Airborne_Again wrote:
I’m getting slightly confused now. But let me restate instead. The pilot needs a CPL (or higher) if either
- (s)he gets paid to fly or
- the operation is commercial
Those are necessary conditions for a CPL (subject to the various caveats), but I was trying to work out conditions where a CPL is sufficient. A CPL clearly is not sufficient for commercial air transport (CAT), as an AOC is required for that, but I admit that I am still a little bit confused with regards to EASA ‘commercial operations’ which are not ‘commercial air transport’.
For example, can a company (without an AOC) hire a pilot (with CPL) to take a professional photographer in an airplane to take pictures on behalf of their paying client? Is the photographer considered a passenger or crew? If they are considered a passenger, then seems clear this would be CAT and require an AOC, but if they are considered crew, or if the pilot is also the photographer and flies alone, is a pilot with just a CPL all that is required along with any airplane (possibly owner operated or possibly not)?
derek wrote:
For example, can a company (without an AOC) hire a pilot (with CPL) to take a professional photographer in an airplane to take pictures on behalf of their paying client? Is the photographer considered a passenger or crew? If they are considered a passenger, then seems clear this would be CAT and require an AOC, but if they are considered crew, or if the pilot is also the photographer and flies alone, is a pilot with just a CPL all that is required along with any airplane (possibly owner operated or possibly not)?
Derek, who’s plane?
If the company hires a plane, photographer and a pilot, then CPL should be enough, just like with corporate flying – if you hire a plane and a pilot, then does not matter which one of your employees or contractors is carried by the plane.
If the company hires a plane and a pilot and sells it as a pulic transport service to a third party, or member of the public, be that A-A or A-B, then AoC is need, as far as I can see.
That makes sense to me, although what would be an example of A-A public transport? A sightseeing tour (taking pictures!)?
Here most of the pilots who fly planes for parachute dropping are CPLs
An introductory flight is always an instructor who would normally be a CPL.
The discovery flight os usually carried out by a PPL.
Photographic or filming work normallty comes under the SPA category now and its usually a CPL as pilot. (Or at least it always used to be)
Also under SPA with a CPL are work such as power line inspection and live line working.
The helicopterd that carry on this work usually belong to the power companies, and often carry an observer or even 2 as well as the pilot.
I have not seen any changes in regulation regarding photography, other than name changes but I don’t keep up much these days.
derek wrote:
That makes sense to me, although what would be an example of A-A public transport? A sightseeing tour (taking pictures!)?
If that was hired as a tour by a photographer, the it might be A-A public transport and then the AoC performes that job.
If the plane and a pilot were hired by a photographer separately, then AFAIK it would not be an AoC thing…
derek wrote:
Those are necessary conditions for a CPL (subject to the various caveats), but I was trying to work out conditions where a CPL is sufficient. A CPL clearly is not sufficient for commercial air transport (CAT), as an AOC is required for that, but I admit that I am still a little bit confused with regards to EASA ‘commercial operations’ which are not ‘commercial air transport’.
You have to separate air crew licensing rules from air operation rules. A CPL is clearly a sufficient pilot license for CAT in single-pilot aircraft because part-FCL says so. But the operator still has to have an AOC.
Peter wrote:
Not strictly true. I have a business (technically I am an employee; a Director is an employee of the company) but I can deliver goods to my customers. I am “paid” because I am paid for being an employee.But I don’t need a CPL for those flights, nor is an AOC needed. Why? Because I am not contractually bound to fly. I am not contractually bound to do anything actually I could just screw the business into the ground, if I wanted to. […]
Come on! There is nothing in the regulations that speaks about the pilot being “contractually bound” (or not). A PPL may not receive any “remuneration” and is limited to non-commercial ops. Period. There are a few exceptions to this, but they are well defined. A PPL with FI or FE ratings may accept remuneration for flight instruction or skill tests/proficiency checks. Some kinds of ops are considered non-commercial even though they properly should be. These are listed explicitly in the ops regulation.
The parachute stuff on a PPL has for decades been a grey area
It’s not a grey area in any way. The Air Ops regulation is quite explicit.
“Introductory flights” (different things in different countries) have also been “on the edge” of what JAA/EASA was regulating.
Again the Air Ops regulation is quite explicit. Introductory flights are not on the edge in any way and apply to all EASA countries.
I suggest you read the Air Ops regulation.
Who here would be interested to participate in crowd funding to run this topic by an aviation lawyer:
Can Joe Public, private individual, approach the owner (private individual or company) of an airplane, and rent it, e.g. for two weeks?
Can Joe Public then search, on his own, for a qualified pilot, to fly him around in said airplane?
Would the operator as listed in the certificate of registration change for the duration of this charter?
Is it NCO/NCC or CAT?
My understanding of the “control” part of the legislation was that if someone owned (even a rather small) share in an airplane, operational control was given and flights could be done NCO/NCC.
The “as long as airplane and pilot are separate” thing is interesting. Can I call up someone who owns a Gulfstream, pay him a couple grand, and then pay a pilot to fly me and some friends in it, all without any AOC structure involved?
Snoopy wrote:
Can I call up someone who owns a Gulfstream, pay him a couple grand, and then pay a pilot to fly me and some friends in it, all without any AOC structure involved?
That is how corporate “GA” works, right? The company doesn’t always own the jet, sometime they hire it. And they don’t have to be an AoC.
arj1 wrote:
That is how corporate “GA” works, right? The company doesn’t always own the jet, sometime they hire it. And they don’t have to be an AoC.
If a bank owns a jet, and a company leases (vs. owns) it, yes. However, then the company is the operator, employs (or pays the freelance) pilots, and the pax don’t pay for the flights. That’s NCC ops…same if the company outright owns it, off course.
I’m not familiar with any other ways, e.g., a company chartering a jet from an owner/operator, and then securing pilots elsewhere.
