What's new
Van's Air Force

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

What can I legally do in a RV (Experimental)

WISC

Well Known Member
Can a person legally receive training in an experimental and take the PPL practical in an experimental? I am thinking the owner (probably in partnership) wants to get his PPL or possibly some other certificates (instrument).

Seperate question:

I know you can't use an experimental for flight instruction but can't the owner charge for his instruction time in one? I am thinking about people who have RV's and offer familiarity training.

Thank you for your expertise.
 
What you can do...

You can receive instruction, and take checkrides in your own aircraft.
If you have a tandem aircraft, don't count on getting instrument training or taking an instrument checkride in it because the instructor or examiner doesn't have visibility of, or access to the instruments or radios in the back seat.

An instructor can provide instruction in his aircraft if he gets a letter of authorization from the FAA. Without the letter, the instructor can give instruction, but he cannot (legally) charge for instruction and must share expenses for the flight to be legal (the 'student' can't pay for all the expenses).
 
You can receive instruction, and take checkrides in your own aircraft.
If you have a tandem aircraft, don't count on getting instrument training or taking an instrument checkride in it because the instructor or examiner doesn't have visibility of, or access to the instruments or radios in the back seat.

An instructor can provide instruction in his aircraft if he gets a letter of authorization from the FAA. Without the letter, the instructor can give instruction, but he cannot (legally) charge for instruction and must share expenses for the flight to be legal (the 'student' can't pay for all the expenses).

Actually, the instructor can charge for instruction, but he/she cannot charge for the use of his airplane. He can share expenses for the operating cost of his airplane.
 
A little off the subject but....

....you can even do 'for pay' aerial photography with your experimental.

A friend on our airport has been doing aerial photography with his Skyhawk and a PPL for years. He charges the paper companies for the pictures, not the use of his airplane, or flying skills, and makes a living doing so.

You can also do powerline patrol and gas line (natural gas) if you only charge for the reports.

Best,
 
He charges the paper companies for the pictures, not the use of his airplane, or flying skills, and makes a living doing so.

You can also do powerline patrol and gas line (natural gas) if you only charge for the reports.

Pierre,

Is there something in the regs you can point to that allows this.

Or can I charge to fly people places and have them pay for the pleasant conversation rather than my skills and airplane?

I think the FAA would view the above as commercial operations.
 
Compensation

There is a common thread in the FARs regarding hauling passengers or goods for money. The requirements change when "for compensation or hire" comes into play. FAR parts 135 and 121 cover this and add many restrictions to the basic part 91 rules. The EAB operation limitations always include the phrase "No person may operate this Aircraft for carrying persons or property for compensation or hire." The only way out of this is a waiver for training.

As to the question of "show me where the regulations allow this," the FARs are generally cover what you can't do, not a long list of what you can do.

Pierre's friend with the survey business isn't moving anything or anyone for money, nor is someone taking photographs. It all comes down to charging someone for the ride, or for hauling something "for compensation." You can use your RV for a business trip, but you cannot charge a co-worker for the ride.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
The little part at the beginning...

There is a common thread in the FARs regarding hauling passengers or goods for money. The requirements change when "for compensation or hire" comes into play. FAR parts 135 and 121 cover this and add many restrictions to the basic part 91 rules. The EAB operation limitations always include the phrase "No person may operate this Aircraft for carrying persons or property for compensation or hire." The only way out of this is a waiver for training.

As to the question of "show me where the regulations allow this," the FARs are generally cover what you can't do, not a long list of what you can do.

Pierre's friend with the survey business isn't moving anything or anyone for money, nor is someone taking photographs. It all comes down to charging someone for the ride, or for hauling something "for compensation." You can use your RV for a business trip, but you cannot charge a co-worker for the ride.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

...of your typical Operating Limitations might cause an interesting discussion between Pierre's friend and the FAA and/or his insurance company...

b. The following operating limitations shall be prescribed to experimental amateur-built aircraft:
(1) No person may operate this aircraft for other than the purpose of meeting the requirements of ? 91.319(b) during phase I flight testing, and for recreation and education after meeting these requirements as stated in the program letter (required by ? 21.193) for this aircraft. In addition, this aircraft must be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general operating rules of part 91...


This isn't quoting a FAR, but is in your Operating Limitations that the FARs say you must follow...:rolleyes:
 
I just finished my PPL in my 9A. Finding an instructor was easy, though it was difficult, at least in Colorado, to find a DPE willing to give me a checkride in an experimental aircraft. After searching and searching in the Denver area, I was finally able to find someone willing to do it, though only after she thoroughly looked over the aircraft. Once she did that, a lot of her apprehension went away and she remarked that it was in much better shape than most of the 172s she flies in.

I think finding a DPE for an IFR rating would be much more difficult.
 
It is a Cessna...

...of your typical Operating Limitations might cause an interesting discussion between Pierre's friend and the FAA and/or his insurance company...

b. The following operating limitations shall be prescribed to experimental amateur-built aircraft:
(1) No person may operate this aircraft for other than the purpose of meeting the requirements of ? 91.319(b) during phase I flight testing, and for recreation and education after meeting these requirements as stated in the program letter (required by ? 21.193) for this aircraft. In addition, this aircraft must be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general operating rules of part 91...


This isn't quoting a FAR, but is in your Operating Limitations that the FARs say you must follow...:rolleyes:

All true, but Pierre's friend is flying a 172.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
My mistake...

All true, but Pierre's friend is flying a 172.
...

...I was going by the original title of the thread....:)

But Pierre did say...

"....you can even do 'for pay' aerial photography with your experimental."

...so I won't delete my post...:)
 
He was challenged...

...by a jealous friend of both of us, who was also a Private pilot. The Skyhawk owner had already checked on the regs, regarding doing photography for pay.

As far as pipeline patrol/ pogy piloting/powerline patrol in your experimental...well, a lot of it depends, I suppose, how close to the line you like to play...kinda like questionable tax deductions...as long as you're not checked, is it OK if you get away with it?

For you furriners:) a Pogy pilot is one who looks for schools of fish and then directs the fishing boats there.

Best,
 
It Ain't a Foul Unless the Ref Blows His Whistle?

As far as pipeline patrol/ pogy piloting/powerline patrol in your experimental...well, a lot of it depends, I suppose, how close to the line you like to play...kinda like questionable tax deductions...as long as you're not checked, is it OK if you get away with it?

Pierre:
While the trend in this country seems to move more toward "Basketball Mentality", the FAA is an entirely different matter. Here, we're subject to Administrative rather than Civil Law, and the phrase "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't really come into play. If I'm going to err, it will be in the direction that is most likely to keep me flying.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
Does anyone know of a DPE that will give a checkride in a -8 only for a commercial rating. My plan is build a -8, build taildragger time, then someday get into cropdusting....
Thanks
 
The Skyhawk owner had already checked on the regs, regarding doing photography for pay.

Pierre,

Do you know what or how he checked this? I have a fantasy about doing aerial photographyl, but currently have a PPL.
 
Pierre,

Do you know what or how he checked this? I have a fantasy about doing aerial photographyl, but currently have a PPL.

FAR 91.501 describes allowed usage under Part 91. You'll need a commercial pilot's license, but the aircraft itself is not a commercial endeavor. Many of the corporate aircraft in the U.S. today operate under this rule. They can be used for business, but they can't "be the business".
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
FAR 91.501

FAR 91.501 describes allowed usage under Part 91. You'll need a commercial pilot's license, but the aircraft itself is not a commercial endeavor. Many of the corporate aircraft in the U.S. today operate under this rule. They can be used for business, but they can't "be the business".
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP

Sorry, close, but...
Subpart F 91.501 Large and Turbine-Powered Multiengine Airplanes and Fractional Ownership Program Aircraft.

This section covers operators like NetJets.

For the purpose of this thread, you might want to read FAR 61.113

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
Thanks John

Sorry, close, but...
Subpart F 91.501 Large and Turbine-Powered Multiengine Airplanes and Fractional Ownership Program Aircraft.

This section covers operators like NetJets.

For the purpose of this thread, you might want to read FAR 61.113

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

First the memory goes...then? I'll be wearing long sleeve shirts from now on, just in case I start drooling.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
This covers...

Sorry, close, but...
Subpart F 91.501 Large and Turbine-Powered Multiengine Airplanes and Fractional Ownership Program Aircraft.

This section covers operators like NetJets.

For the purpose of this thread, you might want to read FAR 61.113

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

...what the pilot can do, not what the plane is licensed/registered to do...:)

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...946681AB499F661E86256EE1004BE0CC?OpenDocument
 
He read the regs, Tom....

Pierre,

Do you know what or how he checked this? I have a fantasy about doing aerial photographyl, but currently have a PPL.

...and I don't know if he asked the FAA....perhaps don't want to open a can of worms.

BTW...he only has a PPL as well,

Best,
 
Guidance

...what the pilot can do, not what the plane is licensed/registered to do...:)

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...946681AB499F661E86256EE1004BE0CC?OpenDocument

Understood, but the discussion is about a Private Pilot. On the aircraft side, the mystery is how the FAA would interpet the "recreation and education" issue in the Opps Specs. The intent of the rule is clear to me, but the question is how far the FAA will let the rule be "bent." I have a call in to a friend that is a FSDO inspector that might provide a little background on how the rule has been applied, and if it has been applied. We have to remember that the FAA has a reputation of being the "tombstone agency," only reacting after the fact. Sadly many of the FARs come directly from a fatal incident of some kind. :(

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
The thread though...

Understood, but the discussion is about a Private Pilot. On the aircraft side, the mystery is how the FAA would interpet the "recreation and education" issue in the Opps Specs. The intent of the rule is clear to me, but the question is how far the FAA will let the rule be "bent." I have a call in to a friend that is a FSDO inspector that might provide a little background on how the rule has been applied, and if it has been applied. We have to remember that the FAA has a reputation of being the "tombstone agency," only reacting after the fact. Sadly many of the FARs come directly from a fatal incident of some kind. :(

John Clark ATP, CFI

...is about doing it in an experimental RV....:)

I personally thought that the "education and recreation" bit was to prevent smaller guys going into the airplane production business and competing with certified planes, but without any of the testing required for certification...

...and that the FAA thinks that once a plane is built for "education and recreation" it should also be used for the same, sort of like the FARs say...

A couple of dumb accidents of experimentals used for business purposes (like you mention above, think 6 o'clock TV news), and we will all have to fax a flight plan to the FSDO before each flight. The FAA could change our Operating Limitations to equal that of Exhibition and Racing with just the stroke of a pen...:(

The local FSDO is reviewing all glider Operating Limitations in our area.... the old ones issued that were very loose for imported gliders under Exhibition and Racing...
 
Last edited:
Can a person legally receive training in an experimental and take the PPL practical in an experimental? I am thinking the owner (probably in partnership) wants to get his PPL or possibly some other certificates (instrument).

Seperate question:

I know you can't use an experimental for flight instruction but can't the owner charge for his instruction time in one? I am thinking about people who have RV's and offer familiarity training.

Thank you for your expertise.

Well, I had that same question a while back and since I have not seen anyone answer quite this way yet, I will try to do so now.

To answer your first question: the answer is 'yes', one can use an experimental aircraft for flight instruction (Private, Instrument, Commercial, CFI, etc.).

However, some flight instructors and evaluators may not want to work with someone in an experimental. I have known a couple that would never even sit in an experimental (let alone fly in one). Then again, I have known a couple of others that love (and have built) experimentals.

So proceed carefully there by making sure that both the CFI you have in mind and the examiner that you have in mind, will work with you in an experimental before hand.

To answer your second question 'yes' a CFI can charge for his time if an experimental is used.

That is because the FAA looks at instructor time as being seperate from airplane time.

Therefore, legally speaking, a CFI can charge for his time if an experimental is being used, but he cannot charge for the airplane time if an experimental is being used (because experimentals are not to be used for commercial purposes). Hence, one does not find too many CFIs that use experimentals as training aircraft. > However: as was pointed out by Mr Smith (see below) in some cases one can get authorization to use experimentals for some commercial purposes (such as transition training) in which case the instructor would be able to charge for both his time and his airplane time.

I hope this helps!
 
Last edited:
....(because experimentals are not to be used for commercial purposes). Hence, one does not find too many CFIs that use experimentals as training aircraft.

I hope this helps!

...not quite right, Steve. I had a LODA for my -6A and used it for 5 years/500 hours, doing transition training in it AND charging for the use of my airplane. It is allowed by FAR, if you have a Letter of Deviation Authority.

The LODA's right now, are in freeze mode but sooner or later...

Best,
 
...not quite right, Steve. I had a LODA for my -6A and used it for 5 years/500 hours, doing transition training in it AND charging for the use of my airplane. It is allowed by FAR, if you have a Letter of Deviation Authority.

The LODA's right now, are in freeze mode but sooner or later...

Best,

Thanks for the correction Mr Smith!

:)

I will correct my posting accordingly.
 
training in the rv

Crossbow,
You post is not quite right. I have been engaged in the transistion training for over 20 years. You may use an RV for training if you dont provide the airplane. I see many on here that think that they may provide their plane as long as they share expenses or dont charge for the use of their plane. You could not get the FAA to agree on this way of thinking. I dont think any insurance company would go along with it either. I ask for an faa waiver many years back and was told that if i provided the plane and did not charge for it, it was still considerd compensation for the use of my plane as long as i was providing it. As long as the student provides the plane then it can be done. Of course if you have a LODA then it can be done legally. Mike
 
What can I legally do in an RV (Experimental)

After almost 1000 hrs in my -7, many are IFR logged hours, I want to get my commercial rating. My instructor from our local FAA part 141/61 flight school has flown with me for BFR purposes in the -7 and and has acknowledged the "Technically Advanced Airplane" nature of my Skyview equipped, fuel injected and constant speed propeller RV7.

My instructor is willing to do the commercial instruction and I still need to find the right examiner but do I need to have any complex (retractable) time?
 
Experimental

The vast majority of the professional airshow pilots in the US are operating Experimental Aircraft, both EAB and Exp Exhibition category. The only requirement the FAA has for this is that if there is any compensation involved, even a free tank of fuel, then the pilot must have a Commercial certificate or higher. A private pilot performing an airshow "for free" and accepting a tank of gas or a free hotel room has more than once found themselves in big trouble.
The wing walking acts are something I have always wondered about, but in those cases the pilot is usually paying the wingwalker.
 
After almost 1000 hrs in my -7, many are IFR logged hours, I want to get my commercial rating. My instructor from our local FAA part 141/61 flight school has flown with me for BFR purposes in the -7 and and has acknowledged the "Technically Advanced Airplane" nature of my Skyview equipped, fuel injected and constant speed propeller RV7.

My instructor is willing to do the commercial instruction and I still need to find the right examiner but do I need to have any complex (retractable) time?

The new SEL commercial test standards are due out in about a week. The original FAA proposal was to allow you to take the test in a non-retractable, but you still needed 10 hours dual in a retractable. Rumor has it that that has been eased to allow time in technically advanced aircraft to be substituted for RG time. I suggest you wait a week or so and see what it actually says.
 
The vast majority of the professional airshow pilots in the US are operating Experimental Aircraft, both EAB and Exp Exhibition category. The only requirement the FAA has for this is that if there is any compensation involved, even a free tank of fuel, then the pilot must have a Commercial certificate or higher. A private pilot performing an airshow "for free" and accepting a tank of gas or a free hotel room has more than once found themselves in big trouble.
The wing walking acts are something I have always wondered about, but in those cases the pilot is usually paying the wingwalker.

These guys all have waivers, for all sorts of FAR violations (low flying, etc). They?re easy enough to get, even I have one (for transition training). Operating an EAB for compensation is not allowed without a waiver.
 
Can those with LODA experience share how the process worked for them and how they insure for training in RVs?

Thanks in advance.
 
Can those with LODA experience share how the process worked for them and how they insure for training in RVs?

Thanks in advance.

The key is finding a FSDO inspector who knows their own rules! I had to educate mine. If you are serious PM or email me your email address, and I will send you a copy of my application packet.
Insurance: I was offered two options: insure for unlimited number of ?students? for about $2K (this is in addition to my normal policy); or add students, individually, as named insureds, to my existing policy, for about $400-$500 per person. My current policy doesn?t want to deal with any mid-term additions, so I only have the first option. It?s obviously not cost-effective. So I am currently not doing transition training. I know several others in the same boat.
 
a fresh look?

...is about doing it in an experimental RV....:)

I personally thought that the "education and recreation" bit was to prevent smaller guys going into the airplane production business and competing with certified planes, but without any of the testing required for certification...

...and that the FAA thinks that once a plane is built for "education and recreation" it should also be used for the same, sort of like the FARs say...

A couple of dumb accidents of experimentals used for business purposes (like you mention above, think 6 o'clock TV news), and we will all have to fax a flight plan to the FSDO before each flight. The FAA could change our Operating Limitations to equal that of Exhibition and Racing with just the stroke of a pen...:(

The local FSDO is reviewing all glider Operating Limitations in our area.... the old ones issued that were very loose for imported gliders under Exhibition and Racing...

I am a bit new to depths of the FAA but I think it is sad that with the quality of the Van's Product that his comment of;
I personally thought that the "education and recreation" bit was to prevent smaller guys going into the airplane production business and competing with certified planes, but without any of the testing required for certification...
It seems that aviation in general would really benefit if the "little guys" could produce, let's say, RV-12's and, if needed do 50 inspections - whatever would be needed for certification. But the bottom line would be that "trainers" might be most readily available and less expensive. Thereby greatly promoting general aviation.
Maybe I am blowing smoke up the wrong pipe but... Maybe a new look at the issue would do the community a great service.
I have seen through the airshows I go to for my business that the "Older generation" is passing on and for the newer generation there is less interest, too expensive, too much regulation (in general) or who knows...
but it seems that the answer is right in front of everyone - the "little guy".

What about the "One Week Wonder" completed this year at Oshkosh?
Larry
 
Last edited:
After almost 1000 hrs in my -7, many are IFR logged hours, I want to get my commercial rating. My instructor from our local FAA part 141/61 flight school has flown with me for BFR purposes in the -7 and and has acknowledged the "Technically Advanced Airplane" nature of my Skyview equipped, fuel injected and constant speed propeller RV7.

My instructor is willing to do the commercial instruction and I still need to find the right examiner but do I need to have any complex (retractable) time?

No, you may use your "TAA" Experimental for all of the ten hours required, without any turbine or retractable time. But, heed the sunrise clause (July 27 and November 26 2018) on the FAR changes:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-06-27/pdf/2018-12800.pdf

In other words, time logged before November 26th doesn't count. You'll have to put in a long weekend after the 26th and take your checkride in December. :D
 
What can I legally do in an RV (Experimental)

Wow, I considered myself educated and somewhat intelligent until I read

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201...2018-12800.pdf

I guess I can do the written and get the instruction while weather in nice around here. Then do the ten hours in December and the checkride.

OR- If I want to buy 10 hrs of instruction in a Complex airplane, I can take the checkride in my RV 7 before December? Thoughts?
 
I am a bit new to depths of the FAA but I think it is sad that with the quality of the Van's Product that his comment of;

It seems that aviation in general would really benefit if the "little guys" could produce, let's say, RV-12's and, if needed do 50 inspections - whatever would be needed for certification. But the bottom line would be that "trainers" might be most readily available and less expensive. Thereby greatly promoting general aviation.

What about the "One Week Wonder" completed this year at Oshkosh?
Larry

There's lots and lots of real flakes in homebuilt aviation, and there's lots of well-intentioned, conscientious but untrained folks who make serious mistakes. There's lots of "professionals" out there who are only professional in that they take people's money. A consumer would have no way of knowing if the plane was competently built or not..

As for the one week wonder, that plane's construction was supervised within an inch of its life! Hardly the same thing as Joe six pack who decides he's tired of driving a truck and building airplanes looks better. And when you look at the time commitment of putting together a kit airplane, unless you've done the same kit several times before, your hourly reimbursement will be pitiful. Then you have to find a buyer, etc.

Don't see any possible way that this could happen... sorry.
 
No, you may use your "TAA" Experimental for all of the ten hours required, without any turbine or retractable time. But, heed the sunrise clause (July 27 and November 26 2018) on the FAR changes:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-06-27/pdf/2018-12800.pdf

In other words, time logged before November 26th doesn't count. You'll have to put in a long weekend after the 26th and take your checkride in December. :D
Dan,

The ATP changes don't go into effect until November but the commercial (61.129) will be into effect Aug 27th. I'm planning to use a friend's SR-22 to get my commercial done in Sept/Oct. I also think that you're fine getting the experience before the date in question because there is no requirement as to when you got that experience.

Paul

P.S. I bought the Jeppesen commercial course for the commercial because I wanted something different from the Kings. I would not buy the Jeppesen course again. It's a good review for someone going from one rating to the next, and who has their previous courses, but it's otherwise lacking in information. Their syllabus calls for 50 flight lessons... their targeted audience is likely well short of the required flight experience.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top