100 hours revisited

[poadeleted20]

Please find me the instructor that provides the plane and themselves sans charge, I'll go do my ATP with them.

He asked about the law, not who's providing free training. The answers are not the same, and your answer was, by the law, wrong.

But since you ask, I provide free training from time to time, usually in conjunction with the annual AYA convention. But if you want to do your ATP training with me, it's gonna cost ya, Chief.

 

[Tom-D]

Correct. In fact the owner can even provide instruction in it as long as no charge is made for either the instruction or the airplane.

They cannot charge for providing instruction in it. They also cannot carry passengers for hire under any Part -- 91, 119, 135, whatever (unless they have another FAA-approved maintenance program for doing that without specific 100-hour inspections).

Both -- see explanation above.

Moot point Ron,, he charges.

I can give instruction If I don't charge. and they don't log.

 

[poadeleted20]

I can give instruction If I don't charge. and they don't log.

If you mean you, the holder of a mechanic certificate, can give instruction on maintaining airplanes without the trainee logging it, I'm sure you're correct. However, legally, a CFI cannot give flight or ground training without it being entered and signed in the trainee's logbook, even if no charge is made for the training. 14 CFR 61.189(a).

 

[Tom-D]

If you mean you, the holder of a mechanic certificate, can give instruction on maintaining airplanes without the trainee logging it, I'm sure you're correct. However, legally, a CFI cannot give flight or ground training without it being entered and signed in the trainee's logbook, even if no charge is made for the training. 14 CFR 61.189(a).

When I do give maintenance instruction the student does log it in their AMT log.

When I give instruction during flight you'd assume that it would be flight instruction when in actually its engine fuel management stuff or break in instruction.

not loggable in the pilots log book in either case.

 

[poadeleted20]

When I do give maintenance instruction the student does log it in their AMT log.

Is it a regulatory requirement that you enter all maintenance training you give in their AMT log?

When I give instruction during flight you'd assume that it would be flight instruction when in actually its engine fuel management stuff or break in instruction.

Since you are not a CFI, you cannot give "flight training" even if you are teaching them something in flight, so for you, the question about flight training and 100-hour inspections is moot.

 

[Tom-D]

Is it a regulatory requirement that you enter all maintenance training you give in their AMT log?

Since you are not a CFI, you cannot give "flight training" even if you are teaching them something in flight, so for you, the question about flight training and 100-hour inspections is moot.

You will not find any thing in the FARs about AMT logs. or their requirements. it is just 1 method of showing the
fsdo that you have the experience to take the written for the A&P.

I think you confuse me with a CFI and their requirements. Showing a pilot The hows and whens of LOP or ROP isn't flight training.

 

[poadeleted20]

You will not find any thing in the FARs about AMT logs. or their requirements. it is just 1 method of showing the
fsdo that you have the experience to take the written for the A&P.

I think you confuse me with a CFI and their requirements. Showing a pilot The hows and whens of LOP or ROP isn't flight training.

I know that, and that's what I said. You are the one who seemed to be arguing with my statement that an aircraft owner cannot give flight training for which a charge is made without the aircraft having a current 100-hour inspection.