CPL Pilot doing commercial work in a 19- rego aircraft - is it legal ?

[Xavier]

Hi all,

 

the question is in the title, is it legal to do commercial work like aerial photography in a home build 19- rego aircraft with the pilot having a CASA Commercial License ?

 

Apology if the subject has already been covered.

 

Xavier

 

 

[SDQDI]

I would think not.

 

Actually I thought that 24 registered were also limited in their commercial endeavours to basically pilot training but I am too lazy to look up our manuals for the actual wording so I could be way off.

 

 

[Yenn]

I think it would be legal to do aerial photography from any aircraft, but you could not charge for the plane if it was an Raaus plane.

 

That means a CPL hires or owns an RAAus plane, goes and takes the photos, then sells them, but he cannot add the cost of the plane to the photos he sells. I did this years ago and I was not a Cpl. I just had an agreement to produce certain photos for a certain price.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Hi all,the question is in the title, is it legal to do commercial work like aerial photography in a home build 19- rego aircraft with the pilot having a CASA Commercial License ?

 

Apology if the subject has already been covered.

 

Xavier

Short answer. NO

 

read def of AWK (includes photography)

 

RAA limited to PVT only, apart from training.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I'd suggest you ask the CPL holder. If they say yes, they obviously don't know what the privileges of their licence permit.

 

CAR 206 (commercial purposes) is a good place to start, you will also need to hold an AOC (this may change under the regulation reform program).

 

 

[Ultralights]

its sad, but i cant help but laugh at the stupidity of taking photos from an aircraft and selling them, being controlled by CASA.... what has CASA got to do with what happens to a photo and who took it? its not an aviation activity, its casa meddling in external business outside of aviation, as a passenger on an airliner, i can take a photo, sell it no problem.. if im the pilot, oh, big NO, unless CASA says so.

 

 

[KRviator]

Worse still if you as a PPL/RPC holder take a photographer-friend flying and they take the photos!

 

 

[frank marriott]

It might be easier to "understand" (whether you personally agree with the regs or not) if you look from an intent perspective - to seperate PVT flying from any commercial activity.

 

For recreational flying we certainly do not want the costs applied that are involved with running a commercial operation - been there done that.

 

 

[facthunter]

When a CPL flys a 19 registered plane, he/she would have to have an RAAus issued certificate and be financial with the organisation the plane flys under.

 

Commercial means for profit, essentially, and I think that is where the line is drawn, otherwise all of the selfies and visual records ( by Go Pro mobile phone etc) we do of our flying would be illegal. This would be stupid as if there is an incident all that visual stuff would be very helpful and we take out right to photograph everything around us as "given" (excluding defined security risk items and sites) Nev

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Hi all, the question is in the title, is it legal to do commercial work like aerial photography in a home build 19- rego aircraft with the pilot having a CASA Commercial License ?

 

Apology if the subject has already been covered.

 

Xavier

No it can not be done. If it is being done then that person is cheating a legal operator, who has paid top dollar to get the approvals.

 

 

[Xavier]

Thank you all for your responses,

 

It looks like the aircraft has to be VH registered and therefore not under RA-Aus and after reading CAR 206 and the AOC requirements is that you need an AOC to do "Aerial surveying" under CASA rules.

 

I was wondering if a VH experimental aircraft would qualify but there is a list of aircraft types to apply for the AOC and I don't think that a VH Experimental aircraft would be suitable, I will try to ask CASA.

 

 

[facthunter]

VH Exp might be the most suitable category for specialist work. Getting mods approved for "normal" VH is time consuming/practically impossible. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

It may or may not be legal, but I don't know how legal it is to take vertical or near vertical photos from an aeroplane without government approval. When I started flying it was illegal to take photos from a plane except at near horizontal angles. I hope those regs have been superceded, if not most of us would have broken the law. I think the reasoning was to stop foreign spying. Ridiculous i know as I bet the Russians have better maps available to them than we do in Qld. Where I live the local 1:25000 map, latest edition is early seventies. The local dam bears no relation on the map to what is on the ground and towns have multiplied many times in size.

 

 

[turboplanner]

It may or may not be legal, but I don't know how legal it is to take vertical or near vertical photos from an aeroplane without government approval. When I started flying it was illegal to take photos from a plane except at near horizontal angles. I hope those regs have been superceded, if not most of us would have broken the law. I think the reasoning was to stop foreign spying. Ridiculous i know as I bet the Russians have better maps available to them than we do in Qld. Where I live the local 1:25000 map, latest edition is early seventies. The local dam bears no relation on the map to what is on the ground and towns have multiplied many times in size.

Those days have gone.

Today, apart from any satellite facilities you might get access to, in the Planning industry the monthly overhead photography is so good that a backyard BBQ is identifiable, and sheds, properties can be scaled. It's possible to set the view on a single property and scroll through a few years, with additional sheds etc appearing as development takes place.

 

As an example of where this is used, it stopped a lot of the illicit tree felling in western Qld.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

We used to take turnpoint photos at gliding competitions just to prove we had been there. The photo had to be "in sector" which was past the turnpoint looking back. The nearer to vertical the less distance you had to go past the point.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

The whole thing is anachronistic really. I suspect ( with no particular proof) the whole concept of photography will end up separated from all other commercial or for reward activities. the fact that cameras and videos are ubiquitous in everything from UAVs to recreational aircraft and to private GA aircraft through to commercial GA aircraft means now that photos and videos get taken by lots of people in lots of situations and may or may not end up being a source of reward either immediately or later. Something taken legally today may be deemed illegal tomorrow depending on what happens well after the flight.

 

Strictly now if you take a video while flying and for example post it to you tube you can be both legal or illegal depending on the actions of others. If you have a you tube account you can link it to advertising. Those annoying ads that get played at the beginning of the clip.

 

These you-tube "for payment" schemes - If no one actually watches an ad all the way through you get nothing so it would be legal but if they watch the ad for the full duration then you are illegal as you get a small return.

 

Also if someone else takes your legally acquired photo or video or one they took legally while in your aircraft and later uses it for profit then the video becomes illegal. But it may only affect you well afterwards and by actions of others over which you have no control.

 

 

[Downunder]

Hi all,the question is in the title, is it legal to do commercial work like aerial photography in a home build 19- rego aircraft with the pilot having a CASA Commercial License ?

Apology if the subject has already been covered.

 

Xavier

I think an important point here would be whether you were taking a paying passenger/photographer or not in an RAA aircraft.

 

This would not be allowed.

 

As far as "for profit" goes. Plenty of "for profit" organisations don't make any money and plenty of "non-profit" or not-for-profit organisations DO make plenty of money. Maybe it depends how good your accountant is......

 

 

[Xavier]

The idea would be to do some surveys (Vegetation Mapping, Controlled burn fuel check, Cultural Mapping, Feral Animal surveys, ...) over Aboriginal Land ( with permission of the traditional owners) for indigenous rangers or land owner.

 

So just me in the plane loaded with sensors and GPS cameras or with just one passenger (traditional owner or ranger) collecting GIS data.

 

A specific area would required X hours of flying at $Y per hour.

 

But after reading the posts and the regulations it looks like I need a CPL with AOC and a VH aircraft.

 

I believe that aircraft like Foxbats, Savannahs or Tecnams are more suitable and economical then typical single engine type Cessna.

 

 

[Jabiru7252]

My insurance says my plane is covered for business or pleasure. I guess business is commercial?

 

 

[Jaba-who]

My insurance says my plane is covered for business or pleasure. I guess business is commercial?

This usually means for the purposes of the business of the owner/pilot stuff like transport from one job to another, transport of plant and equipment owned by the owner or pilot not for actual commercial activities like transporting passengers or freight owned by a third party.

 

 

[KRviator]

I have had a look and can't seem to find it, does anyone know, or know where it may be found, the CAsA definition of "Aerial Photography"? I'm interested to know if it exclusively refers to activity performed by the PIC, or passengers as well.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I have had a look and can't seem to find it, does anyone know, or know where it may be found, the CAsA definition of "Aerial Photography"? I'm interested to know if it exclusively refers to activity performed by the PIC, or passengers as well.

Try CAR 7 (d) ; : Private operations (With the rash of rule changes I am only guessing this is still current)

 

(iv) aerial photography where no remuneration is received by the pilot or the owner of the aircraft or by any person or organisation on whose behalf the photography is conducted;

 

 

[440032]

Almost got it.

 

CAR 2 (7) (d) (iv) actually.

 

 

[Yenn]

Very hard to define commercial. I used to use a C172 with the window open for photographic work.Very good for the job too.

 

I ferried workers from Rocky, back to Brisbane at the end of a job, I didn't charge them anything so it was not a commercial flight, Our employer covered 3/4 of the cost as there were 3 of them.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Very hard to define commercial. I used to use a C172 with the window open for photographic work.Very good for the job too.I ferried workers from Rocky, back to Brisbane at the end of a job, I didn't charge them anything so it was not a commercial flight, Our employer covered 3/4 of the cost as there were 3 of them.

Of course the only time a definition will be tested is in a court room. I prefer to stay well clear of any grey areas having been a witness in court and seeing how things pan out. It seems the side with the largest bucket of money is usually correct!