Is this a commercial operation or not?

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:48 pm

This all started with this.....

I was approached by a friend that would like me to rent an airplane from a local flight school and carry a photographer to take pictures for some promotional material for his company. I would not get paid

Then it went downhill from there.

However some good points have been made and any Canadian citizen has reason to worry about being charged and fined by TCCA for the simple reason they can do whatever they feel like and you are basically screwed as there is no real protection from their Kangaroo court mentality.

Fortunately I have never been charged with any offense but having charged them and won I chose not to fly in this bananna republic run by the storm trooper mentality that is TCCA.

However it will be interesting if I do start to fly in Canada again and they charge me and fine me for some trumped up charge and I then tell them to take it out of the money they owe me.

Hornblower · Post by **Hornblower** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:07 pm

Yah I know it was a fairly simple question, and I didn't feel it was worth responding to, until I read the misinformation being posted for the poor guy.

I then thought to explain my understanding of what constituted "commercial" in this country, and got even more factually incorrect information for responses. I have been through these sections of the CARs a few times so know where to find the info.

And as I told you once before, I will be very interested to see what happens when you start up your "aircraft-rental-but-not-flight-training" thing. It should be interesting

Hornblower · Post by **Hornblower** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:08 pm

2R wrote:Which particular CAR does not allow flight below 500 feet ???
I have had months where i have never been above three hundred for the entire month

Hijack
Start another thread.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:38 pm

And as I told you once before, I will be very interested to see what happens when you start up your "aircraft-rental-but-not-flight-training" thing. It should be interesting

I don't think I will have any problems for several reasons, such as what I will be doing is not against the law.

I have clearly and with witnesses informed the Director General Transport Canada that I will be doing this and challenged him to find some way they can stop me knowing I will bring the news media into it and by doing so produce the documentation that this conversation did in fact take place.

I very much doubt the coc.suckers will be willing to open this can of worms.

But if they do I am willing to go to jail rather than submit to these parasites.

The issue for me is simple, they would not allow me to operate a legal flight training business, so I will do it anyhow.

Remember my record in aviation is flawless, Nowzek and Preuss are the ones who have perverted the rule of law.

FL_CH · Post by **FL_CH** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:19 pm

So let's say my rich dad pays for all my flying. He pays the $20k it takes my slow ass to get the PPL. Then, he asks me to take him up for a spin around downtown, and I do so. In the end, of course, he pays for the flight.

Is this a commercial operation now, that requires an OC?

I mean, we can argue that:
- I was rewarded with 'free flight time'
- The passenger was the reason for the flight
- I provided a commercial service of sightseeing

So I can get charged with violation of 401.28?

Doesn't being 'hired' or providing a 'commercial service' have anything to do with contract, responsibility, and wages?

All-in-all, if it's such a big problem, pay for the flight yourself, and make the money fall from the sky in an envelope or smth

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:55 am

hornblower wrote:Ogee
I believe that you are confusing ours with the rules in the US. There is absolutely no requirement to "hold out" or publicize your air service in Canada. I believe that it should be a criterium, but it isn't. You can be charged with operating a commercial air service if you meet the definition of a "commercial air service" in Aeronautics Act. TC can do what they want since the definition is so loose.

If you really got that info (def. of a commercial air service) from TC, please post it, everyone here needs to see it and be able to use it as a clear TC based interpretation (in the event they need it to defend their actions).

No, I didn't get the "holding out" bit from Transport Canada, but that was the wording from years ago. You may be right and it may have been changed. But I did call them in Vancouver and ask directly about taking aerial photos on spec and then selling them (or throwing them away if nobody wanted to buy them). THAT isn't a commercial air service.

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:06 am

hornblower wrote:I have been through these sections of the CARs a few times so know where to find the info.

And as I told you once before, I will be very interested to see what happens when you start up your "aircraft-rental-but-not-flight-training" thing. It should be interesting

I'm not sure that the offense of operating an illegal commercial air service is defined solely in the CARS. It used to be an offense under the Aeronautics Act. And the regs used to be issued pursuant to the Act. Probably still is that way, I'm just not up on it. Tonight at least.

Years ago, you didn't need any type of license to rent an airplane to a licensed pilot. I remember guys like Joe Haines at Peace Arch Flying Club at Langley ( the old Texan TV man who ran the cafe at Langley) renting out a 172 and an old bulb nose 210 for years, and all that was legal. If you had a private license, you could rent either aircraft and get your own instructor and do your commercial or your IFR with those aircraft a fair bit cheaper than at the schools next door.

Then maybe 15 years ago I heard a story that you couldn't do that anymore, that they were considering rentals to licensed pilots a commercial air service. The story was that you could get some bare bones type of OC to do so, just minimal paperwork, but nonetheless paperwork. I doubt that you needed a chief pilot or ops manager, but you probably needed a maintenance letter or your own AMO.

I never really heard of anyone setting one up and I guess the business just kind of went to the schools, because they could already do it with their existing OC's or whatever it is they have.

Used to be you could rent Turbo 210's, Lances', Bugsmashers, 310's, Aztecs, and the like easily and cheaply in BC. e.g. Turbo 210, $75 hour wet. Aztec $80 hour wet.

Now you're lucky to get a Seneca under $300 an hour.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:11 am

Then maybe 15 years ago I heard a story that you couldn't do that anymore, that they were considering rentals to licensed pilots a commercial air service

Can anyone give me the link to that regulation?

There is no need to even hold a valid pilots license to fly with a licensed pilot legal on type and give advice...like being a consultant..

The only problem is finding clients willing to pay you your consultants fee.

I won't have that problem.

marktheone · Post by **marktheone** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:22 am

Cat Driver wrote:
But if they do I am willing to go to jail rather than submit to these parasites.

At your age . you'll probable be ok in prison. You know, dropping the soap and all. LOL

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:17 am

I very much doubt there will ever be much risk of my having to go to jail because of TCCA marktheone.

Nowzek and Preuss may be low life thugs but like all of their ilk self preservation is part of their DNA.

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:08 am

Cat Driver wrote:
Then maybe 15 years ago I heard a story that you couldn't do that anymore, that they were considering rentals to licensed pilots a commercial air service
Can anyone give me the link to that regulation?

There is no need to even hold a valid pilots license to fly with a licensed pilot legal on type and give advice...like being a consultant..

The only problem is finding clients willing to pay you your consultants fee.

I won't have that problem.

I'll give Transport in Vancouver a call right now, CAT.

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:53 am

Well, Pacific Region all in a meeting. Prairie region on voice mail. Finally got to a guy in Ontario who seemed to know what I was talking about.

What we are essentially talking about is a Budget Rent A Plane. That's the analogy I used. There is no provision for a Budget Rent A Plane. All there now is is something called Block Time, wherein one licensed pilot can sell block time to another licensed pilot at cost, cannot make a profit.

The guy knew about the old history I talked about above, when anyone could rent a plane to a licensed pilot. It seems, as I said, that a change was made in an information circular published sometime around 1990 or so which said that aircraft rented to licensed pilots now had to be maintained to commercial standards.

So that lasted until 1996, when the CARS came in and that whole thing just seemed to get left out. Very probably as a result of lobbying by the flying schools industry. Now, for example, you can't go for a TC ride in an aircraft unless your name is on the reg, or it is operated by a flying school.

There is no exemption in the CARS for renting airplanes to licensed pilots, nor is there any type of OC you can get specifically to do that. Pretty weird, but I guess it shows the power of the flying school lobby. It's like if you wanted to rent a car, you had to go to a driving school.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:50 pm

What we are essentially talking about is a Budget Rent A Plane. That's the analogy I used. There is no provision for a Budget Rent A Plane. All there now is is something called Block Time, wherein one licensed pilot can sell block time to another licensed pilot at cost, cannot make a profit.

Does that mean that if the owner of the airplane does not have a pilot license the owner can't sell block time?

The guy knew about the old history I talked about above, when anyone could rent a plane to a licensed pilot. It seems, as I said, that a change was made in an information circular published sometime around 1990 or so which said that aircraft rented to licensed pilots now had to be maintained to commercial standards.

So if the airplane is a homebuilt it must meet commercial standards?

Is an information circular a tool they can use to lay charges and asses a fine?

So that lasted until 1996, when the CARS came in and that whole thing just seemed to get left out. Very probably as a result of lobbying by the flying schools industry. Now, for example, you can't go for a TC ride in an aircraft unless your name is on the reg, or it is operated by a flying school.

There is no exemption in the CARS for renting airplanes to licensed pilots, nor is there any type of OC you can get specifically to do that. Pretty weird, but I guess it shows the power of the flying school lobby. It's like if you wanted to rent a car, you had to go to a driving school.

So basically they don't know what is legal and what is illegal?

That leaves them their kangaroo court and the ability to lay any charge that fits their agenda.

Interesting.

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:12 pm

Ya, its pretty weird, all right.

I think Budget Rent A Plane is a very good idea in the major population areas. It has quite a bit of business potential, especially where a company has a pilot qualified to rent and needs a machine for a couple of hours or days.

Its possible that if you rented without crew, you'd be kind of in the same category as leasing without crew, which isn't a commercial air service.

I don't know if they'd go after you or not if you tried to set one up. I'm not sure what the charge would be.

The weird thing is that you could set up some one guy flying school and rent pretty much anything. And for insurance purposes, Budget Rent A Plane would probably have to have a checkout with an instructor, so maybe that's the route. Just never bother with flying instruction. Or one student a year.

It seems that whatever type of license a flying school has, which is not an OC to my understanding, allows for airplane rentals. Or does it?

Hornblower · Post by **Hornblower** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:47 pm

I don’t know how you can make those assumptions, by reading the regs.

Anyone who owns an airplane (see section II of the cars for who qualifies to be an owner, … and they do not have to have a pilot’s licence) can rent the airplane to anyone he wants. Neither the renter or the rentee need to licenced to fly it, he can plant flowers in it if he wants.

How the person operates it, is what is subject to the operational rules. Obviously if the guy operates a commercial air service he will have to have an OC; if he flies it privately he does not. He can fly it himself, or hire a commercial pilot to fly it for him.

You do not need any additional authority to rent the aircraft, you do not need an OC, you do not need a FTU cert. you do not need insurance, you do not need nuthin’.

The only sticky bit is if you “knowingly” let someone do something illegal with the aircraft, like operate commercially without an OC, or fly it without insurance, you could be found liable by some holier than thou TC dude, under 8.4 of the Aeronautics Act. Although if you rent the aircraft to a private pilot for private use, you can really not be expected to follow him around all over the place to verify what he does with it. A well written rental agreement would be good defense in circumstances like that in my opinion (although I am not a lawyer).

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:57 pm

You do not need any additional authority to rent the aircraft, you do not need an OC, you do not need a FTU cert. you do not need insurance, you do not need nuthin’.

Exactly, you can rent anything you want as it is a " F U C K I N " " R E N T A L " business.

I have to stop reading this stuff because I'm getting as goofy as some of the posters here who are so afraid of TC they tremble at the very name.

Hornblower · Post by **Hornblower** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:08 pm

I take it then that your last series of questions were tongue-in-cheek?

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:11 pm

I take it then that your last series of questions were tongue-in-cheek?

Yes.

My fear hornblower is TC reads these forums and we don't want to give them new ideas on how to further strangle the industry.

Remember these people only have one agenda and that is to churn out more and more paper work and goofy rules.

Hornblower · Post by **Hornblower** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:21 pm

They already know the rules for the most part, and they have more than enough ideas already; so many in fact that they don't have time to use them all (equitably).

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:33 pm

Or how to agree on what the rules mean...ask ten TC inspectors what a rule means and you get ten different answers.....

.....and the frightening thing all ten can enforce their interpretation.....

Truly a fu.ked up government department.

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 12:23 am

Well you do need insurance for any aircraft in Canada. If you are going to fly it. The responsibility is on the owner, not the pilot.

No one rents an airplane to plant flowers in it. You don't hire a hooker to mow your lawn.

All of the legal responsibilities for an airplane are on the owner. If he rents it to someone who doesn't have a pilots licence and the thing crashes and harms property or people, the owner is going to be at the very headwaters of Shit Creek.

On the other hand, Hornblower, the issue is precisely that there are no regs anymore about this issue. Behind the scenes, we know the people who would raise a shitstorm about Budget Rent A Plane are the flying schools, although it may not be clear that they are authorized to rent planes.

Although rental of an airplane is a very obvious use, the absence of a clear directive as to how such an operation should proceed seems to be an admission that there are no restrictions, right now.

I think the answer I got from the Ontario TC guy this morning was simply that you can't rent your airplane unless its the Block Time exception and you can't make a profit at that. There is no application, no OC, nothing to rent airplanes. You simply can't do it. Although flying schools do.

But there is nothing that says it is illegal either.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:50 am

I think the answer I got from the Ontario TC guy this morning was simply that you can't rent your airplane unless its the Block Time exception and you can't make a profit at that. There is no application, no OC, nothing to rent airplanes. You simply can't do it. Although flying schools do.

But there is nothing that says it is illegal either.

What rule or regulation did that TC guy use to determine you can't make a profit from renting your own airplane?

How do they determine if you are making a profit?

What exactly do they consider " Block time ".

If it is not illegal how can they stop you from opening an airplane rental business?

Anyone from TCCA want to comment on this here?

Ogee · Post by **Ogee** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:47 am

Just got it from an expert at TC Vancouver.

Rental of an aircraft to licensed pilots is considered to be a commercial air service, but...

You don't need an OC or any other paperwork

The aircraft should be commercially registered
Obviously insured for rental use
It must be maintained to commercial standards by an AMO, which suggests that it would be a good idea to have a small maintenance manual, although apparently not required.
It cannot be used for private pilot license training

It can be used for advanced training of already licensed pilots. The rental company cannot provide the instructor. You can use the aircraft for any ride except a private pilot license ride.

If the renter is using an independent instructor for some training, that instructor should be cleared by the insurance company.

There will need to be checkouts for the insurance company. Its a grey area as to whether the rental company can provide that checkout guy, but the word is that you very probably can and can charge for the checkout on the same invoice as the first rental. Otherwise, you can have an independent pilot or pilots, probably instructor rated, that are approved by the insurance company. Any pilot that charges for checkout time must hold a minimum of a commercial pilot's license.

It has been suggested that its probably a good idea to write TC a letter outlining that you are proposing to set up Budget Rent A Plane and clarify this issue about checkouts. That way, if some higher up ever goes a bit loopy over it, you have your approval on paper.

If you need any help with the letter, PM me. I do stuff like that for a living.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 12:29 pm

Just got it from an expert at TC Vancouver.

Rental of an aircraft to licensed pilots is considered to be a commercial air service, but...

You don't need an OC or any other paperwork

True.

The aircraft should be commercially registered
Obviously insured for rental use

" Should be" means it is not mandatory.

It must be maintained to commercial standards by an AMO,

It makes perfect sense to require the airplane be maintained to commercial standards, even though it is privately registered........but why an AMO, what is wrong with an AME?

which suggests that it would be a good idea to have a small maintenance manual, although apparently not required.

As long as the maintenance is done to the manufacturers specs and the AME follows all the legal requirements why would you open yourself up to the minefield of paper work that would ensue with TC?

It cannot be used for private pilot license training

DUH.....

It can be used for advanced training of already licensed pilots.

Of course it can.

The rental company cannot provide the instructor.

Where does it say an individual must be a company?

You can use the aircraft for any ride except a private pilot license ride.

Good.

If the renter is using an independent instructor for some training, that instructor should be cleared by the insurance company.

Of course to do anything else would be stupid.

There will need to be checkouts for the insurance company. Its a grey area as to whether the rental company can provide that checkout guy, but the word is that you very probably can and can charge for the checkout on the same invoice as the first rental. Otherwise, you can have an independent pilot or pilots, probably instructor rated, that are approved by the insurance company. Any pilot that charges for checkout time must hold a minimum of a commercial pilot's license.

There is no requirement to be a licensed instructor to do insurance company check rides.

It has been suggested that its probably a good idea to write TC a letter outlining that you are proposing to set up Budget Rent A Plane and clarify this issue about checkouts. That way, if some higher up ever goes a bit loopy over it, you have your approval on paper.

That would be the last thing on earth I would do...I've already cleared up these issues with the top person in Transport Canada ( Merlin Preuss's boss. ) and I have tons of paper work and independent witnesses ( note more than one ) to confirm that the Director General Transport Canada could not find any legal way to stop me from doing select flight training without a OC.

If you need any help with the letter, PM me. I do stuff like that for a living.

You are a braver man than me, having spent some years writing letters to those pricks I would need a frontal lobotomy to ever want to do that again.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 12:35 pm

Ogee, the foregoing is not meant to demean your post.

In fact I appreciate your input in this issue.

You and I are in two different worlds, it seems you can still work within the system in Canada as far as TCCA is concerned, however Dave Nowzek spent an unbelievable amount of your taxpayers dollars to make sure I can't work in flight training in Canada.

But the coc.sucker has a bit more work to do yet because I will instruct in spite of his efforts.

So thanks for the info it was good stuff.

. .