Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

cloudrunner · Post by **cloudrunner** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:23 am

Just fishing for some pros/cons/facts/opinions on operating an aircraft privately for a resort in Canada as opposed to commercially.

The idea would be that the aircraft would be used strictly for the resort guests, staff and supplies.

To the best of my knowledge this is legal but are there any reasons for or against this?

Thanks in advance.

photofly · Post by **photofly** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:55 am

that doesn't sound like a private operation AT ALL.

ArcticKat · Post by **ArcticKat** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:09 pm

Are you getting paid to fly these guests and supplies to and from this resort? Even if it's just for the fuel costs, it's commercial.

sheephunter · Post by **sheephunter** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:14 pm

good until you mentioned guests

Beefitarian · Post by **Beefitarian** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:16 pm

I would think as soon as the guests were involved it would be considered some sort of air taxi sort of thing but have read about someone here that planned on doing something similar with a helicopter. He must know how this sort of thing works to be considering it.

cloudrunner · Post by **cloudrunner** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:17 pm

The resort would own the airplane. The transportation cost would be included in the room rate as it would be the only realistic means of transportation.

Still a problem?

FL_CH · Post by **FL_CH** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:34 pm

It would be air taxi, because:

1) You are not operating an aircraft for your personal reasons, but rather to transport people from A to B,
2) The flight would not have taken place without the guests, and
3) Your passengers are paying for the transportation (as you stated " cost would be included in the room rate")

CARS defines "Air Transport" as:

"air transport service" - means a commercial air service that is operated for the purpose of transporting persons, personal belongings, baggage, goods or cargo in an aircraft between two points;

CARS 700.02 requires an AOC for this case.

I think it will be very difficult to convince TC of the opposite if it ever goes to a hearing.

NAT2 · Post by **NAT2** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:38 pm

Any consideration if you want to charter the aircraft out during a slow time or pick up extra work with the aircraft? Why not have the extra utility for the aircraft that an OC would provide?

cloudrunner · Post by **cloudrunner** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:48 pm

NAT2 wrote:Any consideration if you want to charter the aircraft out during a slow time or pick up extra work with the aircraft? Why not have the extra utility for the aircraft that an OC would provide?

The whole point is trying to avoid the process of getting an OC if at all possible, maybe it is not.

This would be for a 5 star resort not looking to work their machine outside of their needs. I was under the impression that it could be done privately if for the sole purpose of servicing the point to point transport for residents of the resort.

Any specific references or direction to the CARs are appreciated. I will do the research myself but it sure cuts to the chase when you cans access all of the informed individuals here. This is early days in the planning.

Thanks for the input.

cloudrunner · Post by **cloudrunner** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:51 pm

FL_CH wrote:It would be air taxi, because:

1) You are not operating an aircraft for your personal reasons, but rather to transport people from A to B,
2) The flight would not have taken place without the guests, and
3) Your passengers are paying for the transportation (as you stated " cost would be included in the room rate")

CARS defines "Air Transport" as:
"air transport service" - means a commercial air service that is operated for the purpose of transporting persons, personal belongings, baggage, goods or cargo in an aircraft between two points;
CARS 700.02 requires an AOC for this case.

I think it will be very difficult to convince TC of the opposite if it ever goes to a hearing.

Thanks FL_CH, I hadn't seen your reference before my last reply. Cheers

Chuck Ellsworth · Post by **Chuck Ellsworth** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:16 pm

This subject is quite subjective, if T.C. decides you are using an aircraft for profit you have a problem.

Their rules for training for instance has a subsection that says the airplane must be " At arms length " if used for training.

T.C. can interpret that in any fashion they wish.

Personally I don't care what they think because I wouldn't deal with one of them under any circumstances except to tell them to @#$! off.

However there are not many people in Canada who can take that attitude because they fear the results of having an attitude like mine.

To fear them one has to have something to lose...I don't.

Bushav8er · Post by **Bushav8er** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:23 pm

The other posters already showed you the CARs refs.

Don't do it - bottomline, it IS Commercial.

I heard of an operator that 'tried' that, saying that the guests are only paying for the cabin and boats not the flying...TC did not (nor should they) believe it.

photofly · Post by **photofly** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:14 pm

If I'm going to pay to stay in a lodge then I if the lodge management provides an airplane to transport me around I hope that it's not operated in a shady way to avoid by some whisker having to comply with whatever inspections and regulations apply to commercial flights.

TC is there to protect the public, ostensibly, and as bad a job as they do, in some eyes, it would be laughable if they let someone get away with this kind of thing.

NAT2 · Post by **NAT2** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:19 pm

photofly wrote:If I'm going to pay to stay in a lodge then I if the lodge management provides an airplane to transport me around I hope that it's not operated in a shady way to avoid by some whisker having to comply with whatever inspections and regulations apply to commercial flights.

TC is there to protect the public, ostensibly, and as bad a job as they do, in some eyes, it would be laughable if they let someone get away with this kind of thing.

If you knew Cloudrunner, you can damn well bet your life that there's going to be nothing shady about how the guy operates. But of course, there are no SHADY OPERATORS with an OC in Canada, not a single one.

Chuck Ellsworth · Post by **Chuck Ellsworth** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:24 pm

TC is there to protect the public,

Sure they are.

And here I thought T.C.'s main objective was to protect their own...how stupid of me.

Sonic Blue is a perfect example, of course T.C. had no idea of how that company operated....in fact as I understand it we paid five million to Sonic Blue because T.C. shut them down without cause.

So for all you experts out there I fly a company owned airplane and the company is in the process of buying a lodge, when we get the lodge who can I take in the company owned airplane?

And where can I take them?

cloudrunner · Post by **cloudrunner** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:29 pm

photofly wrote:If I'm going to pay to stay in a lodge then I if the lodge management provides an airplane to transport me around I hope that it's not operated in a shady way to avoid by some whisker having to comply with whatever inspections and regulations apply to commercial flights.

TC is there to protect the public, ostensibly, and as bad a job as they do, in some eyes, it would be laughable if they let someone get away with this kind of thing.

Bold statements.

Chuck Ellsworth · Post by **Chuck Ellsworth** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:39 pm

Don't sweat some of the opinions you get here cloudrunner, some of the posters here wouldn't be able to find their as.holes with a set of moose antlers and a flashlight.

The bottom line is a corporation can own an airplane and take whoever they want in it.

Why all this fear of T.C., suppose tomorrow I have a passenger in the corporate owned airplane I fly and T.C. wants to know who I have with me and where we are going and for what purpose, exactly how are they going to find out if I tell them to fu.k off?

photofly · Post by **photofly** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:44 pm

I don't know cloudrunner at all, but wanting to fly paying passengers around without an OC definitely sounds shady to me.

I know TC has no friends on this forum. I'm just saying what my expectations would be as a member of the paying public.

I'll try to answer .'s question. OC is required for commercial air service, which is one operated for hire and reward. HIre and reward is defined in 3(1) of the Aeronautics act as "mean[ing] any payment, consideration, gratuity or benefit, directly or indirectly charged, demanded, received or collected by any person for the use of an aircraft".

So in .'s example he could fly company officers and employees, and the owners of the lodge, and their invited guests. But not anyone who had a contractual relationship with the lodge or the company in the sense of being a customer of either.

Is that correct?

justwork · Post by **justwork** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:49 pm

cloudrunner wrote:Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

That sounds like an oxymoron to me.

justwork · Post by **justwork** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:00 pm

I don't know much about corporate flying, but it seems to me that this could fall under that. I also don't know if you need a Private operator certificate for that or something else.

Driving Rain · Post by **Driving Rain** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:16 pm

You'd be able to fly the employees of the resort only but not the guest. It's been tried before by a few and they were busted big time. I was involved in an investigation when I was employed by the government. They hit the resort with everything in the book OPP, RCMP, OMNR Fish and Wildlife, plus Transport Canada. The aircraft was confiscated and sold at auction.

Chuck Ellsworth · Post by **Chuck Ellsworth** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:43 pm

There is a definite difference between using a corporate owned airplane for private purposes and using it as a means of transporting customers to and from your place of business.

Are you saying that I must answer to anyone who asks me who I have with me in our company airplane and what we are doing on any flight they choose to inquire about?

Or do you subscribe to a Nazi mentality in government employees?

Because if you are going to infringe on my rights as a law abiding citizen just on speculation you can shove your power right where the sun don't shine.

photofly · Post by **photofly** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:16 pm

Are you saying that I must answer to anyone who asks me who I have with me in our company airplane and what we are doing on any flight they choose to inquire about?

., why would they bother asking you? They could just ask your paying passengers - ahem, sorry - guests. Or book a room themselves, and see if they get a free flight thrown in.

Chuck Ellsworth · Post by **Chuck Ellsworth** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:23 pm

It is very unlikely that TC. would be checking any privately registered airplane unless there was a complaint registered.

I have not in any way suggested or claimed you can fly paying customers to a lodge in a privately registered aircraft.

My comments are focused on the simple fact that if you own or fly corporate airplane that is being used privately......not for hire..... T.C. is limited in what they can just walk up and demand from you.

They can only demand you produce the documents required to be in your possession under the regulations......period.

Unless of course they have reason to believe you are committing an ofence that is unlawful, in which case they will have to advise you what offense they think you are guilty of.....they can not arbitrairly detain you without just cause.

If they truly believe they have reason to arrest you they would probably have the RCMP with them.

So my personal method of handling such an incident would be to ask them what offense they believe I am guilty of.......if they can not state the offense then I would refuse to be detained...period.

photofly · Post by **photofly** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:33 pm

. -

I'm not sure your assertion about not answering TC questions is entirely correct - have you read section 8.8 of the Aeronautics Act?

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts ... ge-30.html

Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??

Re: Operating A/C privately for a resort ??