NIFA and free flying

\__[Ô]__/

\__[Ô]__/

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
496
Location
Ames, IA
Display Name
Display name:
david
I've been talking to people about the National Intercollegiate Flying Association (NIFA). I'm curious about the legality of schools covering all the costs for flying during the competitions run by NIFA.

Many people I've talked to have said that they don't have to pay for any of the flying they do during NIFA related practices and competitions. Some of them are private pilots, so that seems to run afoul of CFR 61.113. There are a couple events with two people in the plane (navigation and message drop) which, by 61.113(c), should require the pilot to pay at least half the defined costs. Other events are solo landing competitions. If the pilot doesn't pay the normal flight cost for those then they are receiving free or reduced flight time. If I understand the FAA's position, that counts as compensation and is thus a clear violation of 61.113(a).

I've asked around and numerous people have been adamant that they competed as private pilots and did not have to pay any of the flying costs.

Am I missing something, or are the private pilot NIFA competitors in violation of the regs if they aren't paying the costs of their flying?
 
Last edited:
I don't think there's any regulation that says you can't fly someone else's plane for free.
 
That is an interesting question. Based on previous threads the logging of time by the private pilot could indeed be considered compensation. This may be one of the "carve outs". It will be interesting to see other's comments on this.
 
I've been wondering this too. Although we don't have a team, I know a couple of other pilots and soon to be pilots who might be interested in giving the competition a shot. I'll be interested to hear what people have to say about it. We pay enough tuition, so maybe it's included in there....
 
Maybe you should ask the Chief Counsel. :stirpot: :nono:
 
bqmassey said:
I don't think there's any regulation that says you can't fly someone else's plane for free.
Click to expand...

Actually as a PP yes, you are being compensated valuable flight time. If you don't log it you're ok, if you log it, you're supposed to be paying your pro-rata share.
 
I understand that flight time can count as compensation, but it doesn't sound like these pilots are flying "for compensation". It sounds to me that they're flying for their own purpose, but have access to an aircraft they can borrow for free.

To put it another way, if a friend that owns an airplane needs to fly his wife somewhere but is too busy to go, and has me fly it because he knows that I am trying to build time and would do it for free, I would be flying for compensation (free flight time).

If I want to fly somewhere and ask my friend if I can rent his plane from him, and he says "don't worry about paying me, here's the keys", I'm borrowing a plane for free, but I'm not flying "for compensation" or "for hire".

The FAA might feel differently about it than I do, I don't know. Maybe someone else can chime in with some case law or an interpretation.
 
bqmassey said:
I understand that flight time can count as compensation, but it doesn't sound like these pilots are flying "for compensation". It sounds to me that they're flying for their own purpose, but have access to an aircraft they can borrow for free.

To put it another way, if a friend that owns an airplane needs to fly his wife somewhere but is too busy to go, and has me fly it because he knows that I am trying to build time and would do it for free, I would be flying for compensation (free flight time).

If I want to fly somewhere and ask my friend if I can rent his plane from him, and he says "don't worry about paying me, here's the keys", I'm borrowing a plane for free, but I'm not flying "for compensation" or "for hire".

The FAA might feel differently about it than I do, I don't know. Maybe someone else can chime in with some case law or an interpretation.
Click to expand...

The FAA Chief Counsel does feel differently that you, whether the inspectors at the FSDO do is another matter.
 
Henning said:
Actually as a PP yes, you are being compensated valuable flight time. If you don't log it you're ok, if you log it, you're supposed to be paying your pro-rata share.
Click to expand...


"Compensated" sounds like the second half of a transaction / agreement.

Part 1: If you dig this ditch......

Part 2: I will give you a 12-pack.


The 12-pack is the "compensation". In the NIFA example, what is Part 1?



----------------------------------

If kid has a scholarship and takes ground school class, is he being ""compensated"?
 
JoseCuervo said:
"Compensated" sounds like the second half of a transaction / agreement.

Part 1: If you dig this ditch......

Part 2: I will give you a 12-pack.


The 12-pack is the "compensation". In the NIFA example, what is Part 1?



----------------------------------

If kid has a scholarship and takes ground school class, is he being ""compensated"?
Click to expand...


If you fly this plane in competition for us (providing the benefactor with whatever benefit they are seeking, typically recruiting status for their program which they make money off of) we will provide you the plane to fly free of charge (which provides the logbook hours valued at the cost of replacement without subsidy). Quid pro quo exists.
 
wsuffa said:
Maybe you should ask the Chief Counsel. :stirpot: :nono:
Click to expand...

Well I would if it weren't for the shutdown and all... Darn, I guess I'm not going to be able to ask. :wink2: Unless they are still working. Are Chief Counsel opinions considered an 'essential service'?

I've looked at a couple related interpretations and they all stress that the FAA defines compensation very broadly to mean receipt of anything of value, including flight time. Based on what I read, I suspect their response would just affirm my belief that it violates 61.113.


I'm wondering how schools handle this. Is it just ignored or is there some attempt to justify the practice - possibly using the fact that people are paying money as tuition, as James mentioned?

I can't be the first one to notice this. The schools are teaching the regulations and the practice problems on the NIFA website even cover rules on private pilot compensation. That's why I'm wondering if there is something I'm misunderstanding about the application of the rules.
 
Last edited:
JoseCuervo said:
"Compensated" sounds like the second half of a transaction / agreement.

Part 1: If you dig this ditch......

Part 2: I will give you a 12-pack.


The 12-pack is the "compensation". In the NIFA example, what is Part 1?



----------------------------------

If kid has a scholarship and takes ground school class, is he being ""compensated"?
Click to expand...

If you advertise for me

I will let you use my plane


^^likely FAA view
 
Even if they do not log the time, maybe they are putting it on their resume, and in the end it helps them get a job, would not that be compensation then as well. ... But really, who cares? If the FAA has nothing better to do than to bust some private pilots flying for competition I say the FAA needs to be given some new things to do. There has got to be better things out there for them to do that actually makes a difference at the end of the day than dealing with something like this.
 
\__[Ô]__/;1276247 said:
I've looked at a couple related interpretations and they all stress that the FAA defines compensation very broadly to mean receipt of anything of value, including flight time. Based on what I read, I suspect their response would just affirm my belief that it violates 61.113.


I'm wondering how schools handle this. Is it just ignored or is there some attempt to justify the practice - possibly using the fact that people are paying money as tuition, as James mentioned?

I can't be the first one to notice this. The schools are teaching the regulations and the practice problems on the NIFA website even cover rules on private pilot compensation. That's why I'm wondering if there is something I'm misunderstanding about the application of the rules.
Click to expand...

I gotta ask, why would you spend 2 minutes researching it? Why would you spend 2 minutes wondering? Why would you spend 2 minutes noticing it?

I got 99 problems, and kids trying to collapse gear on a white line on the runway ain't one of them, for compensation or for free.


Skylane81E said:
If you advertise for me

I will let you use my plane


^^likely FAA view
Click to expand...


I completely understand a D-1 Football program in the SEC exploiting kids in front of 100k fans on Saturday afternoon and raking in $75 million budgets are not worthy of compensation....

I think, back when I flew in the NIFA competitions, our university made us sign WAIVERS explicitly denying any university connection to the dangerous activity.

I think our "free hours" came from spending hours washing planes for donations and knocking on doors with a tin cup seeking support for our next competition.
 
douglas393 said:
Even if they do not log the time, maybe they are putting it on their resume, and in the end it helps them get a job, would not that be compensation then as well. ... But really, who cares? If the FAA has nothing better to do than to bust some private pilots flying for competition I say the FAA needs to be given some new things to do. There has got to be better things out there for them to do that actually makes a difference at the end of the day than dealing with something like this.
Click to expand...

Good question. I have mixed opinions on that.
On one hand, I find it hard to believe that a bunch of private pilots flying for free in a private competition requires application of the "higher standard of safety" that the FAA uses to justify the private/commercial divide.

However, this competition is supposed to showcase pilot skills (note pilot skills, not just 'flying the plane well' skills). Part of that includes a strong emphasis on safety and following the rules. Doesn't it undermine the legitimacy of that if competitors are violating the federal regulations that govern their pilot privileges? And their schools are knowingly aiding them in violating the regs, which isn't sending a very good message either.

So maybe it's a principle thing. I don't know. :dunno: I'm not going to complain if the FAA adds an exception to say the pro-rata share rules don't apply to NIFA competitions. Until they do, I think it's appropriate for the people competing to follow the rules. As far as I can tell, that prohibits the practice of the school paying for the flying.
 
Jose brings up a good point, if they are putting in work and raising funds, then they are not flying for free as work can be held as 'payment in kind' which is an applicable principle as is considering log book hours compensation. No where do the rules restrict payment to being monetary.
 
Henning said:
Jose brings up a good point, if they are putting in work and raising funds, then they are not flying for free as work can be held as 'payment in kind' which is an applicable principle as is considering log book hours compensation. No where do the rules restrict payment to being monetary.
Click to expand...
Good point, but how many competitive flying teams are paying their way by doing car washes, bake sales, etc, and how many are supported by the university? Then again, my original question, who cares. In my mind, these competitions bring a good light to general aviation, and we need all the good press we can get. Sometimes, it seems to me that we are our own worse enemy.
 
Only pilots on forums give a rats ass about this stuff.....One pilot worries some one is getting a better deal than them.

Commercial guys are worried someone is doing something free like moving a plane to help someone else and that is costs the commercial guys a days wages.....

Pretty much all bull ****. Go about your business. Keep your business to yourself and usually all will be good. Bragg about something great you got going and someone out there will want to screw it up for you. That is the nature of things.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top