I agree, heck it's like I have a exacto knife and read a few anatomy books, who says I can charge people for brain surgery, we don't need no stinking badges lol
 
jrollf said:
Replace 'plane' with 'car' and you realize how dumb the restriction on private pilots are.

I'm sorry sir, you are being charged with running a business illegally. You accepted money to pay for your car gas when your buddy needed a ride to work when his car broke down. You must have a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) and a taxi permit to get paid to provide taxi services.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that this is in fact the law as written. I'd like to see somebody provide a citation from their state law, but I would guess that driving somebody to work in exchange for payment is technically illegal. Just, not really enforced against regular folks. But, you better believe that if the cabbies at the airport suspect you're picking up rides for hire they will either turn you in or smash up your car.

It's no different with airplanes -- the law is what it is, but I have not heard of the FAA actively checking to make sure nobody is giving their friend a lift and splitting the gas without technically having a common cause.

You know if laws like this were enforced against everyday drivers there would be outraged backlash against the government. But as soon as you say airplane with a private pilot with way more training than any car driver it is illegal and considered acceptable.
Click to expand...

Can you back up that the rules are being strongly enforced against pilots any more so than they would be against cars? Just because we talk every week about the rules for compensation doesn't mean the FAA is going around surveying passengers as they get out of Skyhawks on the ramp.

Sorry, just venting, this is one area that really bugs me as there is absolutely no common sense in these regulations.
Click to expand...
I agree that sometimes it seems overbearing, but I do actually believe the government has a pretty compelling role in protecting the public from shady, non-regulated commercial air operations.
 
Last edited:
jrollf said:
Replace 'plane' with 'car' and you realize how dumb the restriction on private pilots are.

I'm sorry sir, you are being charged with running a business illegally. You accepted money to pay for your car gas when your buddy needed a ride to work when his car broke down. You must have a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) and a taxi permit to get paid to provide taxi services.

But my buddy just needed a ride to work and I was out of gas!

Sorry doesn't matter, you provided a commercial service without the proper license and training we must protect the public from people like you. If we allow people like you to run amuck, then you are taking business away from legitimate taxi cab companies and endangering the public.

Now how stupid does that sound? You know if laws like this were enforced against everyday drivers there would be outraged backlash against the government. But as soon as you say airplane with a private pilot with way more training than any car driver it is illegal and considered acceptable.

If I took a passenger somewhere once in a while that paid for gas it isn't dangerous and I am not making a dent to commercial aviation services.

Sorry, just venting, this is one area that really bugs me as there is absolutely no common sense in these regulations.
Click to expand...

Welcome to POA!

Best first post I have ever read, in 5 years!

Welcome!
 
wabower said:
I think the FAA has substantial evidence to prove that they can't let this genie out of the lamp. Given an inch, the pilot population has demonstrated that they will take 20 miles and try for 50. On a micro basis I don't think the regs make much sense as written, especially since the case with the big last name, but the macro view is a bit frightening.
Click to expand...

Now, hear me out -- I'm NOT advocating a change in the law. At least not yet.

What I am wondering is this: When did the law change, and why? Presumably, before the government got involved, there was no such thing as "commercial pilots". Why are there now?

Somehow, we went from Barnstormers dropping into farmer's fields and charging a buck a ride, to commercial airline pilots. What happened to force this drastic change?
 
NineThreeKilo said:
Secondly the logic is you need to demonstrate that you can fly for 250 hrs without killing yourself before they will let you charge people for the privilege.
Click to expand...

Okay, well, I've got 1600+ hours, and I've never hurt anyone. Why can't I charge someone $200 to fly 'em to the island?
 
This is weird. I have an aviation library of over 230 volumes. I have read many more. I have an aviation movie collection of over 200 films.

No where do I recall this being discussed. It seems that somewhere along the way the government usurped this freedom, and apparently everyone just nodded sagely and moved on with their lives, without protest?

Somehow, I doubt that's how it went down at the time. I'll bet the pilots of the era screamed to high heaven.

Can anyone point to a book that covers this episode in the history of commercial pilotage in America?
 
NineThreeKilo said:
Secondly the logic is you need to demonstrate that you can fly for 250hrs without killing yourself before they will let you charge people for the provliage.
Click to expand...

I can understand this in theory. But how is it safer for my passenger if I tell them they can't pay for any gas because we don't have a 'common' purpose for the flight, or let them kick in money for gas anyways? I'll fly my buddy either way, the flight is no safer because he didn't kick in gas money. And if it is really just demonstrating that we are safe, then why not allow a passenger to pay for a full fuel load once the pilot reaches the magic 250 hour mark? I'm not asking to be allowed to be paid a wage or make a profit.

The FAA has ruled that even just logging flight hours 'could' be considered compensation if someone else helps foot the bill, as a result it would not be a far stretch to claim any flying at all has a commercial intent. Nope, it is really about control and special interest groups convincing the government that this is needed to 'protect' the public.

'Private' non commercial car drivers kill a heck of a lot more passengers every year than private pilots. This is a cure looking for a disease.

If I start flying people for an actual profit and / or in large numbers, then yes I should be stopped.
 
A commercial pilots certificate would not suffice. They would also need to be operating under pt 135
 
I don tknow what happened but b'crats upping the rules is one possibility the other is working pilots lobbied for it to raise the barrier to entry. Maybe aopa asked for it back in the day...
 
Does it matter? If so, why? We all know when the TSA law changed, and when the BFR rule was enacted, and when the ADIZ around DC was implemented, and when the tailwheel and HP and all that stuff came about. It really doesn't matter when, why and how, it is what it is.

Jay Honeck said:
Now, hear me out -- I'm NOT advocating a change in the law. At least not yet.

What I am wondering is this: When did the law change, and why? Presumably, before the government got involved, there was no such thing as "commercial pilots". Why are there now?

Somehow, we went from Barnstormers dropping into farmer's fields and charging a buck a ride, to commercial airline pilots. What happened to force this drastic change?
Click to expand...
 
NineThreeKilo said:
But I agree, heck it's like I have a exacto knife and read a few anatomy books, who says I can charge people for brain surgery, we don't need no stinking badges lol
Click to expand...
You do not realize how close you are to the truth in medicine. Once you grtaduate from medical school you are called doctor. Once you are licensed by a state, you can call yourself any type of doctor you want. In every state I have practiced, there are no laws that say all because you do not have formal traing in a specialty you cannot say your practice is limited to that specialty. You cannot say you are board certified or board eligible if you are not, but you can call yourself whatever you want. The hospitals have control over what you can do in the hospital, but you can put a shingle up and practice whatever you want. If you screw up enough the state will eventually find out and do what is appropriate, but believe me there is a lot of stuff that is done out there in the name of medicine that is just plain unacceptable.

Oh and why are people always picking on the neurosurgeons?

Doug
 
Here's something that comes close to what I'm looking for. On the death of Barnstorming, from Wikipedia:

Regulation and decline
Initially thriving in North America during the first half of the 1920s, by 1927 competition between acts demanded more and more dangerous tricks and a rash of highly publicized accidents forced the implementation of new safety regulations that resulted in the demise of barnstorming. Spurred by a perceived need to protect the public and in response to political pressure by local pilots upset at barnstormers stealing their customers, the federal government enacted several laws to begin regulating fledgling civil aviation.

The laws included safety standards and specifications that were nearly impossible for barnstormers to meet, and restrictions on how low in altitude certain tricks could be performed (making it harder for spectators to see what was happening). The military also stopped selling Jennys in the late 1920s, which, combined with the regulations, made it too difficult for barnstormers to continue making a living.

Some pilots continued to wander the country giving rides as late as the fall of 1941.

So...regulation killed barnstorming...but "as late as 1941" some pilots were wandering the country selling rides. This implies that the commercial pilot designation had not been invented yet.

Getting closer...back to Google...
 
wabower said:
Does it matter? If so, why? We all know when the TSA law changed, and when the BFR rule was enacted, and when the ADIZ around DC was implemented, and when the tailwheel and HP and all that stuff came about. It really doesn't matter when, why and how, it is what it is.
Click to expand...

If you're asking whether knowing what happened will CHANGE anything, well, then, I agree. This thread is a meaningless exercise. Move on.

Call it intellectual curiosity, then, if you will. Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it. Some how, some way, we, as pilots, went from being able to do common sense things (like split the cost of a tank of gas with our passengers) to not. I'd like to know how -- and why -- that happened, if for no other reason than so that we can recognize and combat future attacks on our rights and freedoms as airmen.
 
Geico266 said:
Welcome to POA!

Best first post I have ever read, in 5 years!

Welcome!
Click to expand...

LOL. Didn't even think about it being my first post here . I'm a member of several boards (been on the red boards for a little while now) and started following more since I downloaded Tapatalk on my tablet. Makes it real easy to cause chaos everywhere ;)

Of course I had to run across a thread about one if my pet peeves.

So hello all, I'm a newbie here; )
 
Can we all line up on your beach and pee against the tide?

Jay Honeck said:
Great way to start -- with a home run post! :wink2:

I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship... :D
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Can we all line up on your beach and pee against the tide?
Click to expand...

Again, I'm not advocating changing any laws -- or peeing against any tides. The odds of getting ANY common sense out of our current government are something less than zero, anyway, so there's no sense in bothering.

That doesn't mean the guy isn't absolutely, 100% RIGHT, however, to point out how absurd the current regulations against receiving compensation really are -- and I applaud his post for hitting the nail squarely on the head.
 
I don't think someone with a PPL should be able to fly and make a profit, or advertise their services.

However if my friend wants to go somewhere, and wants to pay for the gas, that should be legal. I am under the impression if I don't also have a reason to make the trip, he can't even do that.

Let me ask you this: Why can I do an angel flight, and get a discount on fuel and landing/tie down fees, but if I fly my friend to the hospital, he can't even compensate me the same amount?

I guess it's a gray area in my example, because if he is my friend, I can easily claim that I wanted to be at the hospital with him, so we both had a reason to go, and we can split the cost. However if I really didn't care if I was there or not, my own friend should get the same consideration as someone I don't even know who I fly to the hospital.
 
Mafoo said:
I don't think someone with a PPL should be able to fly and make a profit, or advertise their services.

However if my friend wants to go somewhere, and wants to pay for the gas, that should be legal. I am under the impression if I don't also have a reason to make the trip, he can't even do that.

Let me ask you this: Why can I do an angel flight, and get a discount on fuel and landing/tie down fees, but if I fly my friend to the hospital, he can't even compensate me the same amount?

I guess it's a gray area in my example, because if he is my friend, I can easily claim that I wanted to be at the hospital with him, so we both had a reason to go, and we can split the cost. However if I really didn't care if I was there or not, my own friend should get the same consideration as someone I don't even know who I fly to the hospital.
Click to expand...

Excellent points.

In this era where we are trying to figure out ways to make flying affordable, and to expand the pilot population (or, at least, to stem the decline), sharing expenses as you describe would sure go a long ways toward making flying less expensive.
 
History is full of examples about what happens when the camel gets his nose under the tent. The guy's protests may have merit, but the repercussions may not be in the public interest. Given the sorry safety record of PPL's, a case could be made that they shouldn't be allowed to fly alone, let alone with anybody else in the airplane. We gots no chips with which to bargain.





Jay Honeck said:
Again, I'm not advocating changing any laws -- or peeing against any tides. The odds of getting ANY common sense out of our current government are something less than zero, anyway, so there's no sense in bothering.

That doesn't mean the guy isn't absolutely, 100% RIGHT, however, to point out how absurd the current regulations against receiving compensation really are -- and I applaud his post for hitting the nail squarely on the head.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
History is full of examples about what happens when the camel gets his nose under the tent. The guy's protests may have merit, but the repercussions may not be in the public interest. Given the sorry safety record of PPL's, a case could be made that they shouldn't be allowed to fly alone, let alone with anybody else in the airplane. We gots no chips with which to bargain.
Click to expand...

Good thing Americans didn't have that atitude hundreds of years ago. We never would have found California.
 
Mafoo said:
However if my friend wants to go somewhere, and wants to pay for the gas, that should be legal. I am under the impression if I don't also have a reason to make the trip, he can't even do that.
Click to expand...

The way I understand it is even if you have a common purpose your friend can only pay for 50%, assuming just you and your friend are in the plane. If say you, your spouse, and your friend are in the plane, then your friend can only pay 1/3 of the fuel costs.

If you don't have a common purpose then legally your friend can't even buy you a hamburger in connection with the flight.
 
Mafoo said:
Good thing Americans didn't have that atitude hundreds of years ago. We never would have found California.
Click to expand...

Although I agree, I don't want to stray too far from the point of my post, which is to ask: How did we lose the ability to be reimbursed for our expenses. We originally had it, and we lost it -- what happened?
 
I think George Bush must have been responsible. Everything else is his fault.

Jay Honeck said:
Although I agree, I don't want to stray too far from the point of my post, which is to ask: How did we lose the ability to be reimbursed for our expenses. We originally had it, and we lost it -- what happened?
Click to expand...
 
Do not disagree with the thoughts about sharing costs. Boating has similar restrictions by the way. The government in the 1920's made a decision and whether we like it or not we are stuck with it if we want to fly. I would we are not the first to be unhappy with the regulation but evidently it's been there since the beginning. A line has to be drawn someplace so where do you suggest we draw it?

Doug
 
Jay Honeck said:
Although I agree, I don't want to stray too far from the point of my post, which is to ask: How did we lose the ability to be reimbursed for our expenses. We originally had it, and we lost it -- what happened?
Click to expand...

Besides my rant ;) this would be interesting to know. I imagine it wasn't an all at once event, but I really don't have an idea where it started. I imagine there is 'data' that shows how dangerous ppl's are and as such should not fly for hire. The mess most likely came when the FAA tried to define what compensation is.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Although I agree, I don't want to stray too far from the point of my post, which is to ask: How did we lose the ability to be reimbursed for our expenses. We originally had it, and we lost it -- what happened?
Click to expand...

135 operators bitchin and whining. You know what is funny, private pilots can tow gliders and build time but cant get a full tank of gas from a friend. It is retarded and unjustifiable how far they havegone.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Although I agree, I don't want to stray too far from the point of my post, which is to ask: How did we lose the ability to be reimbursed for our expenses. We originally had it, and we lost it -- what happened?
Click to expand...
Did we ever have it and lose it? It looks like from the very beginning of formally licensing pilots on at a federal level, the government made a distinction between private pilot certificate and commercial certificate.
MacCracken issued the first Air Commerce Regulations on December 31, 1926. The regulations
prescribed operational and air traffic safety rules. They also required all aircraft engaged in
interstate or foreign commerce to be licensed and marked with an assigned identification
number. Pilots of licensed aircraft were required to hold private or commercial licenses.
Commercial pilots were classed as either transport or industrial. Mechanics repairing aircraft
engaged in air commerce were required to secure either engine or airplane mechanic licenses, or
both. Owners, pilots, and mechanics had until March 1 (later extended to May 1), 1927, to apply
Click to expand...
for their licenses. Failure to apply was punishable by a $500 fine.
​
Click to expand...


$500 in 1926. About $6500 today.

Doug​
​
 
All I'll say is this: if my FRIENDS and/or family are flying with me, no one is ever going to know what exactly transpires between us.

It's when STRANGERS get involved that it becomes more challenging.

I honestly think that's the whole point of the rule, the slippery slope. Sure, bureaucrats will take a rule and make life hell around it because they can, but the main difference between the commercial operator and me is that THEY can fly MY friends, too.
 
douglas393 said:
Did we ever have it and lose it? It looks like from the very beginning of formally licensing pilots on at a federal level, the government made a distinction between private pilot certificate and commercial certificate.


$500 in 1926. About $6500 today.

Doug​
​
Click to expand...

Questions:

1. Who is "MacCracken"?

2. How did Barnstorming continue until the 1940s, under these rules?

3. Most importantly -- what caused the government to inflict such restrictions? Were airplanes raining from the sky?
 
See post #3. Try to keep up.

Jay Honeck said:
Questions:

1. Who is "MacCracken"?

2. How did Barnstorming continue until the 1940s, under these rules?

3. Most importantly -- what caused the government to inflict such restrictions? Were airplanes raining from the sky?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top