EDYDO 0 #51 May 1, 2004 Quote I just thought of a question: Does anyone know what can happen to the DZ, the DZO, or the jumpers if a private pilot is found in violation? Who can the FAA fine for this? Is it only the pilot that is at risk? Any history? I am curious to see if I need to ask pilots to see their commerical license! I have gone back through this thread and I see a lot of confused opinions. I can understand why you might have questions. It just isn't as bad as some portray. The simple answer to your question is, No you don't need to ask to see a pilot's license. In fact, he is not required by law to show it to a passenger. See FAR 61.3 (L). FAR 105 cites things that you could possibly be held responsible for that there is absolutely no way anyone in the back of the plane could ever know. You just can't be concerned with it. Example: FAR 105.14 (1) (ii) holds the jumper responsible if the pilot fails to make proper radio contact with ATC. They are just covering their butt in every conceivable circumstance. Just keep your reserve in date, stay away from clouds and have fun. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #52 May 1, 2004 If you want to get into silly legal loop holes, some people believe that if a skydiver rents an airplane, pays the full rental fee to the airplane owner, then asks a private pilot to fly him, then they are all acting legally. An amusing interpretation of the law, however, I doubt if any airplane owner in their right mind would rent out an airplane without seeing the pilot's logbook and holding the pilot responsible for returning the airplane in one piece. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #53 May 3, 2004 Rob, In that case most aircraft owners will have some type of insurance. Insurance all most ( qualified as all most) always requires minimum hours and sometimes hours in the specific aircraft or type. Best way is to simply comply with the FAR's. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanglesOZQld 0 #54 May 3, 2004 And by the way , here in Oz there is no requirement at the moment to hold a CPL to fly jumpers. I have seen many so called pilot professionals that made me GLAD to have a rig on my back and be able to jump out of the "ship" rather than land with them. BSBD! -Mark. Holding a higher rating does NOT allow you to fly better all the time. "A Scar is just a Tattoo with a story!!!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakflyer9999 1 #55 May 4, 2004 Quote Nope. The purpose of the flight for the jumpers is to get to altitude and make a jump. The purpose of the flight for the pilot is to build flight time. That is not a common purpose. Quote I've heard the argument that if you don't log the flight time then you aren't "building flight time" and therefore the common purpose is to enjoy the beautiful blue sky. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tombuch 0 #56 May 4, 2004 QuoteQuote Nope. The purpose of the flight for the jumpers is to get to altitude and make a jump. The purpose of the flight for the pilot is to build flight time. That is not a common purpose. Quote I've heard the argument that if you don't log the flight time then you aren't "building flight time" and therefore the common purpose is to enjoy the beautiful blue sky. I think that's nope again. Look, you can try to find loopholes but the FAA feels that most jump operations should be handled by a commercial pilot. FAR 61.113 lists private pilot privileges and limitations, and there are many things that a private pilot CAN do that might otherwise be considered commercial. Flying jumpers is not on the list. One of the interesting things that a private pilot CAN do is to tow gliders under some very specific circumstances listed in part 61.113 and 61.69. Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl You may try to bend and twist the regulations as much as you like, and as long as the operation is not examined by the FAA you will be fine. However, if the FAA does examine the flight they will take a very dim view of private pilots flying jumpers in all but extremely limited circumstances. If you feel strongly that you have a scheme that will pass FAA scrutiny, then contact your local GADO/FSDO and ask for a supportive ruling. Otherwise use caution and leave jump operations to commercial pilot.Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #57 May 6, 2004 Quote Look, you can try to find loopholes but the FAA feels that most jump operations should be handled by a commercial pilot. FAR 61.113 lists private pilot privileges and limitations, and there are many things that a private pilot CAN do that might otherwise be considered commercial. Flying jumpers is not on the list. One of the interesting things that a private pilot CAN do is to tow gliders under some very specific circumstances listed in part 61.113 and 61.69. Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #58 May 6, 2004 QuoteI have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed, You have got to realize the FAA does not need a loophole. If they interpret the reg. one way and you interpret them another, you loose every time. If you truly feel that a private pilot flying jumpers is legal under some special situation, go to you local FISDO and ask for a ruling. If you are not willing to do this you probably have some doubt yourself. If the FAA "uses it, but is isn't in the regs" there is not much that can be done. There is not a lot of case history where people have won going against the FAA. jmo SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites BabaLouie 0 #59 May 6, 2004 QuoteQuote Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed As was explained to a member of my family, who at that time was a part of a glider operation, is this .... The tow pilot is not the PIC of the glider, the PIC of the glider was the responsible party for the glider and its occupant, during an emergency the glider PIC was expected to act in the best interest of all involved. Now admittedly this seems a bit odd as the tow pilot was generally being paid for the tow, but the money transaction was between two pilots. In skydiving, the money transaction is between the pilot and the DZO to carry PASSENGERS to altitude. Perhaps this is the defining difference? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #60 May 7, 2004 Going to FSDO and asking for a ruling is pointless. Been there, done that. It is asking for them to put their neck in a noose if they have missed something and they aren't going to do that if they are smart. What one usually gets back is the regulation numbers that you should read to form your own conclusion. I hope no one has read into any of my posts that I believe that a private pilot can fly a plane for a DZ, that is not the case. I am a glider instructor and acutely aware as to why glider operations are allowed to use private pilots, but we have enough controversy without it. Yes, the FAA is indeed autonomous, but not invincible. I can attest to that first hand. I can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diverdriver 5 #61 May 7, 2004 QuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #62 May 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE I guess I will just give up. I can't seem to get my point across. In the above post the "club" was charging for tandems and more. The FAA found essentially that the "club" was just a front for a business. Once again, I hope no one reads into any of my posts that I believe a private pilot can fly for a DZ, even if they call themselves a "club". That is simply not the case. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
tombuch 0 #56 May 4, 2004 QuoteQuote Nope. The purpose of the flight for the jumpers is to get to altitude and make a jump. The purpose of the flight for the pilot is to build flight time. That is not a common purpose. Quote I've heard the argument that if you don't log the flight time then you aren't "building flight time" and therefore the common purpose is to enjoy the beautiful blue sky. I think that's nope again. Look, you can try to find loopholes but the FAA feels that most jump operations should be handled by a commercial pilot. FAR 61.113 lists private pilot privileges and limitations, and there are many things that a private pilot CAN do that might otherwise be considered commercial. Flying jumpers is not on the list. One of the interesting things that a private pilot CAN do is to tow gliders under some very specific circumstances listed in part 61.113 and 61.69. Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl You may try to bend and twist the regulations as much as you like, and as long as the operation is not examined by the FAA you will be fine. However, if the FAA does examine the flight they will take a very dim view of private pilots flying jumpers in all but extremely limited circumstances. If you feel strongly that you have a scheme that will pass FAA scrutiny, then contact your local GADO/FSDO and ask for a supportive ruling. Otherwise use caution and leave jump operations to commercial pilot.Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #57 May 6, 2004 Quote Look, you can try to find loopholes but the FAA feels that most jump operations should be handled by a commercial pilot. FAR 61.113 lists private pilot privileges and limitations, and there are many things that a private pilot CAN do that might otherwise be considered commercial. Flying jumpers is not on the list. One of the interesting things that a private pilot CAN do is to tow gliders under some very specific circumstances listed in part 61.113 and 61.69. Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #58 May 6, 2004 QuoteI have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed, You have got to realize the FAA does not need a loophole. If they interpret the reg. one way and you interpret them another, you loose every time. If you truly feel that a private pilot flying jumpers is legal under some special situation, go to you local FISDO and ask for a ruling. If you are not willing to do this you probably have some doubt yourself. If the FAA "uses it, but is isn't in the regs" there is not much that can be done. There is not a lot of case history where people have won going against the FAA. jmo SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites BabaLouie 0 #59 May 6, 2004 QuoteQuote Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed As was explained to a member of my family, who at that time was a part of a glider operation, is this .... The tow pilot is not the PIC of the glider, the PIC of the glider was the responsible party for the glider and its occupant, during an emergency the glider PIC was expected to act in the best interest of all involved. Now admittedly this seems a bit odd as the tow pilot was generally being paid for the tow, but the money transaction was between two pilots. In skydiving, the money transaction is between the pilot and the DZO to carry PASSENGERS to altitude. Perhaps this is the defining difference? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #60 May 7, 2004 Going to FSDO and asking for a ruling is pointless. Been there, done that. It is asking for them to put their neck in a noose if they have missed something and they aren't going to do that if they are smart. What one usually gets back is the regulation numbers that you should read to form your own conclusion. I hope no one has read into any of my posts that I believe that a private pilot can fly a plane for a DZ, that is not the case. I am a glider instructor and acutely aware as to why glider operations are allowed to use private pilots, but we have enough controversy without it. Yes, the FAA is indeed autonomous, but not invincible. I can attest to that first hand. I can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diverdriver 5 #61 May 7, 2004 QuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #62 May 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE I guess I will just give up. I can't seem to get my point across. In the above post the "club" was charging for tandems and more. The FAA found essentially that the "club" was just a front for a business. Once again, I hope no one reads into any of my posts that I believe a private pilot can fly for a DZ, even if they call themselves a "club". That is simply not the case. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
EDYDO 0 #57 May 6, 2004 Quote Look, you can try to find loopholes but the FAA feels that most jump operations should be handled by a commercial pilot. FAR 61.113 lists private pilot privileges and limitations, and there are many things that a private pilot CAN do that might otherwise be considered commercial. Flying jumpers is not on the list. One of the interesting things that a private pilot CAN do is to tow gliders under some very specific circumstances listed in part 61.113 and 61.69. Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #58 May 6, 2004 QuoteI have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed, You have got to realize the FAA does not need a loophole. If they interpret the reg. one way and you interpret them another, you loose every time. If you truly feel that a private pilot flying jumpers is legal under some special situation, go to you local FISDO and ask for a ruling. If you are not willing to do this you probably have some doubt yourself. If the FAA "uses it, but is isn't in the regs" there is not much that can be done. There is not a lot of case history where people have won going against the FAA. jmo SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites BabaLouie 0 #59 May 6, 2004 QuoteQuote Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed As was explained to a member of my family, who at that time was a part of a glider operation, is this .... The tow pilot is not the PIC of the glider, the PIC of the glider was the responsible party for the glider and its occupant, during an emergency the glider PIC was expected to act in the best interest of all involved. Now admittedly this seems a bit odd as the tow pilot was generally being paid for the tow, but the money transaction was between two pilots. In skydiving, the money transaction is between the pilot and the DZO to carry PASSENGERS to altitude. Perhaps this is the defining difference? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #60 May 7, 2004 Going to FSDO and asking for a ruling is pointless. Been there, done that. It is asking for them to put their neck in a noose if they have missed something and they aren't going to do that if they are smart. What one usually gets back is the regulation numbers that you should read to form your own conclusion. I hope no one has read into any of my posts that I believe that a private pilot can fly a plane for a DZ, that is not the case. I am a glider instructor and acutely aware as to why glider operations are allowed to use private pilots, but we have enough controversy without it. Yes, the FAA is indeed autonomous, but not invincible. I can attest to that first hand. I can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diverdriver 5 #61 May 7, 2004 QuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EDYDO 0 #62 May 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE I guess I will just give up. I can't seem to get my point across. In the above post the "club" was charging for tandems and more. The FAA found essentially that the "club" was just a front for a business. Once again, I hope no one reads into any of my posts that I believe a private pilot can fly for a DZ, even if they call themselves a "club". That is simply not the case. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
BabaLouie 0 #59 May 6, 2004 QuoteQuote Clearly the FAA has thought about what activity a private pilot may participate in and the agency has made a regulatory decision to include glider towing and exclude skydiving. Please see http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=7497804f426c077bfbdf0cb1d0a16c8f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl . Tom, Your posts always provide a lot of good thought provoking information for me and I again thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have highlighted a part of the above in bold for clarity. The part in italics tells me you understand what it says. It should be made clear for others that this reg says essentially that a private pilot may not fly for compensation Except in the cases of b thru g. Part g is indeed glider flying and those in the glider are paying a number of expenses not shared with the tow pilot. The fact that the list excludes flying jumpers does not mean a private pilot cannot fly jumpers, only that there can be no compensation or hire. We all seem to agree that a private pilot may not fly jumpers for hire. If there is anything to prevent a private pilot from flying jumpers, not for hire, it is elsewhere. I have seen your posts about "common purpose" and that is a good point since the FAA uses it, but it isn't in the regs. There is also the part about logging flight hours, a valid point for the same reason, but I think it pretty weak and full of holes. It's not in the regs either. Honest, I am not looking for a loophole, it seems the FAA is. Ed As was explained to a member of my family, who at that time was a part of a glider operation, is this .... The tow pilot is not the PIC of the glider, the PIC of the glider was the responsible party for the glider and its occupant, during an emergency the glider PIC was expected to act in the best interest of all involved. Now admittedly this seems a bit odd as the tow pilot was generally being paid for the tow, but the money transaction was between two pilots. In skydiving, the money transaction is between the pilot and the DZO to carry PASSENGERS to altitude. Perhaps this is the defining difference? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDYDO 0 #60 May 7, 2004 Going to FSDO and asking for a ruling is pointless. Been there, done that. It is asking for them to put their neck in a noose if they have missed something and they aren't going to do that if they are smart. What one usually gets back is the regulation numbers that you should read to form your own conclusion. I hope no one has read into any of my posts that I believe that a private pilot can fly a plane for a DZ, that is not the case. I am a glider instructor and acutely aware as to why glider operations are allowed to use private pilots, but we have enough controversy without it. Yes, the FAA is indeed autonomous, but not invincible. I can attest to that first hand. I can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #61 May 7, 2004 QuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDYDO 0 #62 May 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteI can't find any evidence where a private pilot not charging, has been issued a violation for flying jumpers. By the same token, I see no evidence that the FAA Southern Region even has an interest in pursuing such a course. Ed Ed, you didn't read Hooknswoop's post then. He cites a case where they did violate a PP for flying jumpers. See post HERE I guess I will just give up. I can't seem to get my point across. In the above post the "club" was charging for tandems and more. The FAA found essentially that the "club" was just a front for a business. Once again, I hope no one reads into any of my posts that I believe a private pilot can fly for a DZ, even if they call themselves a "club". That is simply not the case. Ed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
