Hopefully the serial horse rapist from yesterday doesn't find out about this idea

It's a bird? It's a ... plane? Eh, it's probably a muslin terrist, shoot it down boys.

I want to be a paid-pilot when I grow up.

/stupid use of hyphen

The cranes, of course, are not permitted to use personal electronic devices below 10,000 feet.

I am not sure I understand what difference paying the pilots is making here.

Listen, these pilots knew the applicable FARs, and chose to violate them. They're getting a good deal, here.

That's pretty cool. Hopefully some asstard won't chase them into the street so his buddy can run them over.

As a non-expert the rules seem reasonable. The dudes in charge of this project should probably have done their homework a little better.

baorao: I am not sure I understand what difference paying the pilots is making here.

The rules allow for hobbyist flying. If you're being paid to fly, you're most likely trying to do an end run around the rules.

/IANAAE

GAT_00: Someone breaks the rules, FAA grants special waiver. FAA are the bad guys for enforcing rules.

Right.

You've not dealt with the FAA much I assume.

They are much more of the shoot first, ask... fark asking questions, style of government.

I've had an easier time convincing the military to let me put new explosive designs on aircraft than I have had with getting the most mundane waivers past the FAA.

It was literally easier for me to incorporate explosives into a design than it was to do the same for a lithium battery of the type you find in a hearing aid.

The rules imposed by the FAA are crippling on new tech.

baorao: I am not sure I understand what difference paying the pilots is making here.

It helps if you read the initial story (new window) :
"FAA regulations say only pilots with commercial pilot licenses can fly for hire. The pilots of Operation Migration's plane are instead licensed to fly sport aircraft because that's the category of aircraft that the group's small, open plane with its rear propeller and bird-like wings falls under. FAA regulations also prohibit sport aircraft - which are sometimes of exotic design - from being flown to benefit a business or charity.

The rules are aimed, in part, at preventing businesses or charities from taking passengers for joyrides in sometimes risky planes."

Jument: The dudes in charge of this project should probably have done their homework a little better.

The volunteer pilots should have KNOWN better.

baorao: I am not sure I understand what difference paying the pilots is making here.

I think the rule is - one doesn't need a commercial license to fly "sport" aircraft (under 250lbs, no passengers, unpaid pilot); however, once you start paying the pilot, it becomes a "commercial" flight.

The FAA doesn't kid around when it comes to licensing commercial pilots/flights, but they made an exception in this case, which seems pretty reasonable under the circumstances.

gott-damn ERROR 500 unfetchable/read-timeout.

whatever; you can search WaPo's crappy website (*that they make substantial changes to every fortnight, or less, losing usability the whole way) for "FAA" and find the story from two days ago.

mekkab: The rules are aimed, in part, at preventing businesses or charities from taking passengers for joyrides in sometimes risky planes."

okay. that makes more sense.

Just keep looking out for that leg sweep.

kim jong-un: GAT_00: Someone breaks the rules, FAA grants special waiver. FAA are the bad guys for enforcing rules.

Right.

You've not dealt with the FAA much I assume.

They are much more of the shoot first, ask... fark asking questions, style of government.

I've had an easier time convincing the military to let me put new explosive designs on aircraft than I have had with getting the most mundane waivers past the FAA.

It was literally easier for me to incorporate explosives into a design than it was to do the same for a lithium battery of the type you find in a hearing aid.

The rules imposed by the FAA are crippling on new tech.

And the rules imposed on pilots (even General Aviation) are pretty much geared towards type-A perfectionists. Or at least, those are the types that seem to do well with all the damn FARs.

/license plate found at work in the DC metro area: H8ADIZ
//must be a pilot!

Wake me when I can keep my iPod turned on while taxiing the runway and carry more than 3.5 ounces of a given liquid in a container on a plane. Also stop threatening me with gate rape

Now, can we get a plane designed to drive Canada geese into a giant fan?

My issue is: Paying the guy doesn't change what kind of aircraft it is, or what its capabilities are. He's still flying a light sport aircraft. He has a license to fly light sport aircraft. The only issue is that money is changing hands and the FAA isn't getting a share.

The converse of this is like somebody slapping a "not-for-hire" sign on the side of his Peterbilt, and now "because he's not being paid" it somehow confers upon him the ability to drive an 18-wheeler without a "commercial drivers' license". Note: This is done all the time for 48-foot over-26,000 lb pleasure vehicles. Gramps can drive a huge RV on his regular passenger vehicle license, even though it's the same chassis as a commercial bus that he would need a "B" CDL + passenger endorsement to drive.

mekkab: baorao: I am not sure I understand what difference paying the pilots is making here.

It helps if you read the initial story (new window) :
"FAA regulations say only pilots with commercial pilot licenses can fly for hire. The pilots of Operation Migration's plane are instead licensed to fly sport aircraft because that's the category of aircraft that the group's small, open plane with its rear propeller and bird-like wings falls under. FAA regulations also prohibit sport aircraft - which are sometimes of exotic design - from being flown to benefit a business or charity.

The rules are aimed, in part, at preventing businesses or charities from taking passengers for joyrides in sometimes risky planes."

Jument: The dudes in charge of this project should probably have done their homework a little better.

The volunteer pilots should have KNOWN better.

If they were truly all volunteer, the rules would not apply. In that case, they would not be paid for flying.

Why the FAA is involved with the salaries of pilots to begin with is insane. I was just having this conversation with my business partner a few weeks ago. We could easily expand our operation to employ 20 or so extra people, but we've done that before and after we went through all the crap with payroll, taxes, and workers comp it we ended up making only about 10% more but we both worked at least 2x as many hours. What ever happened to the day where I could just say "here is $100 to paint my fence" If you don't pay your taxes or get hurt its not my problem, I'm simply offering you something of value I have for something of value you have. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED AT ALL!!!

FarkerinMN: Why the FAA is involved with the salaries of pilots to begin with is insane.

... reading comprehension; you need it. They are involved with strictly regulating Commercial Aviation; not with the salaries of pilots.


/If United and TWA hadn't crashed over the Grand Canyon, things would be different.

FarkerinMN: Why the FAA is involved with the salaries of pilots to begin with is insane. I was just having this conversation with my business partner a few weeks ago. We could easily expand our operation to employ 20 or so extra people, but we've done that before and after we went through all the crap with payroll, taxes, and workers comp it we ended up making only about 10% more but we both worked at least 2x as many hours. What ever happened to the day where I could just say "here is $100 to paint my fence" If you don't pay your taxes or get hurt its not my problem, I'm simply offering you something of value I have for something of value you have. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED AT ALL!!!

Thats because the general public is not sufficiently qualified to judge the skills and abilities of a pilot that they are trusting their life (or cargo) to.

The qualifications and experience required to be a private pilot is enough to let you go out and fly around hopefully, but quite possibly, kill yourself. Luckily, the airplanes you'll be flying are small enough and theres enough space out there that hopefully the chances of you injuring anyone/anything else in the process are pretty small.

Therefore, to be a pilot available for hire, you and your aircraft are held to much higher standards (though, still not that high). The FAA requires you to have ~6x the flight experience to be a basic commercial pilot as a private pilot, with a correspondingly greater and more diverse amount of training. The aircraft you're flying faces stricter standards as well.

They don't care at all what you're being paid. They just care that if you're being compensated, that you're trained to a higher level and flying a higher quality airplane.

GAT_00: Someone breaks the rules, FAA grants special waiver. FAA are the bad guys for enforcing rules.

Right.

FAA are the bad guys for creating thousands of extremely restrictive rules (often with dubious justifications) then being a dick about enforcing them even when common sense suggests they should act otherwise.

/Gustapo of the skies

Not sure why they got into a big flap over this in the first place.

95629: FarkerinMN: Why the FAA is involved with the salaries of pilots to begin with is insane. I was just having this conversation with my business partner a few weeks ago. We could easily expand our operation to employ 20 or so extra people, but we've done that before and after we went through all the crap with payroll, taxes, and workers comp it we ended up making only about 10% more but we both worked at least 2x as many hours. What ever happened to the day where I could just say "here is $100 to paint my fence" If you don't pay your taxes or get hurt its not my problem, I'm simply offering you something of value I have for something of value you have. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED AT ALL!!!

Thats because the general public is not sufficiently qualified to judge the skills and abilities of a pilot that they are trusting their life (or cargo) to.

The qualifications and experience required to be a private pilot is enough to let you go out and fly around hopefully, but quite possibly, kill yourself. Luckily, the airplanes you'll be flying are small enough and theres enough space out there that hopefully the chances of you injuring anyone/anything else in the process are pretty small.

Therefore, to be a pilot available for hire, you and your aircraft are held to much higher standards (though, still not that high). The FAA requires you to have ~6x the flight experience to be a basic commercial pilot as a private pilot, with a correspondingly greater and more diverse amount of training. The aircraft you're flying faces stricter standards as well.

They don't care at all what you're being paid. They just care that if you're being compensated, that you're trained to a higher level and flying a higher quality airplane.

One of my complaints is that I would love to have the option to get a license that would allow me to load up a single bag, my wife, and myself into a small single engine aircraft and make a quick flight in the 200 mile range.

It's being able to have my wife ride with me that is important, I'm not charging for her, and she knows my qualifications.

I don't need the extra permissions that come from the standard license, and the cost of going that route is prohibitive to me.

It really gets under my skin because I'm colorblind. Not an issue for the flying I want to do, but the extra 'benefits' of the general license are barred to me. So I have to spend money on qualifications I'm not allowed to use in order to have a single nonpaying passenger.

FAA regs are WAY to focused on the professional pilot aspect of flying.

cr7pilot: I'm an FAA Aviation Safety Inspector, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies...

by all means harass the airlines all you like, just leave us GA guys alone

kim jong-un: 95629: FarkerinMN: Why the FAA is involved with the salaries of pilots to begin with is insane. I was just having this conversation with my business partner a few weeks ago. We could easily expand our operation to employ 20 or so extra people, but we've done that before and after we went through all the crap with payroll, taxes, and workers comp it we ended up making only about 10% more but we both worked at least 2x as many hours. What ever happened to the day where I could just say "here is $100 to paint my fence" If you don't pay your taxes or get hurt its not my problem, I'm simply offering you something of value I have for something of value you have. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED AT ALL!!!

Thats because the general public is not sufficiently qualified to judge the skills and abilities of a pilot that they are trusting their life (or cargo) to.

The qualifications and experience required to be a private pilot is enough to let you go out and fly around hopefully, but quite possibly, kill yourself. Luckily, the airplanes you'll be flying are small enough and theres enough space out there that hopefully the chances of you injuring anyone/anything else in the process are pretty small.

Therefore, to be a pilot available for hire, you and your aircraft are held to much higher standards (though, still not that high). The FAA requires you to have ~6x the flight experience to be a basic commercial pilot as a private pilot, with a correspondingly greater and more diverse amount of training. The aircraft you're flying faces stricter standards as well.

They don't care at all what you're being paid. They just care that if you're being compensated, that you're trained to a higher level and flying a higher quality airplane.

One of my complaints is that I would love to have the option to get a license that would allow me to load up a single bag, my wife, and myself into a small single engine aircraft and make a quick flight in the 200 mile range.

It's being ab ...

Huh?

Sounds like a Sport Pilot certificate would be right up your alley.

/Comm ASEL, CFI-A

This news affects me less directly than I had hoped it would.

algrant33: My issue is: Paying the guy doesn't change what kind of aircraft it is, or what its capabilities are. He's still flying a light sport aircraft. He has a license to fly light sport aircraft. The only issue is that money is changing hands and the FAA isn't getting a share.

The converse of this is like somebody slapping a "not-for-hire" sign on the side of his Peterbilt, and now "because he's not being paid" it somehow confers upon him the ability to drive an 18-wheeler without a "commercial drivers' license". Note: This is done all the time for 48-foot over-26,000 lb pleasure vehicles. Gramps can drive a huge RV on his regular passenger vehicle license, even though it's the same chassis as a commercial bus that he would need a "B" CDL + passenger endorsement to drive.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Certification for aircraft type is completely separate from certification to fly for profit. Private and commercial pilots require the exact same ratings to fly the same types of aircraft. The only difference is that one is entitled to be paid for flying those aircraft, while the other will (rightfully) get in huge trouble if he tries to get paid.

Also, a commercial pilot certification has nothing to do with profit for the FAA. It's to stop brand-new 50-hour private pilots from throwing up their shingle, calling themselves a charter airline business, and killing people left and right because they have no clue what they're doing.

A commercial pilot's license requires a higher degree of experience and skill than a private license. It's to protect the interests of the people who are paying them to fly, not to generate revenue for the government. You wouldn't trust your life with an uncertified doctor, or your property with a lawyer who's never passed the bar. The same principle applies to commercial pilots. They are required to demonstrate a minimum level of competency before they are entitled to be paid for their services.

came hot gaping pictures of 12 year old Anna Paquin, leaving disappointed.


/What? I was 10 at the time that movie came out!

Funny how the truly simple solution - have the pilots donate their time rather than insist on being paid - is overlooked. They REALLY couldn't find anyone wanting to get free hours? As others have mentioned the rules are there for very good reasons.

Oh, and "It really gets under my skin because I'm colorblind. Not an issue for the flying I want to do, but the extra 'benefits' of the general license are barred to me. So I have to spend money on qualifications I'm not allowed to use in order to have a single nonpaying passenger." - This couldn't have anything to do with the simple fact that certain vital forms of communication, oh, like the landing guidepath, light signals from the tower, etc. are color dependant has nothing to do with it. Oh, no. It is the evil FAA.

cr7pilot: Voiceofreason01: cr7pilot: I'm an FAA Aviation Safety Inspector, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies...

by all means harass the airlines all you like, just leave us GA guys alone

Oh, I do. I work in a 121 office. We're co-located with a FSDO though, so I hear a lot of the stories. While I agree that we have a lot of rules that can be a challenge to someone just trying to do their thing, we also keep a lot of people out of the sky that have no business being there.

Believe me, we're too busy dealing with the idiots to just randomly harass the rest of the people doing a good job.

In all seriousness most of the rules are there for good reason and it's a good thing for everybody that the FAA is there to keep an eye on things

dethmagnetic: You wouldn't trust your life with an uncertified doctor, or your property with a lawyer who's never passed the bar. The same principle applies to commercial pilots. They are required to demonstrate a minimum level of competency before they are entitled to be paid for their services.

I get your basic point, but this argument is invalid because there's no second seat. By paying this guy to go up in a LSA, I would not be risking anyone's life except the guy holding the license. Because he's playing mother hen to a pack of geese or farkall, he's likely not carrying any substantial equipment, and definitely none of mine.

The nature of the flight makes this a good candidate for exception, and apparently the FAA seems to have agreed with me.

cr7pilot: algrant33: dethmagnetic: You wouldn't trust your life with an uncertified doctor, or your property with a lawyer who's never passed the bar. The same principle applies to commercial pilots. They are required to demonstrate a minimum level of competency before they are entitled to be paid for their services.

I get your basic point, but this argument is invalid because there's no second seat. By paying this guy to go up in a LSA, I would not be risking anyone's life except the guy holding the license. Because he's playing mother hen to a pack of geese or farkall, he's likely not carrying any substantial equipment, and definitely none of mine.

The nature of the flight makes this a good candidate for exception, and apparently the FAA seems to have agreed with me.

Yes, but unlike a doctor or a lawyer, this guy can crash his LSA into your house or a school playground. There IS risk by allowing someone to operate any aircraft. Just because there's no second seat doesn't mean other people can't be directly harmed by this person's actions. (Utah 2009 (new window))

I don't think it's so much as the FAA has agreed with you as it is 1) political pressure to entertain a waiver and 2) the ability to assess the operation and the pilots during the period they were grounded. Had they requested this ahead of time, they probably could have got it if they'd laid out a proper risk management plan to the FAA and avoided the drama.

He DOES hold a LSA rating, so, he'd be up in the air anyway if he weren't drawing pay.

Does the FAA allow a private pilot's flight rental and fuel to be subsidized by another party (direct expense reimbursement in lieu of payment)?

algrant33: Does the FAA allow a private pilot's flight rental and fuel to be subsidized by another party (direct expense reimbursement in lieu of payment)?

The pilot has to pay at least their pro rata share (so if there's 2 people in the aircraft, the pilot has to pay at least half).

joness0154: Huh?

Sounds like a Sport Pilot certificate would be right up your alley.

/Comm ASEL, CFI-A

It's close, and that's probably why it pisses me off. There are a few extra 'catches' that make it not the best option for me. (Availability of aircraft: I have access to aircraft that fall just outside of the 'sport' category) Trust me, I'm glad they created the category and it's a start, but behind it all is the old-style FAA, and if you do anything to scratch that veneer and expose the beast underneath, it can be a pain in the ass.

Dealing with an agency like the FAA is vastly different when it's your job. It's the same as commercial driver's licenses, when you do it for your livelihood, it just becomes part of your job. They have treated private pilots too much like 'pre flying-career' licenses for a long time, and their agency is designed to manage it from that perspective. Again, that veneer aspect. If everything 'works' it works. But when you become the outlier case, it becomes a paperwork/approval/wait/uncertainty fiasco that should have been worked out of the recreational path a long time ago.

I suppose my major problem is that I dealt with the FAA years ago. I'm quite sure that the Sport Pilot License option may fit what I'm looking for fairly well, but years of bad experiences just caused me to toss up my hands and call the whole thing quits. Well not quits, I've designed quite a few bits of avionics and some work on autonomous air vehicles. So that opened me up to another aspect of FAA frustration.

cr7pilot: Yes, but unlike a doctor or a lawyer, this guy can crash his LSA into your house or a school playground. There IS risk by allowing someone to operate any aircraft. Just because there's no second seat doesn't mean other people can't be directly harmed by this person's actions. (Utah 2009 (new window))

Isn't that the FAA equivalent of 'Stranger Danger' when trying to do risk assessments of how to keep your kids safe?

algrant33: The converse of this is like somebody slapping a "not-for-hire" sign on the side of his Peterbilt, and now "because he's not being paid" it somehow confers upon him the ability to drive an 18-wheeler without a "commercial drivers' license". Note: This is done all the time for 48-foot over-26,000 lb pleasure vehicles. Gramps can drive a huge RV on his regular passenger vehicle license, even though it's the same chassis as a commercial bus that he would need a "B" CDL + passenger endorsement to drive

What you describe is true, but the flip side of the coin is that getting a CDL is way easier than getting a pilot's license. I drove a school bus for a year at a school program, and I got a class B CDL + passenger endorsement + school bus endorsement with about zero amount of effort or training. The fact is that driving a large passenger vehicle really isn't all that different from driving other vehicles, so long as you're aware of the size difference and drive smart.

Granted, it helps if you have some idea of how motor vehicles work. The hardest part for me was scoring high enough on the equipment recognition part of the road test. There are a ton of easy points under the hood if you can understand how the engine, drivetrain, steering linkages, and suspension works.

If I recall correctly, I didn't even know I needed the passenger endorsement in addition to the school bus endorsement and passed it on the spot without studying. It was mostly pretty obvious, such as: "When you're letting people off of the bus, how far from the curb should you be?" It wasn't exactly rocket science. The school bus endorsement section was basically made sure that you can transport children to and from school without killing them or having them commandeer the bus when you weren't looking.

The most challenging part for me was the medical physical, they said I had high blood pressure.

Of course, all of this goes out the window once you start driving more sophisticated vehicles with air brakes, semi-trailers, etc. My bus sat 46 people and had a GVWR of I think 24000 lbs, and it felt very much like driving a large box van, but much longer.