100 Hour Inspection

[brentee]

Hey, all. Sorry if this has already been covered but I couldn't find an answer. I interpreted the following as such: as long as the instructor is not providing the AC then a 100 hour inpection is not required. For example, if I wanted to let my fiance', or anyone else for that matter, train in my 182 free of charge it would not be required.

Sec. 91.409 — Inspections
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceding 100 hours of time in service the aircraft has received an annual or 100-hour inspection and been approved for return to service....

Thanks

 

[Tom-D]

Hey, all. Sorry if this has already been covered but I couldn't find an answer. I interpreted the following as such: as long as the instructor is not providing the AC then a 100 hour inspection is not required. For example, if I wanted to let my fiance', or anyone else for that matter, train in my 182 free of charge it would not be required.

Sec. 91.409 — Inspections
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceding 100 hours of time in service the aircraft has received an annual or 100-hour inspection and been approved for return to service....

Thanks

You can even charge, it still doesn't require a 100 hour.

OBTW, the arrangement you have with your fiance', is none of the FAA's business. make your arrangement at home and don't talk about them at the airport.

The FAA considers you guilty, why open your mouth and prove it.

 

[Witmo]

You can even charge, it still doesn't require a 100 hour.

OBTW, the arrangement you have with your fiance', is none of the FAA's business. make your arrangement at home and don't talk about them at the airport.

The FAA considers you guilty, why open your mouth and prove it.

I think Tom's point is even though what you suggest is perfectly legal, people not knowing the rules might mistakenly sic the FAA on you and then you'd have to defend yourself and if you're unlucky, deal with a clueless Fed who's not happy 'til you're not happy.

 

[poadeleted20]

I don't think even the most clueless of Feds would go after someone who let his fiancee use his plane to take lessons from someone else without a 100-hour inspection.