flight instructing

FlyBoyJae

FlyBoyJae

New Member
I was reading the FAR and couldn't find anything (yet) on the following issue;

can private or commercial pilot teach someone how to fly and log that time? (provided that the student will not log any flight time)

I didn't read any where that CFIs are the only ones authorized to give flight instructions (only endorsements must be made by the CFI).
 
I dont have time to look up the applicable FARs, but technically, assuming that the private or commercial pilot is appropriately rated, they can give flight instruction. HOWEVER... that instruction cannot be towards any requirements of a specific rating or endorement. Only a CFI can give endoresements, sign off for a checkride, log the dual received time for someone going for say a private rating where a certain number of hours of dual is required.

In other words, assuming you are appropriately rated and current, you can take your wife, girlfriend, friend up in an airplane and "teach" them how to fly. You cannot log the time in their logbook as Dual Received. You cannot log the time in your logbook as Dual Given. They cannot use any of that time to achieve a rating or endoresment. And, unless they were already rated and current in class and category and are PIC of the airplane, it can't be in their logbook at all.

I would think that you would be able to log that time as PIC (again, assuming you are appropriately rated and current)--you're the only pilot on board and are at the very least, acting as PIC. Im sure someone out there has a better explanation of this point.

Regardless, my suggestion is: Dont go any further than taking someone up and at a safe altitude in straight and level flight, saying, "Ok, now you take hold of the wheel," then you let go and say, "See, you're flying!". And then take the airplane right back.

Not only are CFIs are trained to teach people how to fly, they are also trained how to, among other things, get out of bad situations (which can happen really fast) and how to keep their eyes outside of the airplane, looking for traffic, while the student flys. They are also insured (supposedly) in case something does happen. I would think that if a private or commercial pilot had a mishap and it was discovered that a "student" was at the controls, the insurance comany may not look on the incident too favorably.

Jeremy
 
I think Merlin pretty much covered everything.

The thing I would boil it down to is this: how much are you willing to put your certificate on the line? As long as you're rated for whatever you're doing, there's nothing to say another person can't take the controls and learn. You can do takeoffs and landings, go into the clouds (assuming you're instrument rated), or whatever you feel like. Just remember that if anything goes wrong, it's all on you and your certificates (if the other pilot is not properly rated).

Of course, that's not any different than a formal student/instructor relationship, except for the fact that instructors have been trained on how to manage a cockpit while teaching.

Also, if the "student" is not properly rated they cannot log it as PIC, and if they are properly rated, you cannot log it as PIC, and at no time should anybody be putting "Dual received" or "Dual given" in their logbook.
 
^^

i wasn't saying that I were intending on doing such thing...i was just curious since I have been reading the FAR thoroughly thesedays. I just thought that FAR should address that only CFI can give instructions.

thanks guys for your input~
 
FlyBoyJae said:
I just thought that FAR should address that only CFI can give instructions.
Click to expand...

The FARs already cover that. 14 CFR 61.51(h) specifies that logged training time must be from an authorized instructor.

As for the unlogged, informal instruction that could be given by any pilot, I think the FAA has intentionally remained silent. The FAA doesn't want to dictate every little technical detail of our lives. Such a rule isn't necessary and would be a hassle to enforce.

If you take a buddy flying and let them take the controls for a few minutes while you show them the basics, that's perfectly safe and there is no reason it should be illegal. If you let your buddy take the controls, then you fall asleep and tell him to wake you when you get to the end of a cross country, that's a problem. But in a case like that, the FAA can always bust you on good 'ol 91.13, Careless or reckless operation. Either way, the FAA has it covered.
 
I had this question when I was working on my private. I thought it would be a good way to build time and a better feel for the airplane after I got my private. I forgot who told me this but they mentioned something about CFIs having that C in front of the FI.

You can show people how to fly as a pilot and that is fine and dandy, but in order for it to legally count it has to be done by someone certified to do it.
 
aside from everything posted, I don't see the benefit. The "student" can't pay for the airplane, he can't log the time, the only one that makes out is you, logging time for half price if you split it pro-rated, which then the FAA could say you're being compensated by logging that time so.... I'd say no :)
 
Isn't there an exception where someone with an ATP can teach people as long as it's the same category, class, and type if needed?

Yeah, yeah, shut up, Tony. Who gets an ATP in a single engine Cessna?:p
 
Actually Tony, I have heard there are alot of single engine ATP guys out there. Not a bad way to stay current, seeking another rating. I mean if that is all you fly, why not?

On a side note. I was in Gaithersburg today and a guy in a gold Acura with a University of Indiana sticker in his back window cut me off... You don't happen to drive a gold Acura do ya?
 
Philip said:
aside from everything posted, I don't see the benefit. The "student" can't pay for the airplane, he can't log the time, the only one that makes out is you, logging time for half price if you split it pro-rated, which then the FAA could say you're being compensated by logging that time so.... I'd say no :)
Click to expand...

I don't want to get too far off topic, but the financial end of things isn't that complicated.

The "student" can't log the time, but that doesn't mean they aren't benefitting. They're learning, and that equates to faster progress later with a CFI.

And the part about the cost being pro-rated and you benefitting from logging the hours...there's nothing wrong with that. How would that be any different than flying a friend across the state for pleasure and them splitting the cost with you? Thats totally legal. As a pilot, you must pay at least your share, but that's it.

There are a few practical reasons for private pilots to teach. For instance, let's say John gets his PPL and wants to build XC time for his instrument rating. He has a friend, Bob, who is a student pilot that has not done any XC training yet. If John can convince Bob to split the costs of an XC with him 50/50, everybody wins. John gets to fly for half price and Bob gets the experience of learning cross country procedures without the expense of the full plane rental with a CFI. That's completely legal. Even though Bob can't log the time, he is more proficient and not as overwhelmed when he does the formal XC training with his instructor, or flies his own solo cross countries as a student pilot.

I agree with you that it wouldn't be very helpful for a private pilot to critique a student pilot's short field landing technique, but there are other areas where worthwhile learning could take place.
 
jrh said:
And the part about the cost being pro-rated and you benefitting from logging the hours...there's nothing wrong with that. How would that be any different than flying a friend across the state for pleasure and them splitting the cost with you? Thats totally legal. As a pilot, you must pay at least your share, but that's it.
Click to expand...

guess I was trained a little on the conservative side, for example if a buddy wants to go to vegas next weekend with 2 friends and offers to pay 3/4ths of the engine time down and back, unless I had some business there I wouldn't do it, if the trip was made solely for the purpose of transporting your friend, that is flying for compensation or hire to me. While they're paying only the pro-rated share of the trip, I am still being compensated.

To me it's like the 135 operator that gets a walk in that needs to go from A-B but he hasn't got a 135 qualified pilot handy, so he sends a CFI along with a logbook and the passenger for a "lesson" on XC flying. That's just my .02

OH now I remember where I was going with that, sorry it's early.
If you get a rep. as the guy that will fly his friends anywhere, anytime for a split cost of the airplane, it can be viewed as "holding out" to the public, the FAA doesn't like that... Again, if I'm going to LAS and my buddy wants to tag along, hey no problemo in my book. Maybe I read into it too much. I'll sit down and be quiet now ;)
 
Timbuff10 said:
Actually Tony, I have heard there are alot of single engine ATP guys out there. Not a bad way to stay current, seeking another rating. I mean if that is all you fly, why not?

On a side note. I was in Gaithersburg today and a guy in a gold Acura with a University of Indiana sticker in his back window cut me off... You don't happen to drive a gold Acura do ya?
Click to expand...

I actually think that's pretty cool for folks to get single engine ATPs. It shows they really care about learning more and more and improving their flying.

And nope, I don't drive a gold Acura, and I wouldn't be caught dead with an IU sticker in my window!

What were you doing up at GAI?
 
Philip said:
While they're paying only the pro-rated share of the trip, I am still being compensated.
Click to expand...

Here's the way I see it: If the pro-rated rule is there, why not use it? The purpose of the trip doesn't matter. As long as the pilot is paying their share, it's legal.

The FAA doesn't intend for people to go broke trying to pay for 100% of the expenses of flying. What the FAA does not want is a bunch of underqualified, unregulated pilots starting up their own little charter company. That would be a hazard to the general public.

By nature of the fact that the pilot has to pay their share, it eliminates any chance of them making a profit. Eliminating any chance of profit eliminates any chance of the operation becoming a business. Why? Because the pilot is still paying out cash every time he flies. The cash is coming out slower than if the pilot were to go alone, but it's still coming out. The "business" can only last as long as the pilot's bank account.

There are certainly shady areas of aviation, such as the charter/lesson type of flight you mentioned, but I don't see anything shady about splitting costs with someone.
 
Well, I think where I derailed above is where the FAA draws the line at holding out to the public, as soon as they've determined you're doing that, they can nail you, is flying a charter for 3/4ths of the cost any different than 100% of the cost?
if your sole purpose in that trip is to deliver passengers and log time, I don't feel that it is, and if you become known for that, even amongst friends it can be considered holding out. It's a bit of a gray area perhaps, just not one I care to tread personally.
 
jrh said:
The purpose of the trip doesn't matter. As long as the pilot is paying their share, it's legal.
Click to expand...
That's not =completely= accurate. Under long-standing FAA regulatory interpretation and NTSB case law, the pilot and the passengers need to have a shared purpose for the trip in order to come under the regulation.

From a 1985 FAA Legal opinion. There are others, but this is probably the clearest statement of the rule (61.118(b) is the older version of the current rule and said the same thing):

==============================
Additionally, the FAA has interpreted 61.118(b) so that the only allowable share-the-costs operations are those which are bona fide, that is, joint ventures for a common purpose with the expenses being defrayed by all passengers and the pilot. Nor does Section 61.118 permit pilots who want to build up time toward their commercial pilot certificates to carry expense sharing passengers to a destination at which they have no particular business.
==============================

Eliminating any chance of profit eliminates any chance of the operation becoming a business.
Click to expand...
That's not realy true either. Let's suppose a pilot is trying to build time for a career. Anything that lessens his cost would be a benefit. Why wouldn't he set up a small air taxi business and operate it at a loss to simply defer =some= of his costs of flying?
 
thanks for completng my thoughts :)

remind me not to try and formulate any kind of anything after being awake for 24 hours.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Nor does Section 61.118 permit pilots who want to build up time toward their commercial pilot certificates to carry expense sharing passengers to a destination at which they have no particular business.
Click to expand...

Ok, I stand corrected. I guess I did go a little overboard by saying ANY trip would be legal as long as the pilot pays their share. However, it still seems like this ruling is to prevent people from starting up pseudo businesses that carry strangers to wherever they want to go for reduced rates. I think taking your friends for rides and having them chip in on the expenses is a cheaper and more fun way to time build than going out and burning holes in the sky solo.

If you say, "Hey friend, I can't afford to go flying just for the heck of it, but if you want to help out by paying half, I'll take you for a sightseeing ride," that is legal. Or if you have friends that ask you to fly them to Vegas, and you say, "Sure, I was wanting to go flying somewhere this weekend anyway, so it might as well be Vegas," that seems legal to me. The problem comes when you start taking trips that you wouldn't ordinarily do.

If you happen to fly with friends a lot and consequently get financial help for flying, I don't think the FAA cares. If you start flying anybody and everybody to places of their choosing, that's when it slides across the gray line to become a commercial operation.
 
tonyw said:
Isn't there an exception where someone with an ATP can teach people as long as it's the same category, class, and type if needed?

Yeah, yeah, shut up, Tony. Who gets an ATP in a single engine Cessna?:p
Click to expand...

Yes, 61.3 (d) section 3ii
"if the training is given by the holder of an ATP certificate with a rating appropriate blah blah blah and conducted in accordance with an approved air carrier training program approved under part 121 or part 135 of this chapter"
 
jrh said:
If you say, "Hey friend, I can't afford to go flying just for the heck of it, but if you want to help out by paying half, I'll take you for a sightseeing ride," that is legal.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is. As stated in your hypothetical, your purpose is strictly to build time and have someone pay part of it. You've already seen the sights form the air. You coldn't care les about sightseeing. Your friend's purpose is sightseeing.

One of the more interesting FAA Legal opinions is a 1977 one where a pilot asks about contributing to a campaign by transporting a candidate for a share of the expenses. In saying that this was a no-go, the Counsel said:
==============================
it is not a joint venture (you are not running for office)
==============================

Another interesting one is the private pilot who got nailed for taking a friend's sick father to the hospital for a share of the expenses, the NTSB saying there was no common purpose for the flight.

If you happen to fly with friends a lot and consequently get financial help for flying, I don't think the FAA cares.
Click to expand...
That's the ticket. If the FAA doesn't care, obviously it's not a problem. If the FAA has no reason to know, then it won't care. That "sick father" one is a good example. Although the NTSB decision doesn't say so, you are definitely left with the impression that this guy did something to piss someone off.

Chances are unless a Part 135 operator notices what's going on and complains or one of your "friends" decides the ride sucked and calls the local gendarmes, or have an incident and there an investigation, you are okay.

But that's about getting caught, not whether the activity is legal or not, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top