Reward/Remuneration for flying a Pax

[Bundy]

A Pilot in Command may not operate an aircraft for the purposes of financial gain, the pilot may however accept a financial contribution in any form that will not exceed 50% of the running costs of that paticular flight. Any such payment/reciept must be logged in pilots logbook.

Why 50%. Why not 100% of the costs or at least Fuel and direct operating costs (like landing and ATNS fees - Abroad Like Moz, Zim etc they can be REAL $ numbers). A trike does not cost a lot to run, but a twin turbine for eg costs amost what a windlass does to buy per hr. 50% would leave a huge hole as would the $ landing and handling fees. Also if you fill in $ you could get back waay more than it would cost for say 500l fuel in SA ronts.... Fuel in Efrica costs HUGE bucks and us fly boys are exploited plenty...


What are "running costs of an aerie?" Do you include the annuals, only the variables and what about opportunity costs or finance costs. The AA has a rate per km for cars. Why not a rate for aeries approved by CAA? If you get hrs flown x rate by caa then it costs reimbursement. if you get more then for reward... There are simple solutions, but it would mean some folks would have to do a bit of thinking and a little work...

Let me explain why i mention the figure 50%:

Think of it this way... Anyone who has trained for a CPL or higher has done so for the purposes of making a financial gain out of the aviation business. You could therefore say that anyone who holds an NPL, PPL, HPL etc would therfore be flying for the enjoyment therof, or for the express purpose of getting from A to B (as you mentioned).

If I am flying for the enjoyment therof, and if the law would make it possible for a PAX/s to contribute 50% of the running costs, I will have been able to save half the cost of my hobby on that day. In this, I see no financial gain at all.

If I was able to recieve 100% of the costs, you could argue that I would be able to take up passengers to fund my hobby and in this I do see a financial gain to be made.

Lets just find some middle ground and "decriminalise" this aspect of our sport! Like I said... I dont know any pilots who have not at some stage accepted a financial contribution..

[RV4ker (RIP)]

I understand 100% what you are saying, but still don't agree with 50% being the law. If you chose only to recover 50% that is your prerogative, but 50% is still significantly less than the cost of the flight. The bottom line remains that as long as CAA sees hrs as Reward it does not matter what percentage you recover. Any recovery and you are being paid....

I am happy to take folks flipping for nothing because I enjoy the smiles and hopefully I can give them something I got plenty of as a youngster.... My issue is when I am doing someone a "favour". For eg Mercy flight, or Batteleurs or 4 oukes going to the Rugga. First 2 are open and shut eg's. If someone does not cover the costs I don't fly. Simple.... 3rd one I don;t have a choice as law stands now... I have a 6 seater I run for R2000 an hr. We want to go to Plett to play golf (mate has a house we can stay for free and has a car down there). All the airlines only fly to George. So we have to drive to Jhb (Cost), park car (cost), be watered and fed (cost), then catch flight to George (Cost), then Hire Avis Car to get to Plett (Cost) and same on way back. Whole trippie as follows...
5 hrs drive to Jhb
Food and drinks
2 hrs wait airport
Flight down FAGG 2 hrs
Food and drinks
Drive Avis Car to get to Plett (2hrs)
Total trip time 11hrs at total cost to all oukes of around R9000.

Enter me and my aerie. We drive to airport 5 mins. Load up and 5 hrs later we on the beach. Cost R10'000

Based on the current law I can not even consider this as an option unless I carry the R10K cost. That just STUPID IMHO. If we drive to Jhb in my car then we split the costs. Exactly the same thing. If on the other hand I say I take them there for R15K and they must pay for all my food, golf and boose then that a different story...

It not about reward, it about it not costing me more than if I did alternative (drive train or airlines). If they cover costs, they are not funding it, simply covering the cost of the equipment same way they do for a car. The flight and "service" remains free.

The flip side argument is the PPL para dropper. I have done plenty drops and they cover 100% of the costs and I am told it is legal.... How is that possible....

Last one.
We got time share at Zebula/Mabalingwe (can't remember exactly). Wives went early in the week and plan was for 4 husbands to join them after work on Friday. Easy flip up there vs hard couple hr in Dark drive... FLY was the answer....

We arrive at FAGM for a trip to the bush and I happy I just pax for a change. Load all our crap and turn key and the pvt aerie is dead as a door nail. Tried jump star, tried everything. It Friday afternoon and AMO says there is nothing they can do, it not the battery. Will have to take starter out and check, so we are stuffed. Plane is loaded all the wives already at destination having driven through the Wed and the 4 husbands at FAGC. I did my PPL at FAGC and the school still has me on their books, so I hire a esxactly the same type of aerie from them for the weekend. Since I had flown with them in last 6 weeks I was current and on insurance bla bla bla, the intended pilot was not and there was not time for the validation flight and excess insurance etc, so I am now the pilot flying, but I don't own the aerie. Off we go and have a ball in the bush. Monday morning we return at sparrows and go direct to work while wives and kids stay for a couple more days.

We split the invoice from the flight school 4 ways. I did not and still do not see the problem. There were 2 pilots and 2 non pilots, not that I think that makes any difference. Plan was to go in my mates aerie and we would pay for the fuel, oil and fees equally, it broke so we took another aerie and I ended up logging the hrs rather than him, but agreement to split costs 4 ways remained. The cost to get us there and back was the schools actual cost including I assume some profit margin (which would have been a wet rate and would def have been more than we would have "paid" my mate had we used his plane...)

Maybe therein lies the solution. You can pay X a wet rate same as if he hired the plane from the school less X% (maybe 20%) to establish "reasonable man test" cost of the aerie.... If that is the case a 172 goes for around R1300/hr wet, less 20% = R1040?

Most of the older pilots will tell you rule of thumb as to aerie costs is 3x hrly fuel burn. Maybe that could be used as a guideline?

[topflight]

Well...I am sure that there are a lot of commercial pilots that are flying today that would not have been able to build hours if it were not for their friends/family that went for flips and contributed to the flight.

There is something else; what about a PPL pilot flying for a skydiving club, he is not getting paid for flying but the club pay for the fuel and the plane? That must then be against the law!! I cannot see something wrong with getting money for fuel, AC costs etc....the pilot is not getting paid for flying the plane.

[Morph]

This will seriously affect the Batteleurs and the S&R and the Young Falcons. It is an absolute case of the law, and lawyers interpretation there of, getting in the way of good work.

I would love to see how CAA would be able to police this, to me it is impossible.

Like I have said before if you blatantly set up a stall advertising your services, taking members of the public for flips, with the intent of deriving an income, you are a commercial operation and hence need to be suitably qualified.

If me and my non-flying mates fly to Vredendal in my aerie, and we share costs that is not a commercial operation. If we drove and they all paid towards the costs, do I then need to have a taxi operators licence? This is exactly the same thing. If however I had a taxi sign on my car, and pick up strangers, charge them a fee that covers the costs involved, including an income for me, then they are a taxi operator and need the relevant licences and insurances.

I have mysterious benefactors, that get into my hangar after hours and replenish my fuel. I feel in the interests of safety, I need to transfer this fire hazzard as quickly as possible to my plane to reduce risks of fire etc. It is my duty

The same can be said for the special beer pricing in the Club house.