Does 61.113 apply if your parents fund your flight training?

CFI A&P

CFI A&P

Exploring the world one toilet at a time.
This is a first for me. Last night while teaching "holding out", compensation for private pilots, illegal charters, etc to the night class I teach one of the students raised this question:

"If my parents are paying for my flight training, then I am receiving compensation in flight time that I didn't pay for. Isn't that against this reg?"

Well, I've never heard it way and I don't think the FAA is that crazy. I tried to explain to him, that he's not exactly breaking the regulation because the spirit of the reg is to prevent illegal charters by underqualified and unapproved pilots. He still didn't follow my discussion about it, so I am trying to find another way to approach it for him so he understands. Any suggestions?

We've already beaten the illegal charter, pro-rata share stuff, flight training flights that are really charters, and such. I am really looking for information that is close to the someone else is paying for my flight training issue.
 
"You're parents aren't paying for your flight training. They are paying for you to do chores and odd jobs for them and then you are paying for your own flight training. "

Simple enough. Problem solved.
 
I want to say there was some problem with volunteer organizations like CAF for a while because the FAA said pilots couldn't receive free flight time without contributing a pro-rata share...I dont remember the details though.

I think this is also why organizations like CAP and others have LOU's with the FAA, authorizing what could otherwise be considered illegal compensation.
 
rframe said:
I want to say there was some problem with volunteer organizations like CAF for a while because the FAA said pilots couldn't receive free flight time without contributing a pro-rata share...I dont remember the details though.

I think this is also why organizations like CAP and others have LOU's with the FAA, authorizing what could otherwise be considered illegal compensation.
Click to expand...

This one was recently published, you can no longer borrow an airplane for fuel only.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...2013/stoner - (2013) legal interpretation.pdf
 
Parents pay kid money as a "gift". Kid uses it to pay for flight training. His money at that point.
 
CFI A&P said:
This is a first for me. Last night while teaching "holding out", compensation for private pilots, illegal charters, etc to the night class I teach one of the students raised this question:

"If my parents are paying for my flight training, then I am receiving compensation in flight time that I didn't pay for. Isn't that against this reg?"
Click to expand...

They're giving you money. What you choose to do with it's their own problem.

Does your student have any gastrointestinal maladies? :)
 
CFI A&P said:
This one was recently published, you can no longer borrow an airplane for fuel only.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2013/stoner - (2013) legal interpretation.pdf
Click to expand...
.
So if I own an airplane (I don't) I'm no longer free to allow a friend to fly said airplane out on a weekend getaway if friend pays for the cost of gas?

Should I start charging friends who use my car the mileage on the car for oil changes and other regular upkeep?

They are from the FAA, they are here to help ;)
 
gotWXdagain said:
.
So if I own an airplane (I don't) I'm no longer free to allow a friend to fly said airplane out on a weekend getaway if friend pays for the cost of gas?

Should I start charging friends who use my car the mileage on the car for oil changes and other regular upkeep?

They are from the FAA, they are here to help ;)
Click to expand...

I'm just as disappointed as the next pilot on this one. It's absurd and how can you track and enforce it?
 
..and it doesn't say that at all...

The interpretation doesn't answer the question as it is entirely too vague.

If I let the local CFI who is desperate for hours take my plane to another airport for the hours, even if he pays for the gas, he's being paid in hours and it's a violation.

If my co-worker borrows the bugsmasher to take a weekend trip with his wife, there's no problem. (...and if there is, there is something REALLY wrong here....) He's not doing it for the hours and I'm not getting anything out of the deal at all.

"We cannot issue an interpretation for your particular circumstances because you have not
provided enough details about the exact nature of the arrangement and the purpose and
intent of the flight."

"In the hypothetical example you provided, you as the pilot are obtaining an airplane from an individual who is not charging the full range of costs associated with operation of an airplane. Thus, depending on the terms of the arrangement with your friend and the purpose of the flight, you might receive some financial benefit that may fit under the broad interpretation of compensation under §61.113."
 
I also recently came across a situation where a private pilot with an instrument rating was going to fly skydivers for a charity event. The airplane and fuel were provided. The FAA stepped in because it was a public event and said that he would be receiving compensation of flight time and that was not acceptable.
 
web265 said:
..and it doesn't say that at all...

The interpretation doesn't answer the question as it is entirely too vague.

If I let the local CFI who is desperate for hours take my plane to another airport for the hours, even if he pays for the gas, he's being paid in hours and it's a violation.

If my co-worker borrows the bugsmasher to take a weekend trip with his wife, there's no problem. (...and if there is, there is something REALLY wrong here....) He's not doing it for the hours and I'm not getting anything out of the deal at all.

"We cannot issue an interpretation for your particular circumstances because you have not
provided enough details about the exact nature of the arrangement and the purpose and
intent of the flight."

"In the hypothetical example you provided, you as the pilot are obtaining an airplane from an individual who is not charging the full range of costs associated with operation of an airplane. Thus, depending on the terms of the arrangement with your friend and the purpose of the flight, you might receive some financial benefit that may fit under the broad interpretation of compensation under §61.113."
Click to expand...

You're right, the author of that letter wasn't specific enough and the FAA wouldn't nail down an answer on it because of the vagueness of the letter. However, the the last few sentences indicate the attitude they will have against the typical arrangement.
 
web265 said:
..and it doesn't say that at all...

The interpretation doesn't answer the question as it is entirely too vague.

If I let the local CFI who is desperate for hours take my plane to another airport for the hours, even if he pays for the gas, he's being paid in hours and it's a violation.

If my co-worker borrows the bugsmasher to take a weekend trip with his wife, there's no problem. (...and if there is, there is something REALLY wrong here....) He's not doing it for the hours and I'm not getting anything out of the deal at all.

"We cannot issue an interpretation for your particular circumstances because you have not
provided enough details about the exact nature of the arrangement and the purpose and
intent of the flight."

"In the hypothetical example you provided, you as the pilot are obtaining an airplane from an individual who is not charging the full range of costs associated with operation of an airplane. Thus, depending on the terms of the arrangement with your friend and the purpose of the flight, you might receive some financial benefit that may fit under the broad interpretation of compensation under §61.113."
Click to expand...
Are you sure about the part I bolded? If the person was a private pilot I can see it being illegal but since it's a CFI he has a commercial. You could hire him to take your airplane where ever you want. He's not holding out, you're supplying the aircraft and he's flying. Kind of like any part 91 corp job. I could be missing some thing. Never really been a reg nazi. :)
 
If this was against FAA regs 90% of the students at ERAU would be in violation.

My buddies dad bought him a twin and then paid for gas/fuel/mx to fly it while in college. Wonder what the FAA thinks of that!

As far as the student goes, tell him not to over think it.
 
wheelsup said:
If this was against FAA regs 90% of the students at ERAU would be in violation.

My buddies dad bought him a twin and then paid for gas/fuel/mx to fly it while in college. Wonder what the FAA thinks of that!

As far as the student goes, tell him not to over think it.
Click to expand...

That's what I tried to explain to him. If that were the case - only GI Bill recipients and lottery winners could fly. I know I didn't lose any sleep over it, but I think he did.

Thanks for all the input, I'll see what he thinks of it next class.
 
hook_dupin said:
I don't buy it. "Compensation" is what is received in exchange for a good or service. What good or service is the aircraft owner getting for all this?
Click to expand...
That's the answer.

"Compensation" is an exchange of something for something.

When you fly someone some where and get something back for it, it's an exchange of value, what lawyers like to call "quid pro quo" ("this for that"). In the case of 61.113 violation, the value to them is going to be a flight benefit.

Parents (or even a stranger) simply paying for your flight training with no expectation of a present or future benefit to them is just a gift. Parents (or even a stranger) simply paying for your flight training with no expectation of a present or future flight benefit to them is not compensation for flight services.

[Perhaps obviously, that's a generalization that may not apply to special circumstances of a specific situation]
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
That's the answer.

"Compensation" is an exchange of something for something.

When you fly someone some where and get something back for it, it's an exchange of value, what lawyers like to call "quid pro quo" ("this for that"). In the case of 61.113 violation, the value to them is going to be a flight benefit.

Parents (or even a stranger) simply paying for your flight training with no expectation of a present or future benefit to them is just a gift. Parents (or even a stranger) simply paying for your flight training with no expectation of a present or future flight benefit to them is not compensation for flight services.

[Perhaps obviously, that's a generalization that may not apply to special circumstances of a specific situation]
Click to expand...
My parents paid for my flight training and expect that one day they can non rev
 
So lets think about this situation. I own a Cessna 150 and my son/daughter/spouse wants to take flying lessons and fly my plane. Of course I will not charge anything for them to fly. Would that be considered illegal???????????:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top