I've never read 401.28(2). I, and most of the people who been around for two to four decades have a pretty good understanding of what this is about. I think that it can be summed up by saying you have to know the difference between scratching your ass and ripping it to bloody shreds.Sun85 wrote:Cncpc, sorry, bud, now I am totally confused. Is your interpretation of 401.28(2) that anyone who does not have a pilot license is allowed to rent an airplane and then ask a PPL-holder to fly them in that airplane to where the renter wants? If that so, then how is that in principle different than a non-license holder approaching a PPL-holder and asking that PPL-holder to rent an airplane and fly the non-license holder to where the non-lincense holder wants, then sharing the cost of the rental with the PPL-holder?
Then, what do you mean by "starting a business by advertising?" I cannot think of any business where the cost of a service is shared by the service provider and the service recepient. Quite on the contrary, I see nothing in 401.28 which prevents a PPL-holder from running ads in the national newspapers (if he wants to) stating what his upcoming flight schedule is, and inviting people to join him and share the costs.
And here's another one for everyone to consider. Say, a PPL holder wants to fly from A to B to build hours. He invites a pax to tag along and share the costs, and the pax agrees. So far so good, TC is happy. Then, upon arriving to the aerodrome, it turns out that the weather at B is bad, but the weather at C and D is not so bad. The pilot starts thinking where to fly: C or D. The pax then says: "I'd love to see C, and I don't care about D." The pilot then flies to C with the pax, and back to A. The cost is then shared. Is there a 401.28(2) violation?
With all due respect, folks, do you really think that TC is against the cost of building hours being alleviated by a PPL-holder flying his friends and acquaintances where THEY want? After all, a PPL-holder is absolutely free to do so at his own expense, so the considerations of "safety," of which there (theoretically) would be more of in case of someone with a CPL license, are not applicable here at all. Then what do you think TC is afraid of? That someone will get their CPL while owing a few thousand dollars less to the banks and would get out of the debt a year or two sooner? Again, from the TC cases I've seen on the Internet, 401.28 (2) has been applied where PPL-holders were running what to TC looked like a commercial service. Someone please show me where TC went after a guy who asked someone he knows where they want to fly, took them there, and then shared the costs with them.
I've run commercial air services and I know that chisel charterers (CCers) can sometimes find themselves ratted out or punched out because the legal operator sees CCers stealing money from them by not incurring the expense of a legal setup and legal operation. We used to have this total dick at Quesnel openly running people out to a lodge at Tsacha Lake in a Cherokee 180. There were a lot of remarks passed there, but not to the authorities. People didn't tend to do that sort of thing in those days. The guy killed himself along with a good friend of mine after I left. The people he was taking were mostly Americans rich enough to fly to Quesnel and pay to charter out to Tsacha. I'd characterize that as ripping your ass to shreds.
On the other hand, I've known my own private pilot students, after graduation, renting and running somebody over to Edmonton for a funeral or whatever and having the whole rental paid for. In fact, we, as commercial operators, took the money directly from them rather than the renter pilot. No money went to the pilot. These people could never have afforded a charter in the same airplane. I characterize that as scratching your ass. Everybody does it, but try not to be seen in public.
So the first thing to understand, if you plan on doing this to time build, is that some commercial operators may be coming down your chimney if they find out. But only in certain circumstances. If the people you fly were never seriously going to be able to charter as an alternative, it really isn't money out of their pocket. If you're out advertising your "schedule", at a minimum they'll call TC enforcement, and at worst take a baseball bat to you. Advertising a "schedule" would be ripping to bloody shreds. No, you can't do that. Get that idea completely out of your head. Once again, scratching your ass in public, buried down to the second knuckle.
The second group who are against you are commercial pilots, especially the ones who can't find work. They want to characterize what you're doing as commercial work, and see you as stealing a pilot's job from them. Once again, depends on whether the pax are legitimate, funded, potential real charter passengers, or wouldn't fly at all if the economics weren't right as they would be in a cost sharing deal. You will find young commercial pilots up on the high horse with the holier than thou hat at full gallop sometimes in this type of thing. Some may be doing it themselves.
I flew 700 hours in the first year after I got my licence back in the 70's. Almost all of it was on four seat or six seat trips to Reno-Monterrey-Vancouver Friday night to Sunday night trips. Monday night on long weekends. We usually all chipped in either a fourth or a sixth. I went almost every weekend, not quite so frequent in the winter. The first one ended in an accident, no injuries, and Transport knew that everyone was sharing. They knew on many other occasions and never had a problem with it. I worked at Canfor in head office with about 200 other people and after the first trip, word of mouth went around very fast that you could do Reno return for under $100, and I usually had a full load by Wednesday. If I didn't, I went anyway and the cost went up. Cancelled on Friday mornings if the forecast would have made the flight problematic, and stayed on the ground and missed work if we couldn't get home. Sometimes the passengers paid for the aircraft and I paid them my share. I can't recall ever doing this on anything but the Reno run.
If I had thought this was illegal, I wouldn't have done it. I knew it wasn't illegal because Transport knew the details and raised no issue at all.
I haven't read the reg because I know the spirit of the law. That is, you can share the costs of an airplane if you are going somewhere and are aware that others may want to go along. If you're talking about stretching the spirit far beyond the breaking point so that it is interpreted that you, trying to build hours by something that is very against the law, as the Colonel points out, can make some half or quarter assed argument that gee, what's the problem, then you're not only going to get the law on you, you're the type of personality who is going to kill yourself and others. How will you know that? You find yourself talking about weather diversions and advertising schedules and huffing and puffing about why anyone wouldn't see that as ok.
It's always a good idea when props turn and aviators aviate. Its part of our business and economy. Applies to private aircraft and private pilots as well. The exception that Transport allows recognizes that and allows sharing types of operations. I doubt there is much if any enforcement if nobody complains or there isn't an incident, but please remember the kiyiing from atop those high horses when that Twin Comanche went down on the Coquihalla a few months back. But take it too far, and people will be able to identify you by the bloodstain on the back of your Dockers.