VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #51  
Old 05-11-2018, 08:47 AM
Auburntsts's Avatar
Auburntsts Auburntsts is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dumfries, VA
Posts: 2,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonFromTX View Post
The FAA’s position is quite clear: an EAB airplane may not be used for compensation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vern View Post
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.
__________________
Todd Stovall
PP ASEL-IA
RV-10 N728TT - Flying!
WAR EAGLE!

Last edited by Auburntsts : 05-11-2018 at 08:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 05-11-2018, 09:41 AM
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 7,864
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auburntsts View Post
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.
__________________
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 05-11-2018, 10:03 AM
Auburntsts's Avatar
Auburntsts Auburntsts is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dumfries, VA
Posts: 2,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 View Post
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.
__________________
Todd Stovall
PP ASEL-IA
RV-10 N728TT - Flying!
WAR EAGLE!

Last edited by Auburntsts : 05-11-2018 at 10:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 05-11-2018, 12:43 PM
DonFromTX's Avatar
DonFromTX DonFromTX is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: La Feria Texas
Posts: 3,771
Default

OK, I think I have it now. If you are getting some transition training from a LODA guy and need a BFR, you should probably give him a birthday present of say $100, then when asking about a BFR, remind him that you gave him a birthday present yesterday (regardless of when his birthday was). That would make it all legal in the eyes of the FAA since he was just giving you a birthday present as well..
__________________
A&P, PP-SEL, Pathological Flier, EAA Technical Counselor
EAA Chapter 595 President,http://www.595.eaachapter.org/index.htm
Retired US Army Officer
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 05-11-2018, 01:54 PM
skylor's Avatar
skylor skylor is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auburntsts View Post
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.
If a person is charging for aerial photography or skywriting in an EAB, aren't they "being carried for hire"? I think this could be why the "or" is in 2).

Regarding EAB aircraft compensation for air-show performances: The FAA has made it clear that a commercial rated pilot may be compensated for air-show performances in an EAB aircraft (this may be part of the air-show waiver). However, they have also made it clear that air-show performers may not be compensated for giving VIP or press rides in an EAB aircraft.

Skylor
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05-11-2018, 01:59 PM
skylor's Avatar
skylor skylor is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonFromTX View Post
OK, I think I have it now. If you are getting some transition training from a LODA guy and need a BFR, you should probably give him a birthday present of say $100, then when asking about a BFR, remind him that you gave him a birthday present yesterday (regardless of when his birthday was). That would make it all legal in the eyes of the FAA since he was just giving you a birthday present as well..
Not really. At least in the eyes of other branches of government as well as government contractors, this type of behavior is considered both unethical and illegal. The example you gave is very similar to examples used in ethics training for govt. contractors. No, you can't give the birthday present to his wife or daughter, either...

Last edited by skylor : 05-11-2018 at 02:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 05-11-2018, 02:08 PM
Auburntsts's Avatar
Auburntsts Auburntsts is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dumfries, VA
Posts: 2,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skylor View Post
If a person is charging for aerial photography or skywriting in an EAB, aren't they "being carried for hire"? I think this could be why the "or" is in 2).

Skylor
IMO no. I take 91.319 (2) to mean carrying someone other than the pilot conducting the flight as in a 121 or 135 operation. But hay, my opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it.
__________________
Todd Stovall
PP ASEL-IA
RV-10 N728TT - Flying!
WAR EAGLE!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 05-11-2018, 05:38 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 5,387
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse View Post
As long as you pay your pro rata share of the expenses, you are not flying for hire, so you can do it.
Jesse, this is a common but incorrect perception. You need to go to the for-hire FARs (like part 135), where it is more clear that you may share the expenses of a flight with passengers ONLY when the flying is incidental to the trip. For example, if you and your friends want to gamble, then you may share the costs of a trip to Las Vegas. But if your friends want to gamble but you only want to fly, and intend to hang around the FBO while they gamble, then this is NOT legal. Likewise for aerial sightseeing, or if receiving flight instruction, then the flight is not incidental, but rather the main reason for going. Cost sharing under these circumstances is not allowed. (This has nothing to do with EAB, the same rules apply to normally certified aircraft.)
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 05-11-2018, 10:23 PM
Ironflight's Avatar
Ironflight Ironflight is offline
VAF Moderator / Line Boy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dayton, NV
Posts: 11,716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vern View Post
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 won’t speak for ALL cases, but in many cases, those “experimental” aren’t E-AB - often times they are Exhibition, which carries different rules and ops Lims....
__________________
Paul F. Dye
Editor in Chief - KITPLANES Magazine
RV-8 - N188PD - "Valkyrie"
RV-6 (By Marriage) - N164MS - "Mikey"
RV-3B - N13PL - "Tsamsiyu"
A&P, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor
Dayton Valley Airpark (A34)
http://Ironflight.com
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 05-12-2018, 06:40 AM
Northernliving Northernliving is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 136
Default Generous people

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTurner View Post
The rulings that come out of courts often surprise me. But in this case, my opinion is that the FAA lawyers would rip this arguement to shreds. The airplane is being used to generate compensation for its owner, the cfi. Now, if you separate the two - you have an owner, not the cfi, who will genuinely let you borrow his plane for free - then you can legally pay the cfi. Same as if you are the owner.
BTW, actual cost numbers from when I was doing transition training in my -10: gas, $50/hr; insurance (just extra cost for giving dual), $400 per person (or $80/hr if 5 hours were needed); wear and tear on brakes, tires, ....??. So you see that your suggested ‘rate’ doesn’t come close to covering costs.
I had just this. I used an RV6 for free, and an RV8 for free for my transition training. 2 hours in each. They were filled with fuel when I took them out, and I filled them when I returned them. I agreed to pay the CFI, but he ended up doing it for free anyway (well, I had to listen to all his flying stories, that were really cool anyway!).
__________________
Brian J.
Boston, MA
RV8 Based at ORH - Purchased
RV8 - The Dream - Under Construction
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:44 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.