Getting info out of any CAA is like pulling teeth, and half the time the reply that you do get will be wrong.
Plus none of it get shared online neither…
EASA rules now do, but I hear this is at the “cost” of having to plan routes where “time not in gliding range of a suitable aerodrome” is restricted.
For SET AOC, ask French DGAC what they think of TBM900 or Swiss FOCA what they think of PC12
For SET AOC, Spain was one of the two (?) EU countries that allowed it even before SERA.
For granting an AOC the authority can mandate full time equivalents of the required nominated persons (postholders). For a one aircraft operation they might accept if those are not fully employed. The AOC application process is expensive and maintaining the admin structure afterwards as well.
It depends a lot on the authority. A possibility is to pay a management fee and add the aircraft to an existing AOC.
From many years ago, and this is for the UK, I recall a charter AOC costing somebody about 20k to set up initially and about 10k a year to keep going afterwards. How much of that was external consultancy fees I have no idea but – like with e.g. ISO9000 approvals – that is how most firms do it.
Many years ago it was not uncommon for bigger flying schools to run a Seneca or two on a charter AOC. A VAT registered company claims back the fuel VAT anyway but with an AOC you claim back the duty also (no need to fly abroad and claim the duty drawback that way). I suspect the duty reclaim angle helped to fund things Today, the piston charter business is practically dead. It died many years ago; we used to have a German pilot here who posted his story here and here.
You could ride piggy back on an AOC for 3500 a month dependent on type and ops. There were companies around who would let you however my understanding that after the Irish/Spanish accident things got slightly more difficult.
However in principal there should be no issues on the assumption that SOP are checked and carried out. Issues arise when one party decides not to bother. It has to be built on trust and transparency which would appear to be in short supply today.
I am assuming that he did a proper check of the operational possibilities to fly commercially to the fields that he has in mind. Various fields still have limited opening times for commercial ops or would need PPR or have other restrictions.
Many NOTAMS ago I had this plan to set up an outfit at LESB with a couple of DA42s which would have been a very convenient service as an island hopper and a little beyond. However, LESB does not permit that, because it’s not a ‘customs airport’ and my pledge that it would strictly be for national flights did not cut it. There is no X-Ray machine, and my offer to buy them one got refused because ‘the people would have to be trained and maintained current in operating such a machine’. Ah well, I guess the real reason was that the handling companies at LEPA really could live without ‘unfair competition’ that would erode their nicely priced services, and operate on Z and Y plans, avoiding slots…
The Channel Islands, particularly Alderney, would be ripe for this type of operation, but you would never get a single engine AOC.
Won’t there be an issue in winter also? single pilot IFR would be reduces as VMC or day time operation? I am very interested by this topic as I am exploring this type of operation.
single pilot IFR would be reduces as VMC or day time operation?
Only for turbojet are two pilots required. Turboprop with <9 pax seats can be flown single pilot under ifr (and at night). At least thats what ORO FC 200/202 say.
Some, possibly all, the existing AOC SET might be operated multi crew in any event, even if the type is single crew?
How many SET AOC are in operation? A Finnish PC12 outfit and a couple of French TBM operators?