DC YXer

Member
Without selling a share or otherwise giving up ownership of it?

[Couldn't find this discussed elsewhere on the forums, but I can't help but feel like someone must have looked into this before.]

OK, I know I'm going to build an airplane - either an RV-7 or, uhmm, something else. (Take a look at my username, not hard to guess what else I'm considering!) In defining my typical mission, I'm basically positive I'll do the same 85-90% of my flying solo or two-up like I have so far, but with one child in the fam now and another one planned sometime soon, having access to a nice four-seater would make a lot of sense. There are a couple good FBO's in the area (Northern Virginia), so renting is a possibility, but the two that I'm most familiar with both told me they'll only waive mandatory daily rental fees for like a two or three day trip at most (and not at all if there's a lot of demand for the plane - which only makes sense). So, anytime I wanted to take the wife and kid(s) out touring for a week or even a long weekend, I could easily end up spending several thousand dollars for maybe 10 or 12 hours of tach time.

In an ideal world, then, what I'd really like to do is build a gorgeous RV-7 (or whatever) and then enter into some kind of sharing agreement with someone who owns a nice spam can, but wishes he or she could get into a sportplane once in a while. (Sharing hangar space would be really nice, too!) Ideally, we'd each still own each plane independently, but with some arrangement to swap time on an as-available basis: if I took his/her 182 away for a week while he/she wasn't using it, he/she could take my RV-7 away for a week while I wasn't using it. Sure, the devil's in the details, but I hope this gives you the gist of what I'm thinking of.

So, couple questions:

1. Is this even legal under part 91? Since we'd each be getting something in return for allowing use of our planes, wouldn't that by itself kick us into part 135 (or 121 or whatever)? Would my theoretical partner and I be able to work around this by legally swapping ownership shares of each plane to each other?
2. Anybody have any experience with any kind of arrangement like this? [I mean with airplanes, you pervs! ;) ] Horror stories? Happy stories?
3. Do any of the alphabet organizations (EAA, AOPA, FAA, JAA, LMNOPAA, etc.) have any info along these lines? I spent 20 minutes or so Googling various iterations of this - found lots of stuff on partnerships & co-ownerships & so forth, but came up empty on swapping. (Well, not exactly *empty* - let's just call the stuff I did find "off-topic"!)

Anyway, this all makes me think this approach wouldn't fly (pun intended) under part 91, but given the depth and scope of the experience base available through these forums, I figured it was worth a post to see if anyone happens to already know how something like this might work. Any thoughts?
 
Lending Legality?

Surely there are no regulations regarding the lending of your airplane to your neighbor or viceversa.
As long as your respective insurance requirements are met, who else cares?

Mike
 
I agree with Mike. Other than insurance, who cares. The issue is that you as the builder (or an A & P) will have to do the maintenance. Your buddy can't.

That's my impression, anyway.
 
Plane sharing

I also agree that swapping time your aircraft is not a regulatory issue. I used to fly Part 135, and that applies when you offer your services, both airplane and pilot, for hire. You aren't doing anything close to that, so you are definitely operating under Part 91. You're really just an informal flying club.
As for insurance, you can either name each other on your policies or just be sure the other person meets the 'other pilot' requirements (total time, time-in-type).

Dennis Glaeser
 
Some insurance experience

If I were in your shoes and could afford it, I would build a RV-10 and maintain my independence and freedom. I have a friend with a Kitfox that recently ran into a little medical problem. I offered to fly with him to keep him active while he works through the issue. His insurance (I think it is AVEMCO but I could be wrong) required that I have 10 hours of dual in the airplane and have a tailwheel endorsement. After that I could fly it just like the owner.

Bob Axsom
 
Which sportplane

DC YXer said:
... (Take a look at my username, not hard to guess what else I'm considering!) ... In an ideal world, then, what I'd really like to do is build a gorgeous RV-7 (or whatever) and then enter into some kind of sharing agreement with someone who owns a nice spam can, but wishes he or she could get into a sportplane once in a while. ...
I would guess it would be easier to find someone who wants to share an RV7 or RV8 than anything else you are considering.
 
A nosewheel would be easier to qualify for

I would like to do the same thing with my RV-7, but recognize that it will be harder to find tailwheel pilots. If you don't have religious feelings on where the 3rd wheel goes, you might consider building a -7A or -8A, just to make it easier for your spam can partner.

There is a beautiful C-180 parked here at Manassas...when my RV-7 is built I'll go looking for that owner!
 
I agree with the rest (as long as you insurance doesn't mind).

The other issue you probably have already figured out is if they break it. Not broken so bad that you want your insurance involved but break some part or whatever. That's the part I don't like about borrowing. My policy is that if I borrow something and break it I replace it with new. So, if I borrowed your -7 or whatever and taxied over a sharp object, blew a tire and dinged a wheel pant you would get a new tire, tube, wheel pant and finish. Unfortunatly not everyone uses that policy. I don't know how you put something like that in writing but at the least do the trading with someone you trust to keep their word. :D
 
No for hire (kind of)

As long as you are not renting it out you are cool.

Insurance is an issue if, you have insurance. Its not required to own and fly a plane (unless I guess you owe money on it).

As far as having insurance to "lend" your plane out, from a personal liability stand point (his survivors sue you and likely will), you would be crazy not to have insurance. As the manufacture your plane, your "A" is hanging out in the breeze. You are Like Cessna, Piper, Boeing. Someone gets hurt with you "product" you are liable and can be sued.

Just think it through. You may be best Buddies with your share a plane partner, but when stuff happens and the Lawyers get involved it could be ugly. Consider just renting a 4-place when you need one.

If you enter into some "share" agreement you should get professional help and have it drawn up. This will cost money and boiler plate "hold harmless" agreements may not stand up in court.

Check this Lawyers site out:
http://www.aviationlawcorp.com/content/liabhomeblt.html


The Insurance Company will dictate the qualifications of the pilots and premium they charge, If they agree to cover you or your friend at all. The more time in make/model and type (tail dragger if the case) the better for both of you. Plan on close to almost $1,700-$2,000 a year premium for a well equipped RV (haul value of $70-$80K). Your friend will have his own insurance on top of that? You have to ask. If you both go with the same underwriter, you may get a break.

No RV time? No T/G time and your RV is a T/G? They will tell you no and go away until you get training and time in make/model/type. If you or your buddy are min time and have low overall time, be ready and get a big fat check book out to write a check, and that is even if they cover you or your friend.

Again you could "take a chance on life" and just do it with out insurance. There is no law like cars that says you have to have mandatory insurance. However I might consider it if it was just me and not passengers. I flew my RV-4 for a few years uninsured. I did not take passengers and I could afford to loose it and had medical insurance. I guess they call that "self Insured". However if there are passengers involved or others flying your plane insurance critical.

You can rent your plane out for flight instruction but you have to submit paper work to the FAA for a wavier (EAA has the form), and the person in the other seat is a CFI, and it is for transition training, not general flight instruction. (However if you own the plane you can receive dual and gain ratings in your RV, but there are some boxes to check and issues but no big road blocks.) Again common sense says full insurance.

I checked what the rider would be over a full policy and it was not terriable, but it was on top of full coverage. I plan on only having ground, gnd in motion, liability (other property) and medical, no hull. As a CFI, I was thinking about teaching in my RV-7, but the cost and potential income vs. time does not justify it for me.

George
 
Last edited:
gmcjetpilot said:
Again you could "take a chance on life" and just do it with out insurance. There is no law like cars that says you have to have mandatory insurance. However I might consider it if it was just me and not passengers. I flew my RV-4 for a few years uninsured. I did not take passengers and I could afford to loose it and had medical insurance. I guess they call that "self Insured". However if there are passengers involved or others flying your plane insurance critical.

... Again common sense says full insurance.
I would argue that it's not an either/or situation re: insurance. It's not full coverage vs. no coverage that we have to choose between. I would argue that liability insurance IS necessary in case we hurt someone else in or out of our airplane. Ground coverage is also useful just like comprehensive is important to our auto insurance. However, hull insurance is entirely a different story and it is expensive.

If you've financed your plane or if you are planning on using the proceeds of the sale of your airplane to finance your kids education or your retirement, you should probably have hull insurance. However, if you've paid for the plane out of pocket and still have your other financial obligations taken care of, is hull insurance really necessary? Depends on the comfort level of the individual.

Me... if I ever total my plane I'll just be happy that I'm alive, I'll part it out and start building a new one. In any case, if I had hull insurance and actually made a claim, I would hate to see what would happen to my rates or even ability to get future coverage. I think a lot of people would be surprised at what would happen if they ever did make a claim under their hull provision.

I would agree that sharing an experimental for privileges on a certificated could be a great deal. Just depends on who that partnership is with. Family/close friend great. I'd be hesitant if not.

FWIW
 
Last edited:
Correct, thanks

alpinelakespilot2000 said:
I would argue that it's not an either/or situation re: insurance. It's not full coverage vs. no coverage that we have to choose between. I would argue that liability insurance IS necessary in case we hurt someone else in or out of our airplane. Ground coverage is also useful just like comprehensive is important to our auto insurance. However, hull insurance is entirely a different story and it is expensive. FWIW
Thanks, great point. I knew the risk and frankly I flew where I would not hit people or things. However that is a good point. That is what I will have for my RV-7, limited liability but no in-flight hull. I will have hull for ground only. However good point on getting liability. Also hull coverage not in motion can be a good value. Of the planes totaled of people I know, many where safely parked in a hanger or on a ramp.

We can get into a whole philosophical debate about insurance. However I think I am correct in saying no one requires you to have insurance except in a few cases. One is if there is a loan on the aircraft, and some times airports require operators to have insurance. That is usually for FBO's and other commercial operator's.

I agree that if you survive the crash, the clean up and repair of damage to other property or law suits can occur. You could land in a house or business and cause substantial damage or kill someone. In this case even if you have insurance there are limits, and if there is any negligence that can be shown, you are in deep yogurt. I guess you can up your liability limits to crazy amounts to cover yourself. There are risk in life. You can limit the risk by using the stuff between the ears.

George
 
Last edited:
Wow! Thanks everybody, this is exactly the kind of info and feedback I was hoping to get. Turns out the rumors are true - RV guys are awesome.
 
I'd have to go with 'build it yourself, fly it yourself' if you can afford it. It's hard to find a guy that will treat your airplane, fly your airplane to your exacting standards. You'll really hate flying whatever the other guy has after you fly your RV anyway.
 
Probably not with this spam can owner...

pict68263ds.jpg