BFR in an RV that's not really transition training?

[DonFromTX]

This struck me as odd, not being able to give a BFR in your plane.
I recently sent for a copy of a LODA for someone I knew, and found NO REFERENCE whatever to a BFR requirement nor any prohibition against giving a BFR. Is this normal practice, or does it just strike each FSDO differently each day of the week?

[quote=TimO;1250391]I have a LODA (authorization from the FAA) to do transition training in the RV-14. Last year I went thru the process. I'm sure that there is at least a SMALL chance that some people would have different results than I did, but, in my case doing a Flight Review in the RV-14 not all all do-able.

As part of my authorization I cannot even give transition training unless the pilot ALREADY has a current "BFR".

[BobTurner]

[quote=DonFromTX;1259135]This struck me as odd, not being able to give a BFR in your plane.
I recently sent for a copy of a LODA for someone I knew, and found NO REFERENCE whatever to a BFR requirement nor any prohibition against giving a BFR. Is this normal practice, or does it just strike each FSDO differently each day of the week?

Originally Posted by TimO

I have a LODA (authorization from the FAA) to do transition training in the RV-14. Last year I went thru the process. I'm sure that there is at least a SMALL chance that some people would have different results than I did, but, in my case doing a Flight Review in the RV-14 not all all do-able.

As part of my authorization I cannot even give transition training unless the pilot ALREADY has a current "BFR".

The FAA?s position is quite clear: an EAB airplane may not be used for compensation. They will issue a waiver (LODA) specifically for transition training only because it cannot realistically be done in anything other than an RV. Every LODA I?ve seen says ?transition training only?. Now there is the question, ?If during transition training we satisfactorly accomplish all the elements of a Flight Review, may I (as a cfi) endorse the pilot?s logbook as Flight Review given?? My LODA says ?no?. This strikes me as unusually strict. But I guess if it was otherwise, people would cheat - e.g., ask for/offer transition training when all they really wanted was a Flight Review. Just to be clear, a LODA is needed for the EAB to be used for compensation. You may get and pay for a Flight Review in your EAB, the presumption being that you don?t rent the plane from yourself.

[DonFromTX]

Interesting. To make a discussion, the words "for transition training only" certainly does not infer to me that you could not use your plane for pleasure or sightseeing or personal travel - or giving a flight review. The one I received however had the statement that the plane can make "No demonstration flights are allowed". I am not even sure what a "demonstration flight" consists of.

[quote=BobTurner;1259165]

Originally Posted by DonFromTX

This struck me as odd, not being able to give a BFR in your plane.
I recently sent for a copy of a LODA for someone I knew, and found NO REFERENCE whatever to a BFR requirement nor any prohibition against giving a BFR. Is this normal practice, or does it just strike each FSDO differently each day of the week?


The FAA?s position is quite clear: an EAB airplane may not be used for compensation. They will issue a waiver (LODA) specifically for transition training only because it cannot realistically be done in anything other than an RV. Every LODA I?ve seen says ?transition training only?. Now there is the question, ?If during transition training we satisfactorly accomplish all the elements of a Flight Review, may I (as a cfi) endorse the pilot?s logbook as Flight Review given?? My LODA says ?no?. This strikes me as unusually strict. But I guess if it was otherwise, people would cheat - e.g., ask for/offer transition training when all they really wanted was a Flight Review. Just to be clear, a LODA is needed for the EAB to be used for compensation. You may get and pay for a Flight Review in your EAB, the presumption being that you don?t rent the plane from yourself.

[BobTurner]

The waiver (LODA) is for using the airplane for compensation. You don?t need the waiver if no compensation is involved, like personal travel. No waiver is needed if you get a Flight Review for free. But a CFI cannot furnish his airplane ?for free? and charge for his services - the airplane is clearly tied to him being compensated.

[flyinhood]

Thank you to everyone in advance. I am new here and just bought my first RV last week.

I am an active CFI with no LODA (yet...maybe)

Can I offer flight training with me, and my plane, if no money changes hands?

ie: a young person spending time with me to suppliment their private, a few approaches with a friend to get current, etc.

Or...does anyone know if, because a Comm is required to have a CFI, that ALL training is considered "commercial" regardless of money changing hands?

Thx,

Hoody

[Jesse]

Originally Posted by flyinhood

Thank you to everyone in advance. I am new here and just bought my first RV last week.

I am an active CFI with no LODA (yet...maybe)

Can I offer flight training with me, and my plane, if no money changes hands?

ie: a young person spending time with me to suppliment their private, a few approaches with a friend to get current, etc.

Or...does anyone know if, because a Comm is required to have a CFI, that ALL training is considered "commercial" regardless of money changing hands?

Thx,

Hoody

As long as you pay your pro rata share of the expenses, you are not flying for hire, so you can do it.

[Vern]

I've always wondered at the regs that will not allow the needed training in EAB but allow some airshow pilots to make a living using their EAB aircraft.
Anyone got any ideas?

[Auburntsts]

Originally Posted by DonFromTX

The FAA’s position is quite clear: an EAB airplane may not be used for compensation.

Originally Posted by Vern

I've always wondered at the regs that will not allow the needed training in EAB but allow some airshow pilots to make a living using their EAB aircraft.
Anyone got any ideas?

I get the primary training vs transition training and LODA stuff. However, I'm not sold on the total no compensation bit outside of the training issues.

Can someone point me to where it says you can't be compensated for performing other, non-training tasks with an E-AB aircraft?
I get 91.319 states:
(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate—
(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or
(2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

And my OPLIMS, issued under the older FAA order 8130.2G (current version is 2J IIRC) has the same verbiage as 91.319 (a) (2). I'm also prohibited by my OPLIMS from glider towing, banner towing, or intentional parachute jumping.

But what about skywriting or aerial photography? Why couldn't a pilot flying their own E-AB be compensated (ie paid) for those activities? There's no carriage of persons or property.

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by Auburntsts

I get the primary training vs transition training and LODA stuff. However, I'm not sold on the total no compensation bit outside of the training issues.

Can someone point me to where it says you can't be compensated for performing other, non-training tasks with an E-AB aircraft?
I get 91.319 states:
(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate?
(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or
(2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

And my OPLIMS, issued under the older FAA order 8130.2G (current version is 2J IIRC) has the same verbiage as 91.319 (a) (2). I'm also prohibited by my OPLIMS from glider towing, banner towing, or intentional parachute jumping.

But what about skywriting or aerial photography? Why couldn't a pilot flying their own E-AB be compensated (ie paid) for those activities? There's no carriage of persons or property.

When reading a document in the context of "legal" meaning, single specific words can mean a lot (even if the person reading it doesn't understand the relevance).

In that context, ask your self why does it say compensation and hire? Wouldn't just one suffice?

Apparently not.

So now you need to find out what the FAA means by those two terms.

Unfortunately, in this case, the writer (FAA legal dept) gets to define the terms, not the person reading them. The FAA has been very clear in the past regarding what their definition is.

[Auburntsts]

Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002

When reading a document in the context of "legal" meaning, single specific words can mean a lot (even if the person reading it doesn't understand the relevance).

In that context, ask your self why does it say compensation and hire? Wouldn't just one suffice?

Apparently not.

So now you need to find out what the FAA means by those two terms.

Unfortunately, in this case, the writer (FAA legal dept) gets to define the terms, not the person reading them. The FAA has been very clear in the past regarding what their definition is.

Umm, because they don't mean the same thing? In any event, the way the paragraph is worded to me implies that the compensation and hire prohibition applies to the carriage, and only the carriage, of persons or property. Otherwise if you wanted to prohibit all activities for compensation or hire why not just leave "persons" and "property" out altogether? But they didn't so they made the prohibited activities specific and not general.

I also have no plan to ask the FAA anything. I simply want to know is there a reference that applies the compensation prohibition beyond what's stated in 91.319 such as a reg or FAA General Counsel ruling and not for anyone to try an provide an interpretation of 91.319, legal or not.

NOTE: This if for my edification only -- I have absolutely no desire or need to fly for compensation in any aircraft, regardless of its certification.