? About logging multi time

Yes... but good luck finding someone willing to insure a solo in a twin.

Met a guy on the golf course once - he was paired up with my Dad and I as we were playing the Lakes track at Firewheel...the gent mentioned that he was taking flying lessons.

"Oh really?" I say. "That's really cool."
"Yeah, I bought a plane I've always wanted, so I'm learning to fly it. Just about ready to solo."
"Nice," I say. "What kind of plane did you buy?"
"Baron 58."

I blinked a few times.

Granted, this guy had a metric arseload of money, having just sold his company. It is possible, it's just verrrrrry expensive.
 
Not sure what you're getting at...no where does it state that you have to pay for instruction...?? :confused:

You are right, he does not need to pay the instructor. However, who is paying for the airplane? 61.113(c) plainly states pro rata share. I am not trying to be argumetative, rather making sure I understand the reg.
 
You are right, he does not need to pay the instructor. However, who is paying for the airplane? 61.113(c) plainly states pro rata share. I am not trying to be argumetative, rather making sure I understand the reg.

I would assume that the owner is paying the commercial pilot to ferry the airplane. That's perfectly legal under the regs. If the ferry pilot is an MEI and wants to give instruction at the same time, that's all good too.
 
You are right, he does not need to pay the instructor. However, who is paying for the airplane? 61.113(c) plainly states pro rata share. I am not trying to be argumetative, rather making sure I understand the reg.
Assuming anyone in this scenario is a passenger to begin with, it's the poster (he's certainly not the PIC). 61.113 doesn't require a passenger to pay anything.

You may be reading more into the reg than in there.
 
Back
Top