passengers on phot flights

[FLCFI]

anyone else think this a stupid idea?

[PhotoFlyer]

A passenger on a photo flight? Since I don't like taking the photos myself while I'm flying, I think a passenger is a good idea. If you mean a passenger in addition to the photographer then I don't see any problem assuming the aircraft can carry more than 1 pilot/pax. Maybe a you could post a little more detail, and we can post more specific information.

[FLCFI]

Well common sense should tell you that the pilot and photographer would be on board and that there would be more than 2 seats on the ac. My question is is it worth the added weight and liability just to please a button pusher? Is there an incentive? What do you tell the FAA if there is an accident?

[Guest pokey]

Well common sense should tell you that the pilot and photographer would be on board and that there would be more than 2 seats on the ac.

 

of korse ! DUH !

 

BTW? whats a "phot flight"

[PhotoFlyer]

Well common sense should tell you that the pilot and photographer would be on board and that there would be more than 2 seats on the ac. My question is is it worth the added weight and liability just to please a button pusher? Is there an incentive? What do you tell the FAA if there is an accident?

 

As for weight, it depends. If it's the middle of winter at sea level in an R-44 or Jetranger, I wouldn't be too concerned about the extra weight. If it's 35C at 5000 MSL in the 44 or 206, I would say it depends on how much fuel is needed to complete the flight. Or if it would adversely effect the performance needed (i.e. hover oge at a safe height).

 

As for liability, I'm no lawyer, but I don't see any difference in the liability unless the passenger is unrelated to the photo flight. For example, if the photographer is shooting a construction site to keep a record of construction progress and the other pax is the foreman who needs an Ariel view of the site, I don't see it as a problem. If a person off the street wanted to ride along and share the expense with the photographer, I would say no. The reason is that a photography flight isn't a particularly risky flight, but there is some risk involved that there wouldn't be if it was simply a ride.

 

Is there an incentive? If it doesn't effect the safety of the flight, then the incentive is positive customer service experience.

 

What do you tell the FAA? You shouldn't tell them anything, unless the extra PAX caused the accident somehow. You don't need to explain why each pax was on board. Nor should they be concerned. It isn't a violation of the FARs to carry an additional pax during a photo flight as long as you meet the requirements of the part you are operating under.

Edited March 12, 2007 by PhotoFlyer

[JDHelicopterPilot]

There may only be 2 seats. I have used the R-22 on several photo flights. Depends on the mission.

[joker]

What a strange thread.

 

What would it matter if a pssenger jumped in on a photo flight?

 

The only problems I can envisage is possibly where the passenger pays for a tour and the photographer pays for a photo ride. You would have to inform both parties to ensure they both felt they were getting what they paid for.

 

Another possible conflict could be a breach of 91.113 or part 119 where the flight accidentally becomes something other than a Part 91 operation. I'm not at home with references or FAR to hand so can't specify.

 

Safety-wise and risk-wise I can't see anything wrong with someone jumping in for the ride, so long as they were properly briefed as to the nature of the flight.

 

Joker

[Falcon1184]

Well common sense should tell you that the pilot and photographer would be on board and that there would be more than 2 seats on the ac. My question is is it worth the added weight and liability just to please a button pusher? Is there an incentive? What do you tell the FAA if there is an accident?

 

If theres an accident, you tell the FAA he was a passenger. What difference does it make? Is it worth the extra weight and liability? Thats up to the pilot, or owner of the company you fly for. I don't see where this is going.....