Transition Training during Phase I

[KatanaPilot]

One difficulty some builders experience is getting transition training in type to satisfy their insurance company. I know of a few pilots who have flown their newly built airplanes without insurance until they had the required amount of flight time. Gutsy move I think, but somewhat understandable.

Transition training used to be prohibited during Phase I presumably due to the prohibition on carriage of anyone except the solo pilot. I don't know if there was explicit language in ops limits prohibiting training, or if it was simply implied.

Given that there is now language in AC 90-116 referring to logging of training time during Phase I (page 18, section 17 (b)) - my assumption is that transition training given during Phase I by a CFI also meeting the requirements of the Additional Pilot or Observer Pilot would be permitted.

If this is not the case, I am looking for specific FAA guidance that prohibits it.

 

[Carlos151]

Shouldn't transition training happen BEFORE you actually fly your airplane in Phase I?

 

[BobTurner]

AC 90-116 answers your first question. The ‘traditional’ phase 1 still allows only required flight crew, and the AC says that for single engine aircraft, that means solo only. So no dual is possible.
For phase 1 conducted under the second pilot program, it’s much murkier. Here’s my unofficial opinion: if I were the qualified observer pilot (and I am a cfi), then I would sign off your logbook as ‘dual received’ while I watched (and coached, if needed) you perform normal landings, crosswind landings, no flap landings, etc. But once the aircraft was shown to perform within expectations on all possible wind, density altitude, etc, landing configurations, then landing practice would cease. The purpose of phase one is aircraft testing, not pilot training. So I would only sign off as dual those things that were accomplished accidentally, during and as part of the phase 1 testing. If I thought more practice was needed before I could sign you off as ‘transition training received’, then that would have to be done in phase 2. Note some insurance companies may just say, ‘5 hours dual’, which is different from asking for ‘transition training accomplished’.
As I said, it’s not perfectly clear.

 

[KatanaPilot]

Shouldn't transition training happen BEFORE you actually fly your airplane in Phase I?

Sure, but that is not always possible. There are very few pilots that offer transition training in RV's and its very difficult to find anyone for certain types (like a Rocket/Raider).

So the only feasible method may be to train in the airplane you built - if you can find a CFI willing to do it and if it's allowed.

I'm looking for specific language in the FAR's or Ops Limits prohibiting transition training during Phase I and so far - I haven't found it.

 

[BobTurner]

I think your Ops Limits restrict phase 1 activities to complying with 91.317. Which leaves the question, can you log dual while demonstrating compliance with required testing? Or is logging time as ‘dual instruction’ implicitly not allowed?

 

[N8DAV8R]

I think your Ops Limits restrict phase 1 activities to complying with 91.317. Which leaves the question, can you log dual while demonstrating compliance with required testing? Or is logging time as ‘dual instruction’ implicitly not allowed?

This was an important question to me too. In my opinion it would be more useful to limit the conversation to what is in the regs, not what is implicit, what 'should happen', or what it 'traditional'. I appreciate the reference to 91.137.

In that context, the part that seems to be most relevant to 91.317 d (2).

(d) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate a provisionally certificated civil aircraft except—

(1) In direct conjunction with the type or supplemental type certification of that aircraft;

(2) For training flight crews, including simulated air carrier operations;

What part of the regulations specifically would indicate that it is prohibited?

 

[lr172]

I can't speak to the regs as they exist today. However, the APP came out 2 months before my first flight in the 6. I went through them with a fine tooth comb and found NO explicit prohibition from the Additional pilot providing instruction, in fact it seemed that was the whole point; Having someone more experienced to provide support and guidance and shariung that expertise in the name of safety. It may or may not have been the FAA's intention to prohibit it, but was NOT stated in words. I did call the insurance company to get there take, as it was their requirment and they said it was fine with them. It was brand new then and I was probably the first pilot to ask them. So, have no idea what their stance is today. Also, I am not convinced that the pilot needs to log the dual in their book, as it is not FAR related training (for a rating, currency, BFR, etc.). Very possible that a written note to the insurance company is adequate (a question for them). This is not a FAR requirement so no legal reason to put it in your log book as dual, at least it doesn't seem that way. What if your buddy is flying with you and gives you tips on a better way to do your pattern. That is not dual and I am not sure that changes just because the guy giving the tip is a CFI. Not an aviation lawyer, so take it for what its worth.

I, of course, didn't follow this path. Just did the research. But my conclusion was that it was doable. Many times the insurance company will accept a sign off by a CFI and not necessarily dual time. IMHO, that absolutely is not dual received. That is someone evaluating you and just like a checkride, is not logged as dual. The fact that he gave tips and guidance during that observation doesn't make it dual, just like DPEs giving tips to students during their checkride doesn't change it to dual.

So if the AP qualified pilot is also in a position to be able to sign off the pilot as competent purely to satisfy the insurance company, I don't see how this can be considered training, even if you somehow read the regs to prohibit training during phase I.

 

[N8DAV8R]

Also, I am not convinced that the pilot needs to log the dual in their book, as it is not FAR related training (for a rating, currency, BFR, etc.). Very possible that a written note to the insurance company is adequate (a question for them). This is not a FAR requirement so no legal reason to put it in your log book, at least it doesn't seem that way. .

This is a fair point as far as something tangent to the regs. In my case, the insurance was clear about 1 hour of dual with an endorsement to solo the make/model. That means creating a record, and my pilot logbook would be the logical place to create the record. The analog would be doing similar to meet insurance requirements for club and rental aircraft. Not addressed in the regs but well established as customary...but one could write things down wherever and however they want. This doesn't seem like new ground.

From there, it goes back to the regs. Is there anything in the regs that prevent dual being given. I don't see it.

 

[spatsch]

Don’t see anything in the regs to prevent it.

Am wondering though how many CFIs would be willing to do it. How do you write that accident report stating that you were not busy enough being the test pilot of a newly build airplane on its first flight so you decided to give/receive instructions at the same time to keep yourself occupied…. .

Just make sure you get in writing that the insurance will cover that accident. That seems something they might try to wiggle out of… .

Oliver

 

[N8DAV8R]

Don’t see anything in the regs to prevent it.

Am wondering though how many CFIs would be willing to do it. How do you write that accident report stating that you were not busy enough being the test pilot of a newly build airplane on its first flight so you decided to give/receive instructions at the same time to keep yourself occupied…. .

It's a pretty big leap to take the question from dual during Phase 1, to dual during the first flight. Phase 1 is somewhere between 5 and 20 hours. A CFI that is familiar with make model, especially the RV models with standard design, could verify the basic controllability of the airplane in an hour or two.

 

[spatsch]

It's a pretty big leap to take the question from dual during Phase 1, to dual during the first flight. Phase 1 is somewhere between 5 and 20 hours. A CFI that is familiar with make model, especially the RV models with standard design, could verify the basic controllability of the airplane in an hour or two.

Fair. Took me longer then 1-2 hours to establish all the basics but maybe I am just slow. I think you got your answer though. Seems to be legal so your big question is if the insurance will cover.

If I was the insurance I would argue gross negligence. If that sticks in a court or not who knows ... . That's why I suggested to get this from the insurance in writing ahead of time. Otherwise you can as well fly off your hours without insurance... . That's legal too.

Oliver

 

[rocketman1988]

Phase 1

It's a pretty big leap to take the question from dual during Phase 1, to dual during the first flight. Phase 1 is somewhere between 5 and 20 hours. A CFI that is familiar with make model, especially the RV models with standard design, could verify the basic controllability of the airplane in an hour or two.

Between 5 and 20 hours for phase 1? Maybe for the Rv-12. You would be hard pressed to accomplish everything you are suppose to be testing in 20 hours.

As far as training during phase 1, I as a CFI, would not offer to do it. Phase 1 is to explore the characteristics of that particular aircraft within its entire operating envelope. Being a qualified second pilot during phase 1 I have no problem with. Testing an unknown aircraft while training an inexperienced pilot (in the RV) I think is asking for trouble. The best thing that could happen is nothing happens; it goes downhill from there.

 

[lr172]

Fair. Took me longer then 1-2 hours to establish all the basics but maybe I am just slow. I think you got your answer though. Seems to be legal so your big question is if the insurance will cover.

If I was the insurance I would argue gross negligence. If that sticks in a court or not who knows ... . That's why I suggested to get this from the insurance in writing ahead of time. Otherwise you can as well fly off your hours without insurance... . That's legal too.

Oliver

I offer no consideration to pleasing the insurance companies. They are the ones that put us in this mess. We have only a VERY small number of people that are willing to do transition training in a plane other than our own. The ins co's have made it prohibitively expensive to do it in the instructors plane or even a friends airplane. How is a guy to deal with this when he wants insurance coverage during phase I. No real surprise that folks are looking for legal ways around this issue. I called Seeger in '19 to get training for my 10. He was booked 3 months out. Can only imagine how bad that is today. I got lucky, as I had a friend with a 10 that also was a CFI and did it in his plane.

Larry

 

[N8DAV8R]

Between 5 and 20 hours for phase 1? Maybe for the Rv-12. You would be hard pressed to accomplish everything you are suppose to be testing in 20 hours.

I did screw that up. Meant to type between 5 and 40...and of course with task based Phase I it's even harder to define in terms of hours. The more important point being that somewhere in that range a safe and controllable airplane is established. A builder/owner could learn to operate safely enough to take over from there.

I'm happy for other builders who were able to satisfy insurance requirements easily. My experience for putting the pieces together was frustrating. I even travelled half way across the country just to spend a week socked in by smoke. Eventually I had to explore the options described in this thread. There was an experienced CFI with RV time and several test flights under his belt. The -12 being a standardized build didn't present any surprises. My insurer was aware of the situation and what I got in writing was good enough for me.

I have lots of flying left to do and expect that along with flying some pattern work and just enjoying the airplane, it will take in the 10ish hour range for me to complete the test cards as published by Van's and collect the important data.

 

[rockwoodrv9]

It isnt specifically what the OP asked but I had an experienced pilot do my phase 1 for me. I was not qualified. Some builders have a great desire to pilot or be in the plane on the first flight. That was not a consideration to me so it made the choice easier.

As for training in my 9A after phase 1, I was lucky to have a friend who gave me lessons and a DPE that would do my check ride for my license in my plane. It took some looking but there are instructors and DPE's that will work with you.

My insurance was about $500 a month until I got my ticket - then dropped to under $200. I did add my instructor on my insurance at no cost. He is a Cirrus instructor and test pilot for Airbus and as soon as I told my agent his name, she said he was covered!

Good luck and have fun!

 

[rocketman1988]

I did screw that up. Meant to type between 5 and 40...and of course with task based Phase I it's even harder to define in terms of hours. The more important point being that somewhere in that range a safe and controllable airplane is established. A builder/owner could learn to operate safely enough to take over from there.

I'm happy for other builders who were able to satisfy insurance requirements easily. My experience for putting the pieces together was frustrating. I even travelled half way across the country just to spend a week socked in by smoke. Eventually I had to explore the options described in this thread. There was an experienced CFI with RV time and several test flights under his belt. The -12 being a standardized build didn't present any surprises. My insurer was aware of the situation and what I got in writing was good enough for me.

I have lots of flying left to do and expect that along with flying some pattern work and just enjoying the airplane, it will take in the 10ish hour range for me to complete the test cards as published by Van's and collect the important data.

The -12 is a different animal; I do think that the intent of phase 1 testing is airplane centric. Gathering data and expanding the aircraft operating envelop is typically not the time to be pilot training, imo. I do understand the insurance conundrum, and I know that is driving much of the problem.

 

[mfleming]

It's a pretty big leap to take the question from dual during Phase 1, to dual during the first flight. Phase 1 is somewhere between 5 and 20 hours. A CFI that is familiar with make model, especially the RV models with standard design, could verify the basic controllability of the airplane in an hour or two.

My friend did the first flight. After the first flight, we filled out the additional pilot paperwork, he's also a CFI...now he's legal in the right seat and I'm legal in the left. We did two flights like that. Legal and it really helped my confidence.

My transition training with Mike Seager happened a year and a half before then and I felt very rusty.

 

[BobTurner]

I offer no consideration to pleasing the insurance companies. They are the ones that put us in this mess. We have only a VERY small number of people that are willing to do transition training in a plane other than our own. The ins co's have made it prohibitively expensive to do it in the instructors plane or even a friends airplane. How is a guy to deal with this when he wants insurance coverage during phase I. No real surprise that folks are looking for legal ways around this issue. I called Seeger in '19 to get training for my 10. He was booked 3 months out. Can only imagine how bad that is today. I got lucky, as I had a friend with a 10 that also was a CFI and did it in his plane.

Larry

+1. Did your friend fully understand that he was not insured while giving you dual? That unless absolutely free, it was illegal unless he had a waiver (‘LODA’)?

It is exactly my experience with the FAA and the LODA for using my 10, for hire, to give transition training, that makes me so negative in this thread. In the earliest days of this LODA (first decade of the 20th century) a CFI would give, say, 5 hours of transition training to X. Then X would ask, would this training satisfy the flight portion of a BFR? The cfi would think, say yes, of course. They’d do the one hour minimum or more on the ground and the cfi would sign off the Flight Review. By 2011, however, the faa outlawed this practice. My LODA explicitly says that I may not sign off Flight Reviews, may not sign off high performance endorsements, may not sign off anything other than ‘transition training given’ while flying under the LODA. I personally think they killed the goose that laid the eggs. My fear is that in the near future, the faa will do the same thing with the ‘second pilot on board in phase 1’ program. They’ll change the rules to explicitly forbid any dual instruction given sign offs. It just seems to be their nature to ignore common sense, and to be suspicious of cfi’s in general (not to say that no one has ever abused their privilege).

 

[mfleming]

+1. Did your friend fully understand that he was not insured while giving you dual? That unless absolutely free, it was illegal unless he had a waiver (‘LODA’)?

In my case, my friend was fully insured. The insurance company approved of him for PIC as well as sitting in the right seat for the additional pilot program. And yes, it was done for free.

 

[KatanaPilot]

Good discussion

Still have not seen any language prohibiting training during Phase I using the additional pilot program.

If the additional pilot is a CFI, can meet the requirements of the insurance company and be a named pilot on the policy - I think this could be a workable solution for builders needing transition training.

We can argue whether or not training on the first flight is appropriate and/or prudent - but I don't think it would violate any rules.

 

[rocketman1988]

Still have not seen any language prohibiting training during Phase I using the additional pilot program.

If the additional pilot is a CFI, can meet the requirements of the insurance company and be a named pilot on the policy - I think this could be a workable solution for builders needing transition training.

We can argue whether or not training on the first flight is appropriate and/or prudent - but I don't think it would violate any rules.

Maybe not but if something happened, what do you think the FAA’s first question would be?

 

[KatanaPilot]

Maybe not but if something happened, what do you think the FAA’s first question would be?

Playing “what if’s” was not the point of my original question. I was simply trying to determine if training during Phase I was legal. I believe that it may be under certain circumstances lacking any prohibition in ops limits or FAR’s.

 

[rocketman1988]

Playing “what if’s” was not the point of my original question. I was simply trying to determine if training during Phase I was legal. I believe that it may be under certain circumstances lacking any prohibition in ops limits or FAR’s.

Legal doesn’t necessarily mean safe, or even a good idea.

I understand your thought…even if it was legal, as a CFI, I still would not agree to instruct while the airplane was being tested.

 

[KatanaPilot]

Legal doesn’t necessarily mean safe, or even a good idea.

I understand your thought…even if it was legal, as a CFI, I still would not agree to instruct while the airplane was being tested.

I appreciate your input Bob and don't really disagree with your opinion. I was just trying to determine legality. As you know, taking off zero-zero under Part 91 is legal, but not necessarily prudent.

This doesn't affect me, but a lot of new builders are getting in a bind being unable to obtain transition training.

 

[dwranda]

I just went through this a few months ago. I tried to do transition training with Mike Seager. Flew all the way across the country and only got 1 hour in the plane with him due to a flat tire and 2 days of rain outs. Then tried to do it with the East coast rep in the 14. Rained out again. I discovered a fairly local guy that did my first flight and my transition training.
The thing that doesn't make sense to me is the insurance company was OK with my transition training being done in an RV10, 14 or any nose gear model but COULD NOT be done in my plane. I'm sure they have reasons for this but having an experienced pilot train me in my plane with my panel was terrific. I was able to fly off the phase 1 testing with more confidence than I would have had training in a different aircraft.

 

[lr172]

+1. Did your friend fully understand that he was not insured while giving you dual? That unless absolutely free, it was illegal unless he had a waiver (‘LODA’)?

.

Correct. He did not charge me. No barters / trades, etc. Just a friend doing a buddy a solid. Like I said, I was lucky.

 

[lr172]

We can argue whether or not training on the first flight is appropriate and/or prudent - but I don't think it would violate any rules.

I of course agree, but do suggest we not discuss it publicly. I have all confidence that this was an oversight and upon realizing what may be happening, the FAA will explicitly exclude it, just as they did for guys trying to get other endorsements or BFRs during transition training.

EDIT: it may not matter, as the post above implies that the ins co's have gotten wise to the option and are specifically excluding it now. No surprise. Almost seems like they want it be near impossible. It's nice that they allow you to do it in any other RV, but those other RVs have policies that specifically exclude the pilot with no RV time from being insured under that policy. So it seems the options are wait x months for one of the three instructors with training insurance (and hope it doesn't rain), convince some other RV owner to do it without coverage or try to work around the phase I limitations. Seems like a real mess.

 

[lr172]

Maybe not but if something happened, what do you think the FAA’s first question would be?

and the pilots response to it is likely to be "what training?" There really is no way to prove that training was being given by the AP unless that training is documented, which is typically done post flight. Not saying I would do this, but is conceivable that others might, given the challenge in meeting the insurance mandated training in today's environment. The onerous regs tend to make people very comfortable in rule bending. I drive down the freeway and not A SINGLE car is doing the posted 55 MPH speed limit (sadly my state still clings to this). As I mentioned, the ins co's have made this a real challenge and when that happens, folks start looking for alternatives and sometimes people bend the rule a bit in those cases. In the case I mentioned where the CFI is simply providing a "sign off" of competency, I am not even sure how the FAA could call that training or dual. By definition, they would be an observer, just like a DPE on a checkride. Best I can tell the FAA considers the DPE a passenger, not an instructor and the FAA forbids instruction during a checkride. Following that logic and assuming it is correct, you just need to get the ins co to change the 5 hour dual requirement to a CFI sign off, then no training or dual is required and therefore no rules to be broken.

 

[rocketman1988]

In the end…

I appreciate your input Bob and don't really disagree with your opinion. I was just trying to determine legality. As you know, taking off zero-zero under Part 91 is legal, but not necessarily prudent.

This doesn't affect me, but a lot of new builders are getting in a bind being unable to obtain transition training.

In the end, it is left up to the instructor and what they are comfortable with.

Y’all be careful out there!

 

[Mikeyb]

What dwranda said…
I very much wanted to fly with one of the big name transition trainers. Depending on where you live the logistics can be near impossible by the time you factor in post 2020 instructor availability, travel and weather.

I finally had a local CFI friend to work it out with.

 

[N8DAV8R]

+1. Did your friend fully understand that he was not insured while giving you dual? That unless absolutely free, it was illegal unless he had a waiver (‘LODA’)?

Is this true, at least as of the of 2022? I thought the LODA is no longer necessary in this context (builder receiving instruction in his plane from a CFI). Also, that the instructor can charge. It's the airplane that there can't be compensation for. This fix was pretty big news.

 

[spatsch]

Still have not seen any language prohibiting training during Phase I using the additional pilot program.

If the additional pilot is a CFI, can meet the requirements of the insurance company and be a named pilot on the policy - I think this could be a workable solution for builders needing transition training.

We can argue whether or not training on the first flight is appropriate and/or prudent - but I don't think it would violate any rules.

Only a workable solution if the insurance doesn’t consider it gross negligence. Otherwise the whole activity is not insured no matter who is named on what.

Will also be difficult to decide after the flight if it was training or not at least in rv-8s and 4s if the qualified pilot was sitting in the back seat during the crash.. .

Oliver

 

[BobTurner]

Is this true, at least as of the of 2022? I thought the LODA is no longer necessary in this context (builder receiving instruction in his plane from a CFI). Also, that the instructor can charge. It's the airplane that there can't be compensation for. This fix was pretty big news.

What I’m talking about here is the ‘old’ LODA, originally issued around 2008 or so, which allows the EAB owner (who is not the pilot receiving instruction) to charge someone else for the use of his airplane. It’s limited to transition training only.

 

[gmcjetpilot]

my assumption is that transition training given during Phase I by a CFI also meeting the requirements of the Additional Pilot or Observer Pilot would be permitted.

If this is not the case, I am looking for specific FAA guidance that prohibits it.

You are asking for FAA guidance in the wrong place. You will not find it explicitly. I guarantee if you ask a FAA inspector they will not know or err on the safe side and say no. EAA Legal is a good place to call. I did not read every comment in this tread. Some may be right but saw a few that were wrong. I see from your profile you are experienced and asking for others.

You can have TWO people during Phase 1.... that has changed from a strict solo test pilot or strict required crew.

Transition training in experimental is very simple, assuming plane has airworthiness, you need to be current, qualified (including tail dragger) before doing transition training. I can not do tail dragger training in an RV.

Why do you NEED transition training? Insurance. It is NOT required by FAA and it is not a check ride or even an endorsement (although I give one). It is just training.[/COLOR]

If you are a private pilot, current medical, (3 to/ldg) last 90 days, current medical, even if you have ZERO RV time you can do the first flight. If it is a tail dragger you need an endorsement, high performance you need that aS well. I can tell you initial tail dragger training in RV is a no no regardless of phase 1 or if plane has airworthiness. However transition training is not a FAA thing, a T/G endorsement is.

YOU WANT TO BE SAFE... Drop a few grand on transition training with the many that offer training and the plane. Most notably Van's factory transition pilot Mike Seager. I never flew with him, but I talked to him on the phone about qualifying as a Van's Transition instructor (see my ratings in signature). I don't need Van's approval to do transition training in my plane or others, only to be put on their website. See van's web site for instructors in your area. I have talked to a few. They get a LOT so be ready to pay a lot. Let me say this. I called a local FBO for rental for the first time in decades (have my own plane so not a renter). A C172 and instructor was $240/hr wet. So expect to pay for transition training. Now if you just want a GEN FAM flight to go fly your own plane you can do that. If you want "assurance for insurance" expect 5 to 10 hours. Then you can fly your own plane, even for Phase 1. I was at an airport with 19 RV's and so I had opportunity to go for rides (with pilot owner not CFI). So I felt comfortable flying my plane from for first flight,.

I do transition training. I can fly off your Phase I. You could sit in the other seat. There is nothing keeping me letting you manipulate the controls while I take flight test notes, if you are a current pilot, class/catagory, qualified in high performance and/or tail draggers as applicable. Can you log it? That is between you and your logbook, but I would not GIVE DUAL instruction or log or endorse it. Would you learn, sure.

I flew my first RV 28 yrs ago with no RV time except for one back seat ride in an RV4. It was all aerobatics including intentional stall inverted. It really gave me confidence in how the plane flew. I was VERY current in taildraggers, aerobatics and flying a lot. The first flight in the RV and the next +1000 all have been uneventful. The plane was not insured at that time.

So in my opinion UNLESS you get a GO from FAA in writing. No amount of rationalization will suffice. If you want to sit in on Phase 1 and get experience so you can either
1) After X hours of sitting crew while I fly Phase 1, you could fire me and go fly it yourself, with no insurance of course.
2) Even if you have 5 hours of dual in RV with some ad hoc endorsement, some (most?) insurance will not insure Phase 1.
3) If you want to be proficient and qualify for insurance, go get transition training before you fly your plane.