Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Experimentals for hire?

  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,365
    The regs usually prohibit experimental aircraft carrying passengers or freight for hire. So you can't be an airline or charter company.
    But I don't think it prohibits you earning a fee or a pilot flying it for a fee.

    Let's say you homebuild a new design acro plane, and it is a real whizbang worldbeater. You hire Patty Wagstaff to fly in it airshows, and the appearance fee might be $12,000 , split half between the pilot and half the builder.

    Same for the Reno racers, many of which are experimental and some even amateur built. The top unlimiteds are often flown by some expert pilot, not necessarily the owner and may win hundreds of thousands of dollars.
    An example of this was Rick Brickert flying the homebuilt experimental Pond Racer, which did not win anything, but would not have been illegal if they did. There was no passenger or freight being carried.

    Some pilots may be flying for the challenge and fun of it, but many may be earning a fee also.

  2. #32
    Jim Hann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ballwin, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    420
    Bill, I think you are mixing Experimental categories. None of the ones you cited except maybe Pond Racer were E-AB. Or maybe I'm wrong.
    Jim Hann
    EAA 276294 Lifetime
    Vintage 722607
    1957 Piper PA-22/20 "Super Pacer"
    Chapter 32 member www.eaa32.org
    www.mykitlog.com/LinerDrivr
    Fly Baby/Hevle Classic Tandem


  3. #33
    Scooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    35
    Necro thread, I know, but all of the posts here occured before the FAA legal counsel interpretation in December, 2013. This interpretation is limited to renting ELSAs and SLSAs that have had their certification changed to experimental.

    https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/data/interps/2013/botsaris-botsaris&vance%20-%20(2013)%20legal%20interpretation.pdf
    Last edited by Scooper; 05-19-2019 at 08:09 AM. Reason: typo
    - Stan, Private Pilot ASEL, LSR-I, EAA 115792 (since 1966)
    Zenith CH601XLi-B, N601KE, KSTS



  4. #34
    Since this "necro thread" renewal caught my attention, I'll extend the pain a bit to ask for comments on the following case that I saw in another forum.

    I think he was an employee of the company in this case, but maybe not. He might have been providing this service to the company as an individual. If that changes anything, say so.

    Anyway, for two or three years he was delivering products to customers. He would chuck products in the back of his truck and drive them to the customer who purchased them. I believe they had this arrangement because the products required certain handling (like never tilt the container more than 30 degrees in any direction), and this service is not available from conventional shippers like USPS, UPS, FedX, DHS, etc. But I doubt the reason matters. My memory says he was paid a fixed amount per mile based upon the number of miles a google search generated. I assume that is highway miles rather than straight line based upon what I see google generate from such searches.

    About a year after he started this job (or arrangement/contract), he got his pilot certificate. Then he purchased an experimental airplane ("exhibition", as I recall, not amateur-built). When the weather was poor, he would drive the products in his truck as before. When the weather was good, he started flying the products to the destination in his airplane. Obviously he was never paid to fly the airplane, because he didn't even have an airplane for the first two or three years he was doing this. In fact, I think the company didn't even know for several months that he would sometimes fly their products to the destination.

    The claim was ... this was perfectly okay. Apparently the basis for this conclusion was a case where someone asked the FAA if employees who were required to attend a convention as part of their job / employment (and given a fixed payment to cover expenses like air tickets, hotel, food, etc) could choose to fly to the destination in their own airplane. After all, they could also choose to drive to the destination, take a bus, or get to the destination in whatever way they chose. The point supposedly was, "they were not paid to fly in his own airplane, just get to and attend the convention" and therefore this no more constituted "commercial activity" than driving their own car or motorcycle.

    Given this as the model case, the claim was that the delivery case is equivalent. Seems reasonable to me, but I'll bet someone out there will find a reason to disagree. Right? :-)
    Last edited by max_reason; 05-23-2019 at 08:01 PM.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    57
    The flight would be for "compensation" which is not allowed. It is stated plain as day. The pilot is giving the owner money to fly the plane for recreation. He is compensating the owner for the use of the plane and the person being carried is the pilot. It doesn't have to be a passenger. There is wear and tear on the plane because it is being used. No if's and's or but's. Easy to understand.
    Last edited by skeeter_ca; 05-30-2019 at 12:40 PM.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,392
    "he got his pilot certificate. Then he purchased an experimental airplane ("exhibition", as I recall, not amateur-built). When the weather was poor, he would drive the products in his truck as before. When the weather was good, he started flying the products to the destination in his airplane. Obviously he was never paid to fly the airplane"

    Illegal in several areas. He was being paid to move a product from point A to point B. If you use a plane to do that it's called 'carrying property for compensation or hire.'
    He needed an ATCO certificate, which could not be obtained with an experimental airplane of any kind; he needed to hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and meet the aeronautical experience requirements to be approved on the ATCO certificate.

    "Apparently the basis for this conclusion was a case where someone asked the FAA if employees who were required to attend a convention as part of their job / employment (and given a fixed payment to cover expenses like air tickets, hotel, food, etc) could choose to fly to the destination in their own airplane. After all, they could also choose to drive to the destination, take a bus, or get to the destination in whatever way they chose. The point supposedly was, "they were not paid to fly in his own airplane, just get to and attend the convention"

    Obviously, these two scenarios are not the same. The FAA employees are not carrying persons or property for compensation or hire on their trip. That is legit. Even a private pilot can fly his own plane to a business meeting in another town because the flying is only incidental.

    If the FAA employee's neighbor said "Hey, you're going to Podunk tomorrow for that convention, right? I'll give ya $10 if you can deliver this feather to my brother" the flight would now be illegal if the FAA employee accepts.
    Last edited by martymayes; 05-30-2019 at 01:51 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •