Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Instructing in a Kolb

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Instructing in a Kolb

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

gliderx5

Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 203

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:41 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

I'm trying to interpret the FARs for training in an experimental amateur built airplane that I own (ie. my Kolb MKII)

91.319 states  (a) that I cannot carry persons for compensation or hire - which I believe means just that - passengers.

(e) that I cannot operate the aircraft for compensation except to conduct flight training (c) in an aircraft that I provide prior to 1/31/2010.

(f) That I can lease the Kolb for instruction until 1/31/2010.



It looks like

- I can be paid for instruction in my Kolb only until 1/31/2010

- I can lease my Kolb for instruction only until 1/31/2010

- I cannot be paid for instruction in a Kolb that the student provides anytime

- I can give free instruction in my Kolb or the students Kolb anytime



Does this sound right?



Malcolm Morrison

MKII



 [quote][b]

Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 1047
Location: Connecticut, USA

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:49 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

At 06:40 PM 1/9/2009, gliderx5(at)comcast.net wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  It looks like

- I can be paid for instruction in my Kolb only until 1/31/2010

- I can lease my Kolb for instruction only until 1/31/2010

- I cannot be paid for instruction in a Kolb that the student provides anytime

- I can give free instruction in my Kolb or the students Kolb anytime



Does this sound right?


	


Except for #3, I believe... I'm pretty sure it's always been legal for one 

to hire a flight instructor to provide instruction in one's own airplane... 

since the owner of the aircraft is not receiving any compensation for the 

use of the aircraft.



-Dana

--

  (A)bort, (R)etry, (P)retend it didn't happen?

aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:55 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

Malcolm, I,2,and 4 are correct, but for E-LSA, not E-AB. You can be paid for your instruction in a plane the student provides.



Rick

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 5:40 PM,  <gliderx5(at)comcast.net (gliderx5(at)comcast.net)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  I'm trying to interpret the FARs for training in an experimental amateur built airplane that I own (ie. my Kolb MKII)

 91.319 states  (a) that I cannot carry persons for compensation or hire - which I believe means just that - passengers.

(e) that I cannot operate the aircraft for compensation except to conduct flight training (c) in an aircraft that I provide prior to 1/31/2010.

 (f) That I can lease the Kolb for instruction until 1/31/2010.



It looks like

- I can be paid for instruction in my Kolb only until 1/31/2010

- I can lease my Kolb for instruction only until 1/31/2010

- I cannot be paid for instruction in a Kolb that the student provides anytime

 - I can give free instruction in my Kolb or the students Kolb anytime



Does this sound right?



Malcolm Morrison

MKII



  [/b] 	


[b]

gliderx5

Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 203

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:13 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

Dana



I agree.  I always thought that the instructor could be paid if the student provided the experimental airplane, but I just can't figure out how 91.319 says that this is true. Paragraph (e) seems clear that no person may operate an experimental aircraft for compensation except (2) to conduct flight training in an aircraft which that person provides, prior to 1/31/2010.  There is no exclusion for an aircraft that the student provides.  This is counter to what I had always thought.  Also, I misread the FAR when I created my second conclusion earlier.  Leasing only applies to aircraft being used for towing gliders, so not for flight instruction.



Malcolm Morrison

MKII



---

Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 1047
Location: Connecticut, USA

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:44 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

At 08:12 PM 1/9/2009, gliderx5(at)comcast.net wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Dana



 I agree.  I always thought that the instructor could be paid if the student provided the experimental airplane, but I just can't figure out how 91.319 says that this is true. Paragraph (e) seems clear that no person may operate an experimental aircraft for compensation except (2) to conduct flight training in an aircraft which that person provides, prior to 1/31/2010.  There is no exclusion for an aircraft that the student provides.  This is counter to what I had always thought.  Also, I misread the FAR when I created my second conclusion earlier.  Leasing only applies to aircraft being used for towing gliders, so not for flight instruction. 	




 91.319(e) refers to 21.191(i) only applies to E-LSA, i.e. E-LSA kits or aircraft converted to E-LSA from fat ultralights, but not to E-AB aircraft.  E-AB aircraft fall under 91.313(a)(2), which says you can't carry persons or property for compensation or hire (which doesn't include flight instruction), as opposed to the more broad 91.319(e) which only covers all aspects of "operating for compensation or hire".



 So, a converted E-LSA Kolb can be used for paid instruction, whether it's owned by the student or the instructor, until 2010.  If it's E-AB, it can be used for paid instruction only if the student owns it, and that's true forever (or until the FAA changes the rules).



 -Dana



 

 --

  Friends help you move.  *Real* friends help you move bodies.    [quote][b]

gliderx5

Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 203

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:05 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

Dana



Thanks.  That clears up the confusion.  I hate FARs



Malcolm Morrison

MKII

---

Thom Riddle

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1597
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA (9G0)

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:49 am Post subject: Re: Instructing in a Kolb

Dana is correct, as usual. 



My CFI mentor is an ATP rated pilot with CFI and CFII tickets and owns and operates a flight school. I asked him once which local AME he used for keeping his 1st class medical current and he told me that he keeps a 3rd class only because he does not fly for hire but only gives instruction. He had to have the 2nd class medical for getting his commercial ticket and the 1st class for ATP but no longer needs either for instruction. As a SP-CFI I don't need any medical at all and plan to let my 3rd class expire this year.

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

Don't worry about old age... it doesn't last very long.
- Anonymous

Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 1047
Location: Connecticut, USA

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:53 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

Continuing the discussion, here's something interesting:



§ 91.319   Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.

(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.



BUT...



§ 91.319(h) The FAA may issue deviation authority providing relief from the 

provisions of paragraph (a) of this section for the purpose of conducting 

flight training. The FAA will issue this deviation authority as a letter of 

deviation authority.

(1) The FAA may cancel or amend a letter of deviation authority at any time.

(2) An applicant must submit a request for deviation authority to the FAA 

at least 60 days before the date of intended operations. A request for 

deviation authority must contain a complete description of the proposed 

operation and justification that establishes a level of safety equivalent 

to that provided under the regulations for the deviation requested.



The fact that the FAA has put such specific language into the regs would 

indicate that they expect to issue such deviation authority, or that they 

realized there will be a lack of "ultralight like" SLSA's.  I wonder if a 

former BFI with a SP or PP certificate might be able to convince the FAA 

that his request "establishes a level of safety equivalent to that provided 

under the regulations"?



This is separate from the provision that allows training in converted 

E-LSA's until January 31, 2010, and could apply to ALL experimental 

aircraft, including E-LSA, E-AB and E-exhibition, so it could apply to 

converted fat ultralights, homebuilts, and even warbirds.



-Dana

--

  Roses are red,

Violets are blue,

I'm wasting much too much time on the internet,

and probably, so are you.

aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:56 am Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

I thought Thom Riddle and I had covered this thoroughly, but..........To keep it short, LODA's are issued when training requirements cannot be satisfied by any other aircraft. They are not issued for primary flight training. They are not issued for things like tailwheel ratings. This is covered in a couple of FAA docs that should be referenced in the archives.  The classic example of an aircraft that would qualify for an LODA is a canard of the Varieze / LongEZ ilk. There is no production TC aircraft that can be substituted for it so it qualifies.

Rick

 

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote:

[quote] --> Kolb-List message posted by: Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)>

 

 Continuing the discussion, here's something interesting:

 

 § 91.319   Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.

 (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.

 

 BUT...

 

 § 91.319(h) The FAA may issue deviation authority providing relief from the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section for the purpose of conducting flight training. The FAA will issue this deviation authority as a letter of deviation authority.

  (1) The FAA may cancel or amend a letter of deviation authority at any time.

 (2) An applicant must submit a request for deviation authority to the FAA at least 60 days before the date of intended operations. A request for deviation authority must contain a complete description of the proposed operation and justification that establishes a level of safety equivalent to that provided under the regulations for the deviation requested.

  

 The fact that the FAA has put such specific language into the regs would indicate that they expect to issue such deviation authority, or that they realized there will be a lack of "ultralight like" SLSA's.  I wonder if a former BFI with a SP or PP certificate might be able to convince the FAA that his request "establishes a level of safety equivalent to that provided under the regulations"?

  

 This is separate from the provision that allows training in converted E-LSA's until January 31, 2010, and could apply to ALL experimental aircraft, including E-LSA, E-AB and E-exhibition, so it could apply to converted fat ultralights, homebuilts, and even warbirds.

  

 -Dana

 --

  Roses are red,

 Violets are blue,

 I'm wasting much too much time on the internet,

 and probably, so are you.

 

 

 

 ===========

 " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ===========

 MS -

 k">http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 e -

           -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 

 

 

 [b]

Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 1047
Location: Connecticut, USA

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 8:10 am Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

At 09:55 AM 1/11/2009, Richard Girard wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  I thought Thom Riddle and I had covered this thoroughly, but..........To keep it short, LODA's are issued when training requirements cannot be satisfied by any other aircraft. They are not issued for primary flight training 	  Quote: 	
		  ...

	
	


 That makes sense, and I'm sure it's the intent, but the way it's written seems to leave it open.  If the FAA gets alarmed by a repeat of history and rising UL accident rate due to the termination of the 103 exemptions, it gives them an "out" and a way to allow training without "rulemaking by exemption" which they're not supposed to do.



 Of course, that assumes intelligence on the part of politicians and bureaucrats... never a safe assumption.



 -Dana



 

 --

  A goverment that fears arms in the hands of it people should also fear ROPE!    [quote][b]

rlaird

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Houston

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:11 am Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

I think the LODA is primarily used by the gyrocopter community, since

there are no manufacturers of certified gyros.  All are either E-AB or

gE-LSA, so instructors get a LODA so they can train.  Since there are

S-LSA fixed wing aircraft, I don't think you'll ever see the FAA

issuing a LODA for fixed wing E-AB or gE-LSA.



On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   At 09:55 AM 1/11/2009, Richard Girard wrote:



 I thought Thom Riddle and I had covered this thoroughly, but..........To

 keep it short, LODA's are issued when training requirements cannot be

 satisfied by any other aircraft. They are not issued for primary flight

 training



 ...



 That makes sense, and I'm sure it's the intent, but the way it's written

 seems to leave it open.  If the FAA gets alarmed by a repeat of history and

 rising UL accident rate due to the termination of the 103 exemptions, it

 gives them an "out" and a way to allow training without "rulemaking by

 exemption" which they're not supposed to do.



 Of course, that assumes intelligence on the part of politicians and

 bureaucrats... never a safe assumption.



 -Dana

 --

  A goverment that fears arms in the hands of it people should also fear

 ROPE!

_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Laird
formerly: MkIIIc w/ 912ULS & Gyrobee
current: Autogyro Cavalon w/ 914ULS
Houston, TX area
http://www.Texas-Flyer.com

gliderx5

Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 203

Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:52 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

I got some resolution on instructing in an experimental from a Senior Aviation Specialist at the EAA.  He states that you can be paid to instruct in an experimental, regardless of who owns or provides the aircraft, but the aircraft itself cannot be rented.  He goes on to address some of the other practical issues such as insurance and finding an examiner willing to give the test in the experimental.  So, depending on how much liability I'm willing to risk it could be done.  Thanks to all of you who provided input on this issue.



Malcolm Morrison

MKII

---

Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 1047
Location: Connecticut, USA

Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:00 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

At 06:51 PM 1/20/2009, gliderx5(at)comcast.net wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  I got some resolution on instructing in an experimental from a Senior 

Aviation Specialist at the EAA.  He states that you can be paid to 

instruct in an experimental, regardless of who owns or provides the 

aircraft, but the aircraft itself cannot be rented.  He goes on to address 

some of the other practical issues such as insurance and finding an 

examiner willing to give the test in the experimental.  So, depending on 

how much liability I'm willing to risk it could be done.  Thanks to all of 

you who provided input on this issue.


	


So you could charge, say, $120/hour to instruct in your experimental Kolb, 

and provide the airplane for free?  That seems like a large enough loophole 

to... well, fly a MKIII through!



-Dana

--

  The number of elected federal officials is limited to congress, the 

president and the vice president. That's only 537 people. The federal 

bureaucracy numbers in the millions.....

Thom Riddle

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1597
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA (9G0)

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 6:39 am Post subject: Re: Instructing in a Kolb

Malcolm,



Could you provide the name of "a Senior Aviation Specialist at the EAA" that told you that? I'd like to confirm your understanding with him/her.



I'd like to be able to instruct (I'm a CFI-SP) in our Rans S6 but don't think that is allowed except for my co-owners. That has been my understanding for eons.

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

Don't worry about old age... it doesn't last very long.
- Anonymous

aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:00 am Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

Thom, Malcolm, et al, Who cares what "a Senior Aviation Specialist at the EAA" says? He/she can say anything, whether well meaning or not, and it means nothing, it's just their opinion.To try and track this down again, I called the Light Sport Branch in OK city. I proposed Dana's conjecture, "I charge $120 an hour for my instruction, I supply the plane for free". Would that be legal?

 Answer: "It's a gray area that would be decided by your local FSDO". "The FAA does not want to become involved in setting compensation rates". As an aside, these people aren't stupid, if an instructor is charging far above the local rate, but claiming the aircraft is provided for free, they're going to figure that some portion of the cost is going to be used to support the aircraft. This was the general thrust of the comments.

 So, sorry guys and gals, I can't give you the definitive answer, but your local FSDO can. Call them for the answer, they're the folks who will start the enforcement action against you. I don't think the, "a Senior Aviation Specialist at the EAA told me it was okay" defense is going to hold much water if they do.

 



Rick



On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Thom Riddle <riddletr(at)gmail.com (riddletr(at)gmail.com)> wrote:

[quote] --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" <riddletr(at)gmail.com (riddletr(at)gmail.com)>

 

 Malcolm,

 

 Could you provide the name of "a Senior Aviation Specialist at the EAA" that told you that? I'd like to confirm your understanding with him/her.

 

 I'd like to be able to instruct (I'm a CFI-SP) in our Rans S6 but don't think that is allowed except for my co-owners. That has been my understanding for eons.

 

 --------

 Thom Riddle

 N1208P RANS S6S, Tailwheel, 912UL

 N197BG FS1/447

 --------------------

 It is by universal misunderstanding that all agree. For if, by ill luck, people understood each other, they would never agree.

   - Charles Baudelaire

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=225982#225982

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 ===========

 " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ===========

 MS -

 k">http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 e -

           -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 

 

 

 [b]

gliderx5

Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 203

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:46 pm Post subject: Instructing in a Kolb

Rick,



I think you have said it best.  It is a gray area and it would depend on whoever wants to enforce the rules as they see them.  I received an email from NAFI today that said "     Normal   0                         MicrosoftInternetExplorer4   <![endif]-->     /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0in; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	font-family:"Times New Roman";}  <![endif]-->If you are providing the aircraft and the instruction, it will be considered a package."  and would not be allowed.       Normal   0                         MicrosoftInternetExplorer4   <![endif]-->     /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0in; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	font-family:"Times New Roman";}  <![endif]-->Timm Bogenhagen  from the EAA said that it does not matter who provides the airplane.  I'll be darned if I can read any of this into what it actually says in 91.319.  The bottom line is that instructing and receiving compensation for instructing in an experimental appears to be just fine with big brother.  The student appears to be able to provide the airplane, either their own, or a club aircraft, or one borrowed, stolen, or otherwise acquirred, but just not rented.  The issue for debate with big brother would seem to be whether I'm letting the student use my airplane out of the goodness of my heart because there are no other LSAs available in the area, or am I really receiving rent through my instructon fees for the use of the airplane.  If the hourly instruction fee was reasonably inline with the norm, and the same rate was charged to students whether in my airplane or their own airplane, then I would guess you could make an argument that you were within the intent of the FAR.  However, as you have pointed out, it is ultimately up to the FSDO should they choose to get involved.  I know in my part of PA getting sport pilot instruction is next to impossible, so I plan to pursue this a little more.  I'll keep you posted and thanks again for the inputs.



Malcolm Morrison

MKII



---

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum