DavidC wrote:
LAPL/LAPL Medical
- Cost sharing on any EASA aircraft
I’m sure you can do glider towing and all the other stuff on a LAPL
For sure you can ferry a plane for somebody for free, on a PPL/[IR] 
But in reality practically nobody will do it for free. Maybe once…
As moving a plane from A to B doesn’t equate to a transport service, an AOC is not required.
Doesn’t necessarily follow; for example traffic spotting for a local radio station needs an AOC, over here. I used to know somebody who got one; cost about 20k initially and then 5k/year.
Peter wrote:
Ferrying is one of the few things which needs a CPL (to get paid for it)
I think the context of the question was ferrying for maintenance or positioning, without being paid. Ultimately (if not paid to do it) this just boils down to doing someone a favour and it’s hard to see how the flight can have any special status which might bring with it extra rules on licensing requirements or rules on who can cover the costs.
Ferrying over long distances is a viable business, presumably because (especially crossing oceans) it is felt to require specialist skills and experience. On paper there would appear to be nothing to prevent a PPL doing it for free (or ‘at cost’), but the commercial operations would attack anyone trying that and as you say the CAA would probably try to do you for something/anything if they found out about it.
An AOC is required for commercial air transport services. As moving a plane from A to B doesn’t equate to a transport service, an AOC is not required.
Peter wrote:
Ferrying is one of the few things which needs a CPL (to get paid for it) but doesn’t need an AOC.
Peter, did you mean ferrying for hire?
Otherwise, it should be just a normal flight…
Good thread!
Do ferrying or being a personal pilot have any formal definition in law
Ferrying is one of the few things which needs a CPL (to get paid for it) but doesn’t need an AOC. Why not an AOC? Probably because most of the flight is outside the jurisdiction of whoever might want to bust you If you offered a ferry service within the UK I am sure the CAA would try to get you for something…
A personal pilot… depends on whether the pilot is actually PIC. In many situations he doesn’t have to be. For example you can be PIC in a TBM with just the required papers (a PPL and the TBM Class Rating) but the insurer will stipulate the second pilot (who has a lot of time on type but doesn’t have to be PIC).
Great to see a good discussion already, plus some extra details I wasn’t aware of or overlooked, such as the Annex 1 glider tug option.
Really? Wouldn’t that be “only aircraft that a LAPL allows to pilot”, namely “single-engine piston aeroplanes-land/sea or TMG with a maximum certificated take-off mass of 2000 kg or less, carrying a maximum of 3 passengers, such that there are always a maximum of 4 persons on board of the aircraft.”?
I noted at the top that pilots must be rated and insured for the aircraft they are flying.
I wanted to keep it simply and avoid mentioning complex aircraft or mass above 5,700kg etc.
I think “covering flight costs” is a bit misleading. Do you mean reimbursement for expenses like fuel and landing fees?
I was trying to distinguish between the direct costs of the flight (fuel, landing fees etc.) and additional remuneration/reward for the pilot. This could be in the form of money, free flights or other benefits. The direct costs of the flight are used when cost sharing so I agree that some portion of those would need to be paid by the pilot.
For example, when ferrying aircraft for maintenance, our club charges a reduced rate but it’s not free.
Graham wrote:
My point being that this idea of who’s covering the costs is too complicated to write effective regulation around, and if they feel the need to regulate at all then the right way to approach it would be to regulate a payment made by a passenger.
That’s more or less what they do, isn’t it?
In any case I think we agree than reimbursement for costs that rightfully should have been borne by someone else is unproblematic.
Airborne_Again wrote:
But if you do e.g. pay for fuel out of your pocke and you get paid back by me, that’s reimbursement by definition!
Sure, but without wanting to get too far into semantics on the exact meaning of the word I believe there are shades of grey here:
On the one hand, reimbursement after I have paid your costs on your behalf simply because you were not present and able to do so (a situation where, had you not been paying, I would not have done it).
On the other hand, reimbursement where the costs are otherwise mine and I have no right to expect you to pay (but I say yippee when you do).
My point being that this idea of who’s covering the costs is too complicated to write effective regulation around, and if they feel the need to regulate at all then the right way to approach it would be to regulate a payment made by a passenger.
Graham wrote:
Who says it’s reimbursement?If I do you a favour and move your aircraft from A to B (say for maintenance) then there is not necessarily anything to reimburse. The fuel burned and the landing fee can perfectly reasonably be defined as your expense, not mine, even if you are 1,000nm from the aircraft at all times.
Not necessarily, no. But if you do e.g. pay for fuel out of your pocke and you get paid back by me, that’s reimbursement by definition!
