Donated airplane ride?

[BeaverFixer]

Wondering about the legal implications of a private pilot in his own aircraft donating an airplane ride to a club for a raffle or door prize.
Maybe a flying club member donates a 1 hour ride in his private R44 as a door prize for an event. As it is a door prize, tickets are not sold, no money changes hands. Is this legal in Transport Canada's eyes.
How about the same pilot donating his aircraft for transporting "financially underprivelged" patients with such organizations as Hope Air?
Or flying his aircraft for search and rescue with an operation such as CASARA with volunteer spotters on board?

[Panama Jack]

Just a thought:

Regardless of what the answer is here, call up your regional office and talk to one of their inspectors. That way, you are being transparent with your intentions and they know about it, lest one Johny Public files a complaint and you get a call from them to clarify the matter.

[Redneck_pilot86]

Should be no different than the copa for kids flights.

[photofly]

Read the rule about reimbursements, which have special allowances for charity flights. It's all in the CARs if you look.

[fleet16b]

Every summer for the past 10 years I have donated two rides in my biplane for one event that I attend.
I take no reimbursement /gas etc
I really don't think its any different than taking anyone else for a flight in my bird. However, I do a witnessed briefing and make everyone sign a waiver before flying with me .
Some people say the waiver will not help but I tend to disagree
At least I have something that shows that the passenger was aware of danger etc and assumes liability
It may not be foolproof but its better than nothing .

Now on the other side of the coin ; could the group I donate the ride to be liable due to them selling the raffle tickets ?......maybe

[AvWood]

I've been giving free charity rides to raise money for years. Hope I haven't been breaking the law. I'll have to read up on this.

[Rookie50]

Hope Air has waivers signed and operates under their own insurance rider too. See their site.

[cncpc]

I think there is a point being missed here.

The commercial licensing system provides a minimum "guarantee" of qualifications of both pilot and airworthiness of aircraft. A group holding a raffle which is approached by a private pilot offering to give free rides in his or her airplane has no such assurance.

Private pilots can take passengers based on their license and the condition that there is no reward. It is sort of assumed, that for the most part, the people riding will know the pilot personally or on recommendation and at least have some basis for trusting that pilot and his airplane. That doesn't happen if you win a raffle. It may be that you lose a bigger raffle. You and your kids.

I know its not true in every case, but in some cases these things are done so the pilot can be seen being a pilot by others. It's an exercise in ego satisfaction. Within that group is a subset of pilots who want to not only be seen as pilots, but thrilling pilots. And on it goes. To impact. In what, one case in two thousand?

At the end of the day, the person or persons who get in the seats for that ride actually have paid for them. And I think most courts would find that the organization conducting the raffle has a duty of care to ensure that the pilot and aircraft are safe, and no ability whatever to make that conclusion in a non commercial operation.

There is meaning to the term "private" pilot. It implies limitation of risk to a private sphere, that is one in which potential victims have some basis for knowing and accepting risk. The alternative, the "Public" commercial pilot, is available to the public within a system of legislated qualifications and safety standards.

I'm not saying this applies to every private pilot, but I do think it applies to the original poster and I'll ask this question...who has decided you and your aircraft are safe enough that they've "won" something when they get into your airplane? If the answer is "I did", then I hope you take my point.

[fleet16b]

I think there is a point being missed here.

The commercial licensing system provides a minimum "guarantee" of qualifications of both pilot and airworthiness of aircraft. A group holding a raffle which is approached by a private pilot offering to give free rides in his or her airplane has no such assurance.

Private pilots can take passengers based on their license and the condition that there is no reward. It is sort of assumed, that for the most part, the people riding will know the pilot personally or on recommendation and at least have some basis for trusting that pilot and his airplane. That doesn't happen if you win a raffle. It may be that you lose a bigger raffle. You and your kids.

I know its not true in every case, but in some cases these things are done so the pilot can be seen being a pilot by others. It's an exercise in ego satisfaction. Within that group is a subset of pilots who want to not only be seen as pilots, but thrilling pilots. And on it goes. To impact. In what, one case in two thousand?

At the end of the day, the person or persons who get in the seats for that ride actually have paid for them. And I think most courts would find that the organization conducting the raffle has a duty of care to ensure that the pilot and aircraft are safe, and no ability whatever to make that conclusion in a non commercial operation.

There is meaning to the term "private" pilot. It implies limitation of risk to a private sphere, that is one in which potential victims have some basis for knowing and accepting risk. The alternative, the "Public" commercial pilot, is available to the public within a system of legislated qualifications and safety standards.

I'm not saying this applies to every private pilot, but I do think it applies to the original poster and I'll ask this question...who has decided you and your aircraft are safe enough that they've "won" something when they get into your airplane? If the answer is "I did", then I hope you take my point.

I have to disagree on this one .
For the most part , a CPL does not make you or your aircraft any safer than me or my aircraft.
It does give you the right to charge a fee for you services though.
To answer you one question , Transport Canada decides that a pilot and the aircraft are safe ?
Even homebuilts have a "system of legislated qualifications and safety standards."
Are you saying that you have never given someone a ride in your aircraft during your PPL days ?
Most people I know are very generous and enjoy sharing their interest with others , for the most part it has nothing to do with ego. Its about promoting aviation and in my particular case giving people a chance to experience history and fly in an aircraft that would normally be hard to obtain a flight in.
As I said earlier , the raffle group may be liable but the liability for the pilot would be no different than if he gave a stranger at any airport a ride . Thats what passenger insurance is for .
Donating a free ride to an organization has no monetary merit to the pilot thus no extraordinary liability either

[the_swede]

I have to disagree on this one .
For the most part , a CPL does not make you or your aircraft any safer than me or my aircraft.

And I have to disagree on this one.
While a commercial pilots licence doesn't provide any degree of safety, a commercial registered aircraft does. Commercial Aircraft are maintained by an AMO. Which is audited by a QA process, as well as TC. At least it is supposed to work that way. This process does provide a degree of safety.

[cncpc]

I have to disagree on this one .
For the most part , a CPL does not make you or your aircraft any safer than me or my aircraft.

And I have to disagree on this one.
While a commercial pilots licence doesn't provide any degree of safety, a commercial registered aircraft does. Commercial Aircraft are maintained by an AMO. Which is audited by a QA process, as well as TC. At least it is supposed to work that way. This process does provide a degree of safety.

On a small point, I have to disagree on the first one. I didn't write that.

And, with low time pilots, a commercial pilot's licence is an indicator of additional training and additional flight testing, which can reasonably be said to give a safety edge. I know that once time builds, the distinction can blur and there are many private pilots who are safer than many commercial pilots.

I can think of two people in my private pilot days who were in the airplane and didn't really know me.

Finch, I did say that I know its not true for everybody, and you were the one I had in mind.

[the_swede]

Sorry CNCPC my bad on the miss quote. Rookie mistake.