Originally Posted by
WEACLRS
My understanding is this is Private Carriage and would operate under part 91. Am I wrong?
If it was Private Carriage in a large or turbine multiengine aircraft it would operate under part 91 subpart F. If it was Private Carriage in an airplane with pax seats of 20 or more or a payload capacity of 6000 lbs or more, then it would be governed by part 121, 125, or 135.
***
Here is the advisory circular that talks to Common Carriage vs. Private Carriage. It's a little dated and the specific regulation numbers that are quoted have changed, but the discussion stills holds. It talks about the FAA's point of view when it comes to "holding out".
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu.../AC120-12A.pdf
The statement in the circular about private carriage that has gotten pilots into trouble is "
...Private carriage for hire is carriage for one or several selected customers, generally on a long-term basis. The number of contracts must not be too great, otherwise it implies a willingness to make a contract with anybody..."
Good conversation. Thanks.
Yes the AC is
seriously out of date.
You also point out the primary problem with the "small private carriage as Part 91" issue. They probably exist, but I have never seen an FAA Legal opinion or NTSB case that looked at one and said, "yup, that was private carriage." Even with small group of customers, the question becomes, "oh yeah, so how did they hear about you?
Ferrying and some of the other 119.1(j) exemptions are interesting since many of them don't seem fit the definition of carriage to begin with (carrying persons or property for compensation or hire). I sometimes get the feeling that they are there (a) mostly to avoid questions or (b) to cover situations in which passengers or property are being carried.
Examples of both points:
(a) Ferrying Part 135 and even Part 121 aircraft is a Part 91 operation (you can see a lot of FAA Legal opinions, mostly on duty hour issues, that refer to it), even though, because of seats or weight, they are not covered by 119.1(j)
(b) The aerial photography exemption only needs to apply when the airplane is being used as a platform for the folks taking the pictures (carrying persons or property for compensation); if the pilot is the photographer, it's not even a commercial operation to begin with. The pilot doesn't even need a commercial certificate - a private certificate is sufficient.
This is a really interesting topic. I guess it's why I'm making my first posts here in it.