Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Sharing Aircraft Operating Expenses in Accordance with 14 CFR ? 61.113(c)
- Thread starter RV8JD
- Start date
Jpm757
Well Known Member
Carl, I looked it over and basically you are only allowed to share expenses that include fuel, oil, rental fees and airport expenditures. That does not come close to covering the real cost of operating our birds when you consider maintenance, insurance, hangar, and avionics, engine and prop reserves. I flew about 150 hrs last year, and adding everything up that comes to about $95/hr. to operate my -7. My second biggest expense after fuel is the hangar at $300/month. I didn't even bother to include my time for maintenance. So let's call the price of FUN $100/hr., To me it's worth every penny!
Desert Rat
Well Known Member
" fuel, oil, rental fees and airport expenditures." is a cut and paste out of FAR 61.113. This has been in the FARs for a long time. To the best of my knowledge, nothing has changed since the old days, other than maybe the feds felt the need to try to explain it in something closer to plain english with an AC.
Last edited:
Auburntsts
Well Known Member
Pretty good discussion on this over at The Pilot's Place: http://thepilotsplace.com/forum/ind...ht-sharing-and-the-regs.987/page-3#post-18068
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
It is pretty much "common sense" and nothing changed. It has to be equitable. I am sure people abused the intent of the Reg. 50%/50% is OK. 1%/99% is not.
When getting my Inst Rating with another Pilot we rented a plane and took turns under hood and as safety pilot. We split everything 50/50.
Fun fact per FAR's the safety pilot can log PIC if current and rated in Cat/Class (and not be CFI) when acting as safety pilot as required crew member. Pilot under hood, sole manipulator of controls logging instrument time is also PIC.
https://pilotworkshop.com/tips/logging-safety-pilot-time/
I later got a CFI, a privilege I still hold, so of course all my instruction is PIC and the pilot pays for all the expenses plus my time. You can get rich being a CFI!!!
If I get letter of deviation authority (LODA) I can charge for training in my RV 100%. So you can use an experimental for hire under restricted intent of training.
When getting my Inst Rating with another Pilot we rented a plane and took turns under hood and as safety pilot. We split everything 50/50.
Fun fact per FAR's the safety pilot can log PIC if current and rated in Cat/Class (and not be CFI) when acting as safety pilot as required crew member. Pilot under hood, sole manipulator of controls logging instrument time is also PIC.
https://pilotworkshop.com/tips/logging-safety-pilot-time/
I later got a CFI, a privilege I still hold, so of course all my instruction is PIC and the pilot pays for all the expenses plus my time. You can get rich being a CFI!!!
If I get letter of deviation authority (LODA) I can charge for training in my RV 100%. So you can use an experimental for hire under restricted intent of training.
Last edited:
You left out an important fact: safety pilot can log PIC time only if he acts as THE PIC, e.g., the person legally responsible for the safe and legal operation of the aircraft. If I am the safety pilot in the airplane I own, this makes sense. OTOH if I am under the hood in my airplane, and some pilot who has zero time in type is my safety pilot, it seems highly unlikely that any court would believe that I would allow him to be the final authority over my airplane!
Side note: the LODAs that the faa has issued for EAB airplanes are highly restrictive, to be used solely for transition training. Mine specifically forbids high performance endorsements, instrument currency checks, flight review sign offs, even if these are accomplished as part of transition training. Throw in the cost of insuring instructional activities in your airplane and you likely have a money losing proposition.
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
You did not read my post my friend. "Fun fact per FAR's the safety pilot can log PIC if current and rated in Cat/Class (and not be CFI) when acting as safety pilot as required crew member." BOTH pilots have to be current in Cat/Class to log PIC. That is pretty obvious you have to be qualified and current. If one is not a pilot at all, you the PILOT can not (legally) let a non-certificated pilot manipulate the controls of a plane unless a CFI. However this is a rule that gets broken all the time. So yes it is dumb to use a non-pilot as a safety pilot but no where did I say or imply that. So I did not leave that out, it is just obvious. You can not be working on a logging time for IFR rating if not already a private pilot.
LODA: I also mention they are restrictive. "If I get letter of deviation authority (LODA) I can charge for training in my RV 100%. So you can use an experimental for hire under restricted intent of training." You really did not add anything I did not mention.
Last edited:
You did not read my post my friend. "Fun fact per FAR's the safety pilot can log PIC if current and rated in Cat/Class (and not be CFI) when acting as safety pilot as required crew member." BOTH pilots have to be current in Cat/Class to log PIC. n.
I DID read your post. Did you read mine?
FAR 61.51 (e)(iii) (which is the relevant reg for logging safety pilot time as PIC) places an additional burden on a pilot who wants to log safety pilot time also as PIC time: the safety pilot must actually be the acting PIC (the person responsible...). I gave two contrary examples. One was if the owner was under the hood, and a casual acquaintance was safety pilot. If the engine were to suddenly stop, do we believe that the owner would yield command to the safety pilot? Would the safety pilot decide which field to try for, what landing configuration to use, etc. If that answer is (obviously) ?no?, then he may not log his safety pilot time as PIC. This reg actually makes sense.
I know this has been beaten to death on numerous forums, but how about this:
engine quits, casual-acquaintance-friend relinquishes the role of PIC *back* to the owner, who removes his hood and assumes control of the plane as Pilot In Command.
Safety pilot logs time while owner is under the hood, doesn't log it when owner is NOT under the hood (like take-off and landing for the flight).
I'm confused. Are we all in agreement?
CFI always logs while acting as "CFI"
Safety pilot (appropriately rated) can log wile sole manipulator of controls is under the hood.
Sole manipulator of controls always logs as they are the one flying.
People can spit expenses.
LODA is restrictive to what kind of instruction is occurring for pay (transition).
Insuring to offer transition is very expensive and to be profitable one would have to charge A LOT / hr.
Is that everything?
CFI always logs while acting as "CFI"
Safety pilot (appropriately rated) can log wile sole manipulator of controls is under the hood.
Sole manipulator of controls always logs as they are the one flying.
People can spit expenses.
LODA is restrictive to what kind of instruction is occurring for pay (transition).
Insuring to offer transition is very expensive and to be profitable one would have to charge A LOT / hr.
Is that everything?
We are not in agreement.
CFI can log as PIC time when acting as an instructor, true.
Pilot acting as required safety pilot may log PIC time only when he is the actual PIC: person responsible for safe and legal operation, final authority... And no, you cannot claim to be PIC when everything is okay, but plan to abdicate if things go bad...
Sole manipulator may log as PIC, true.
Pilot may share certain expenses with passengers but only when the flying is ?incidental? - as per the recent advisory circular.
When I last checked insuring my RV to give transition training cost an extra $1400/yr above normal insurance. You can judge if that?s excessive. Remember, you can only give transition training to those with a bona fide need.
IF the safety pilot is also THE PIC - the person responsible for the safe and legal operation of the airplane, the final authority... then yes, you are correct. If in fact you are the final authority, then the safety pilot logs ?other flight time? - not PIC. As you note, the logging rules are not well correlated with who is the PIC.
Why not? In our example, the safety pilot is PIC while the owner is flying under the hood. Safety pilot is PIC, owner logs PIC as well as sole manipulator of the controls.
Engine trouble develops, and the owner removes the hood and assumes command of the aircraft, eventually resolving the situation somehow (up to and including an emergency landing or even a crash landing).
Is the safety pilot *really* still the PIC, in command authority? Or was that portion of the flight terminated when the owner ended the IFR training activity?
Here's another scenario...same pilot and safety pilot, plan to fly 2 hours in VFR, just a normal flight with the owner flying, to get to some airport with some specific approach they want to try out. When they get about 15 minutes out, owner goes under the hood, safety becomes PIC, owner acts as PIC (same rules as before). 15 minutes of instrument training, completed, owner removes hood, VFR back home.
As I see it that, 2:00 hours PIC for the owner, :15 simulated instrument for the owner and :15 PIC for the safety pilot.
It sounds like what *you're* saying is that the safety pilot HAS to be THE PIC for the entire duration of the flight???
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
Your scenarios are confusing my brain.
I see you are adding more great information to my equally great post. To make it super simple.... Two private pilots in a rented C-172 both current, qualified and eligible to rent the plane from FBO. One is under hood and the other safety pilot. Who takes over if the engine quits? Well they should discussed before hand. Either pilot is legally qualified. The pilot wearing Mr. hood view limiting device can take it off pretty quick. In fact the hood guy/gal who was flying may be best to keep flying, since they are warmed up. However if the safety pilot is more experienced and a better stick... well again brief it. FAA is big into who is PIC and what it is, ultimately person in command responsible for safety of flight. As a Captain I log PIC even on legs I don't fly. You seem to take this owner/my plane thing into account. The Regs don't care who owns what. Who grabs the controls when the SHTF should be briefed be it in a C-172 or Boeing 777. You like scenarios right? Let's say Bob Hoover in his prime was your safety pilot in your RV. Then engine quits. I know what I'd say. BOB YOU GOT IT. Oh I would have so loved to have flown with BH.
Not to get into a pee-pee match, there is no such thing as type unless we are talking larger jets, but I get your point and agree. If you mean a C-182 jockey who is current and qualified in SE Land complex is your safety pilot in your RV-10 but has ZERO RV-10 time, could he be "final authority"? YES. However obviously if the engine quits take your darn hood off and fly your own darn plane. Second insurance is the DRIVER not the FAR's. If safety gay/gal has no RV-10 time then Mr. Insurance will not let them fly it. Safety pilot? Sure why not in the eyes of FAA. Not sure why the "court" is involved. Ha ha. The safety pilot WOULD have to grab the controls if there was a mid-air about to happen. So the safety pilot with no RV time might be a bad idea... however FAR's it is totally cool. RV's are just Single Engine Land... We are talking FAR's and common sense. What is FAR LEGAL does not always make common sense or make insurance companies happy. FAR's say I can land with 30 min of fuel VFR. No thanks that is a lot of air in the tanks. It is really obvious? You are making the simple super complex. Are you a physicist? I am kidding I have a degree in mechanical engineering, I like to call useful practitioner of physics.
You should get a competent (legal to be PIC) pilot to be safety pilot regardless of logging PIC time or not. It is better if the safety pilot has an IFR rating and RV experience for sure.. but FAR's don't care. It is NOT needed, but if the pilot in the left seat is working towards the rating or IFR currency, a safety pilot who knows the standards can help. However LOOKING FOR TRAFFIC IS JOB #1.
Good Points and great added detail again to my equally great previous post... Yes I looked into all the cost. The only way I could make it worth while even a little, is get liability insurance only, and charge $120 wet plus instructor, $40 an hour. There would be a minimum of say 25 hours a year to break even on AC cost and pay for insurance. Hull insurance for teaching? Forget it. The $1000 for 25 hours instructor time dual is peanuts. However for fun and love of teaching still plan on doing it. I will do some CFI work in RV's or other planes when I retire regardless.
Last edited:
George,
I agree with what you?ve said. Some good examples. Would you comment on the one thing that has me in a tizzy? The idea that two pilots agree that pilot A (who will also be the safety pilot) will act as PIC - unless there?s a problem, in which case he will abdicate and pilot B will become PIC. I think this is the very definition of the word ?sham?.
I agree with what you?ve said. Some good examples. Would you comment on the one thing that has me in a tizzy? The idea that two pilots agree that pilot A (who will also be the safety pilot) will act as PIC - unless there?s a problem, in which case he will abdicate and pilot B will become PIC. I think this is the very definition of the word ?sham?.
Why would it be a sham? The safety pilot *is* responsible for ensuring the flight is safe *while the pilot flying is under the hood*...i.e., don't run into a mountain, don't hit another plane in flight, don't allow a descending spiral to develop, etc.
But if the aircraft develops a problem such as an engine issue, and the pilot *takes off the hood* to manage the problem and assumes command of the plane, technically there's no longer a "safety pilot" aboard, right?
We're not talking about the obviously "sham" case where they agree to both log PIC time, but if an FAR is busted or a mid-air happens or whatever, then the left-seater agrees that he'll take responsibility as "PIC" and let the safety pilot off the hook, if that's what you're referring to...
But if the aircraft develops a problem such as an engine issue, and the pilot *takes off the hood* to manage the problem and assumes command of the plane, technically there's no longer a "safety pilot" aboard, right?
We're not talking about the obviously "sham" case where they agree to both log PIC time, but if an FAR is busted or a mid-air happens or whatever, then the left-seater agrees that he'll take responsibility as "PIC" and let the safety pilot off the hook, if that's what you're referring to...
skylor
Well Known Member
Interesting Read
This AOPA article on “basic-med for safety pilots” adds to this discussion about who is PIC:
https://pilot-protection-services.aopa.org/news/2017/september/01/basicmed-and-safety-pilots
One takeaway is that if your safety pilot is flying with basic-med certification, then he better be a named pilot on your insurance policy or meet the requirements of your policy’s Open Pilot clause if you have one. The article also states that the basic-med pilot “acts as pilot in command during the portions of flight under simulated conditions” but then later states that “ the entirety of the flight from takeoff to full-stop landing must be conducted within the flight condition limitations of BasicMed”. These two statements seem to be somewhat contradictory.
Skylor
This AOPA article on “basic-med for safety pilots” adds to this discussion about who is PIC:
https://pilot-protection-services.aopa.org/news/2017/september/01/basicmed-and-safety-pilots
One takeaway is that if your safety pilot is flying with basic-med certification, then he better be a named pilot on your insurance policy or meet the requirements of your policy’s Open Pilot clause if you have one. The article also states that the basic-med pilot “acts as pilot in command during the portions of flight under simulated conditions” but then later states that “ the entirety of the flight from takeoff to full-stop landing must be conducted within the flight condition limitations of BasicMed”. These two statements seem to be somewhat contradictory.
Skylor
Last edited:
Note: I have deleted my previous reply. After reading the aopa article, I see that it is more of the faa?s imposing strange limitations on operation under basic med. However, that does not change my belief that the proposed ?I am PIC unless something goes wrong; if something goes wrong, I abdicate, and the other pilot is PIC? makes no sense. If you are not prepared to be the final authority, then you were never PIC in the first place. That?s why I called it a sham. You can?t be the final authority when your plan is to tell someone else to decide.
