What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Transition training

bob888

Well Known Member
I will soon be ready for first flight and need some transition training first. I'm current in my C210 and expect that two hours or so should do it. I'm in central CA (Fresno) and can travel to Van's if need be. If anyone closer can accommodate it will be much appreciated.
 
Bob,
I believe Mike is the only person active at this time, if you need the cfi to furnish the -10. Due to the high cost of insurance for this activity, everyone else that I know of has dropped out, myself included.
 
Last edited:
+2 for Mike

Not only is Mike one of the nicelst, most mellow people I've ever met, he's one **** of an instructor. He litteraly changed the way I fly.
 
Bob,
I believe Mike is the only person active at this time, if you need the cfi to furnish the -10. Due to the high cost of insurance for this activity, everyone else that I know of has dropped out, myself included.

This is troubling news. How will those of us building 10s get the transition training needed, if Mike also decides to hang it up?
 
I will jump on the Mike Seager bandwagon too.

Good guy to fly with.

Word of advice-------call now to schedule your training. He is most likely booked out a bit.
 
This is troubling news. How will those of us building 10s get the transition training needed, if Mike also decides to hang it up?

Like many problems, it can be solved by throwing money at it. If someone wants to pay me $2K up front, plus a reasonable hourly rate for the plane and myself, I'll be happy to re-start giving transition training. The $2K will go straight to the insurance company. The one or two established guys, like Alex D, could pretty much count on getting at least 4 people a year, and include $500 each for insurance. (I understand Alex now has an FAA job and is no longer allowed to do this). The low volume guys like myself had to guess if we would get one, or two, trainees per year. And if it was zero, we'd eat that premium. See the problem? The insurance companies just aren't set up for this specialized low volume business. BTW, I believe Mike has an arrangement to use Vans' demonstrator RV-10. I have no idea of the finances, but it's most likely different than the ones I face.
 
Two thumbs up for Mike!

I also highly recommend Mike Seager. I took my transition training in Van's "Old Blue" 6A while I was current on Cessna's and Pipers. Best money spent on my project to date, and I saved more than the cost of training from a reduction in first year insurance premiums. I also enjoyed staying at a local B&B while attending lessons in Vernonia.
Jay
 
Active transition instructors?

In post #3, Mike Seager is noted as the only instructor active at the moment, does anyone have contrary information? Or is that only for RV-10? I'm at a crossroads....Thanks.
 
Last edited:
In post #3, Mike Seager is noted as the only instructor active at the moment, does anyone have contrary information? Or is that only for RV-10? I'm at a crossroads....Thanks.

Since that was my post I'll answer. To the best of my knowledge Mike is the only cfi offering transition training in the -10, when the cfi provides the airplane. If you can provide the airplane, there are other choices. I believe Tim Olson (MN) is offering transition training in his -14, and is considering doing it in his -10.
 
Since that was my post I'll answer. To the best of my knowledge Mike is the only cfi offering transition training in the -10, when the cfi provides the airplane. If you can provide the airplane, there are other choices. I believe Tim Olson (MN) is offering transition training in his -14, and is considering doing it in his -10.
Jesse Saint is not a CFI, but some insurers accept him as a transition trainer, given his hours and experience in the RV-10. Mine did
 
Jesse Saint is not a CFI, but some insurers accept him as a transition trainer, given his hours and experience in the RV-10. Mine did

I'm sure Jesse is a fine pilot. But someone using their EAB airplane for compensation must have a waiver from the FAR prohibiting exactly that. And the waiver is limited to transition training given by a cfi. (Note, the cfi and the owner can be different people).
Now if the new to a -10 pilot furnishes the airplane (out of phase 1, e.g., perhaps one he bought already built), that's a different story. Assuming he's not renting the plane to himself.
The problem is the cost of insurance - standard policies don't cover instruction for hire in an airplane provided by the instructor.
 
Last edited:
Bob

What about simply instructions without compensation?
I was the lucky recipient of some free hands on time in the left seat of an RV-10. Maybe share the cost or whatever makes it legal.
The insurance company might not recognize the experience and charge the newbie a bit more until he has accumulated 100 hours or so.
The whole transition training experience should be all about getting the experience not getting the lower insurance premium.
Weighing the cost of a trip to Vernonia and instructions from Mike Seager vs the cost of a short term increase in insurance premiums might help decide the dilemma. I too have taken transition training with Mike Seager and can highly recommend it but a good instructor familiar in an RV-10 and local could be equally beneficial except to the insurance company.
Some food for thought....
 
What about simply instructions without compensation?
I was the lucky recipient of some free hands on time in the left seat of an RV-10. Maybe share the cost or whatever makes it legal.
The insurance company might not recognize the experience and charge the newbie a bit more until he has accumulated 100 hours or so.
The whole transition training experience should be all about getting the experience not getting the lower insurance premium.
Weighing the cost of a trip to Vernonia and instructions from Mike Seager vs the cost of a short term increase in insurance premiums might help decide the dilemma. I too have taken transition training with Mike Seager and can highly recommend it but a good instructor familiar in an RV-10 and local could be equally beneficial except to the insurance company.
Some food for thought....

Instruction with absolutely no compensation is legal with the FAA; but if anything goes wrong and the insurance company finds out what was going on, they will be within their rights to deny coverage.
"Sharing the costs" is one of the most misunderstood rules. It can only be done when the flight is incidental to the purpose (e.g., you and the owner want to go to Vegas to gamble). When the primary purpose is flying sharing the costs is not allowed.
The issue is not a 'short term increase' in insurance rates with no transition training. For many pilots the choice is "no insurance" for a short term, or get the training at whatever it costs.
The insurance companies say they want pilots to have transition training. Then they make getting that training expensive.
 
I'm sure Jesse is a fine pilot. But someone using their EAB airplane for compensation must have a waiver from the FAR prohibiting exactly that. And the waiver is limited to transition training given by a cfi. (Note, the cfi and the owner can be different people).
Now if the new to a -10 pilot furnishes the airplane (out of phase 1, e.g., perhaps one he bought already built), that's a different story. Assuming he's not renting the plane to himself.
The problem is the cost of insurance - standard policies don't cover instruction for hire in an airplane provided by the instructor.

I have done this many times, and always in the trainee's airplane.
 
I have done this many times, and always in the trainee's airplane.

It's hard to see how this helps anyone whose airplane has not flown yet and is getting ready for the first flight and 40 hour phase 1.
Not blaming anyone here just realizing what a catch22 all of this transition training is:confused:
 
It's hard to see how this helps anyone whose airplane has not flown yet and is getting ready for the first flight and 40 hour phase 1.
Not blaming anyone here just realizing what a catch22 all of this transition training is:confused:

I have also done many first flights. With the 2nd pilot rule, there can be 2 people in the airplane during Phase 1.
 
I have also done many first flights. With the 2nd pilot rule, there can be 2 people in the airplane during Phase 1.

I get that you can, but do you really want marry-up transition training and initial Phase 1 flights together as SOP?

To Ernst's point, it would seem that the option of having a CFI give you transition training in your own RV where a LODA wouldn't be required is mainly an option for those that buy an already flying aircraft that's in Phase II vs. one that hasn't flown yet.
 
To Ernst's point, it would seem that the option of having a CFI give you transition training in your own RV where a LODA wouldn't be required is mainly an option for those that buy an already flying aircraft that's in Phase II vs. one that hasn't flown yet.

Just to be clear, any owner can obtain a LODA just by filling out some paperwork. That's not a big deal. It's the cost of insurance. For some reason standard insurance policies generally are valid when the airplane owner is receiving dual instruction; but those same policies generally do not cover an owner who is giving instruction in his airplane.
 
Just to be clear, any owner can obtain a LODA just by filling out some paperwork. That's not a big deal. It's the cost of insurance. For some reason standard insurance policies generally are valid when the airplane owner is receiving dual instruction; but those same policies generally do not cover an owner who is giving instruction in his airplane.

Why would I need a LODA to receive training in my own plane?
 
Why would I need a LODA to receive training in my own plane?

You don't. But if you desire, you may apply for a LODA which will allow you to rent, for profit, your airplane to others, for the sole purpose of transition training. On the application you will need to list the cfi(s) who will conduct the training. e.g., the LODA holder is an aircraft owner; he need not be a cfi. So if you desire to do so, you can help out new -10 pilots in this way. But your standard insurance policy does not cover this use!
The point I was trying to make is that for new builders who want to make the first flight themselves as PIC, and be insured, finding a -10 with the LODA paperwork is not much of an issue. It's the insurance cost that makes it so hard to find a suitable airplane, and is why several transition trainers have dropped out of the business in recent years.
 
AC90-116

Maybe not as SOP, but there are cases where it is about the only way. My RV-6 now has an airworthiness cert and my insurance co. wants 3 hrs of dual in a tailwheel RV before I'm covered. They do cover for dual in the insured aircraft as long as I don't violate my operating limitations. I've got 800+ hrs in a 6A and a TW endorsement but only 17 hrs of TW. I'm going to get some more landings in a Citabria this Saturday to sharpen up. I would happily do the 3 hrs in an RV if I could find one other than my own, but as others have noted, that's the rub. So I elect to fly the first several hours of phase 1 with a qualifying pilot per the requirements of AC90-116. I just need to make sure the QP is also a CFI so I can log it as dual and my insurance will be valid.

Ed Holyoke



I get that you can, but do you really want marry-up transition training and initial Phase 1 flights together as SOP?

To Ernst's point, it would seem that the option of having a CFI give you transition training in your own RV where a LODA wouldn't be required is mainly an option for those that buy an already flying aircraft that's in Phase II vs. one that hasn't flown yet.
 
So here we go....

Somehow I didn't think the purpose of phase 1, nor of AC 90-116, was to be giving dual to the observer pilot.
 
Somehow I didn't think the purpose of phase 1, nor of AC 90-116, was to be giving dual to the observer pilot.
Amen to that.

Just how much is insurance to cover instructions Bob?
 
Somehow I didn't think the purpose of phase 1, nor of AC 90-116, was to be giving dual to the observer pilot.

YEP! This kind of abuse is exactly why I fought AC 90-116 tooth and nail.

Phase I is for flight testing. NOT for flight instruction!
 
Amen to that.

Just how much is insurance to cover instructions Bob?

As of 3 years ago, an annual policy covering instruction given was about $2K more than a policy not covering it, and the coverage was not quite as good. Instead I was able to add trainees to my policy, for about $500 each. But my current insurer won't allow that.
 
Purpose

Well, obviously the purpose of phase 1 is to prove the newly built aircraft safe to operate while risking as few lives as possible. An observer pilot is not allowed by the AC until the initial flight test program, with all the maneuvers and at least 8 hrs flown by the builder pilot, is complete and documented and has nothing to do with what I propose. If I intended to be an "observer pilot" I'd have no business being along on the first flight anyway, even if I did build it and know the airplane better than anybody.

The purpose of the additional pilot program, as set forth in the opening pages of the AC itself, is to cut down on the risk of an inexperienced pilot crashing his brand new plane early in the test flight period. So, taking along a very experienced and highly qualified pilot, who happens to be a CFI, with a ~20hr tailwheel builder pilot - how is that abuse of the additional pilot program? It is exactly what the program is for. If my insurance didn't mandate a CFI, I might well want to use a qualifying pilot per the additional pilot program for the first flight anyway.

I'd be happy to take enough dual in a tailwheel RV to be competent and confident before flying my own airplane solo if I could arrange it, but as noted by others, the insurance companies punish LODA holders to the point where that route isn't feasible. Yes, I would fly with Mike Seager if he were available to me before mid June despite the travel and the additional expense that entails. Even he wouldn't be doing training in RVs if he weren't subsidized by the mothership.

Ed Holyoke


Somehow I didn't think the purpose of phase 1, nor of AC 90-116, was to be giving dual to the observer pilot.
 
I just need to make sure the QP is also a CFI so I can log it as dual and my insurance will be valid.

Ed Holyoke

Just to be clear, YOU never get to 'log dual'. Your cfi must sign your logbook as 'instruction given'. The job of a cfi and a test pilot are fundamentally different. If you are really getting an hour of instruction on that first hour-long flight then the cfi is not following the AC guidance for the PIC. If the CFI is following the test program then you aren't receiving instruction.

I'm sympathetic to your situation, but I don't think bending the rules is the answer. Advice to others: Start thinking about this issue at least 6 months before you will be ready to fly.
 
What's more important?

As I mentioned before, I solved the issue by receiving some "instructions" in a friends RV-10.
This did not satisfy the insurance requirement but more importantly improved my confidence in handling the RV-10. I flew phase 1 without liability insurance and everyone can get liability insurance but not hull insurance. (unless I am mistaken)
There are hundreds of RVs out there and getting a few rides from a friend and developing a good feel for the airplane should not be too difficult for anyone who has completed and RV. If you can't fly up to Oregon and book with Mike Seager, getting some stick time in a friends RV would certainly take the excitement level down a couple of notches on your first flight.
Not having hull insurance may be uncomfortable to many but for me it was more important to sharpen my flying skills vs. having hull insurance.
What's more important to you?
 
Well, obviously the purpose of phase 1 is to prove the newly built aircraft safe to operate while risking as few lives as possible. An observer pilot is not allowed by the AC until the initial flight test program, with all the maneuvers and at least 8 hrs flown by the builder pilot, is complete and documented and has nothing to do with what I propose. If I intended to be an "observer pilot" I'd have no business being along on the first flight anyway, even if I did build it and know the airplane better than anybody.

The purpose of the additional pilot program, as set forth in the opening pages of the AC itself, is to cut down on the risk of an inexperienced pilot crashing his brand new plane early in the test flight period. So, taking along a very experienced and highly qualified pilot, who happens to be a CFI, with a ~20hr tailwheel builder pilot - how is that abuse of the additional pilot program? It is exactly what the program is for. If my insurance didn't mandate a CFI, I might well want to use a qualifying pilot per the additional pilot program for the first flight anyway.

Just to clarify, IAW with AC 90-116, while it's true that an Observer Pilot (OP) cannot accompany a builder pilot (BP) until the AIT has been performed, a qualified Pilot (QP), as defined by the AC, most certainly can. Again I'm absolutely not condoning conducting any Phase 1 ops with transition training, just pointing out what the AC says.
 
Last edited:
I flew phase 1 without liability insurance and everyone can get liability insurance but not hull insurance. (unless I am mistaken)

You are mistaken. I had no hull insurance for my first year (self-insured) but did not have any desire to self insure the liability. No carrier would provide liability coverage to me without some form of type specific experience (past experience or specified hours with a carrier approved pilot in my plane). They would issue me a policy, but it carried an exception for use by me as PIC until I me the requirements of the policy. My carrier did not require "dual instruction," as Bob mentioned, only x hours of time with a carrier approved pilot. I am sure this is typical and that is how Jesse is allowed to perform this support as a non-CDI. Seems some want dual, some want time and some want a checkout/signoff.

When my CFI, who was also a named pilot on my policy, was PIC my liability coverage was in force. Once I had accumulated the necessary hours, I could act as PIC and my liability coverage was in force. Prior to completing those hours, my policy was not in force if I was PIC.

Larry
 
Last edited:
Back
Top