"Discovery" flights in a Cessna... 421!

at least 500/hr and at that they probably wont make enough to make it worth it. useful load on that bird has got to be lousy with all the extra crap in it.
 
nice lookin plane! no way they make enough $ to make it worth it...
 
I'm surprised that Ron isn't all over this thread. Sounds to me like they're just trying to get around 135 requrements. But hey, 135 is a PITA, can't blame em for trying :rolleyes:.
 
They've worded the ad very, very carefully, and it appears to be legal, but I'll bet the local FSDO will be watching them equally carefully.
 
Ron Levy said:
They've worded the ad very, very carefully, and it appears to be legal, but I'll bet the local FSDO will be watching them equally carefully.
Click to expand...
I'm confused how THIS:
Instruction begins on your first day of training en route to any needed destination, whether your first flight goes to New York, Atlanta, New Orleans, Bahamas or simply a local discovery flight.
Click to expand...
is any different from those threads where we've discussed the fake "instruction" flights with the "instructor" flying the "student" to wherever he happened to have a business meeting that day?? What brand new student pilot starts out in a high performance, complex multi like the 421???
 
And there are so many of those that this company can put it out there legitimately?

Don't think so! :no:
 
etsisk said:
is any different from those threads where we've discussed the fake "instruction" flights with the "instructor" flying the "student" to wherever he happened to have a business meeting that day?? What brand new student pilot starts out in a high performance, complex multi like the 421???
Click to expand...
Note that the ad is ostensibly aimed at folks with PP-AMEL who want to step up and build cabin-class time, PP-ASEL-IA's who want to work on their multi, etc. They were careful to avoid the suggestion of putting anyone into the plane unless legitimate training would be accomplished. As I said above, I'll bet the FSDO will be monitoring this closely.
 
ron, you're being very generous to these guys. Here is a quote from the "non pilot" link
DAYSTAR AIR WAS FORMED TO PROVIDE A UNIQUE ALTERNATIVE TO CHARTERING AIRCRAFT…

Even if you have never sat in a cockpit before, you can learn to fly our Golden Eagle airplane from your very first flight to any needed destination, anywhere in the world.
IT IS FAR LESS EXPENSIVE, JUST AS SAFE AND MORE FUN…

OUR EXPERIENCED FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR WILL TEACH YOU TO FLY OUR GOLDEN EAGLE AIRCRAFT

If it quacks like a duck...
 
I hadn't read the "nonpilot" link. I now predict the duck season will open early for the Tampa FSDO.
 
etsisk said:
I'm confused how THIS:
is any different from those threads where we've discussed the fake "instruction" flights with the "instructor" flying the "student" to wherever he happened to have a business meeting that day?? What brand new student pilot starts out in a high performance, complex multi like the 421???
Click to expand...

Everskyward said:
One with a lot of money?
Click to expand...

What Mari said. Somewhere in Hawaii, there's a guy with a CP-AMEL-IA (no SEL time) who walked into the flight school down there (some simulator place), handed them a blank check, and said "I want to be the best 421 pilot in the world." Couple hundred hours of sim and instruction time later, he's reportedly a damn good 421 pilot.

If I had my way, I would've gotten my twin before I finished my private and been flying it since. I wouldn't have bought a 421, but probably a 310 or an Aztec. The main reason I didn't was because of the insurance issues, namely that I couldn't get any, and I'm just now getting to the point where I might be able to get insured.

That is really Part 134 1/2, though. I would not advertise an outfit like that so openly because it is so very close to that line that you don't want someone with a badge stating "FAA" accusing you of crossing.
 
It sounds like they're trying to provide mid-level, scenario based flight training. Scenario based flight training is highly encouraged by the FAA, and is probably the best type of flight training, the more realistic the flight scenarios, the better.
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
It sounds like they're trying to provide mid-level, scenario based flight training. Scenario based flight training is highly encouraged by the FAA, and is probably the best type of flight training, the more realistic the flight scenarios, the better.
Click to expand...

And the scenario they are providing is the need to get there, regardless of the regulations?

Even without the non-pilot link they keep using the phrase "to any needed destination" ...

--david
 
Keep in mind also that this is just an ad. They may just be taking liberties with the ad so that it brings in people with a need to travel who may not have thought about taking flight training before, and then they pitch them on the benefits of GA travel etc.

The proof, as far as the FAA is concerned, will be how they actually execute this. If they allow nonpilots a single "discovery flight" to prove the viability of GA and then insist on a more conventional flight training program, I think that would probably be deemed non-ducklike.
 
Ken Ibold said:
If they allow nonpilots a single "discovery flight" to prove the viability of GA and then insist on a more conventional flight training program, I think that would probably be deemed non-ducklike.
Click to expand...
I think if the discovery flights are one way to a destination of the pax choosing, the duck turns into a cooked goose.

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
I think if the discovery flights are one way to a destination of the pax choosing, the duck turns into a cooked goose.

-Skip
Click to expand...

Where in the regulations does it say that instructional flights, including a discovery flight, need to serve no purpose other than to congest airways and burn AvGas without any redeemable benefit?

While I agree with the fishy nature of this website, the kind of upper scale clients that they are clearly after (who else could afford those kinds of rates?) is the kind of person who they want to demonstrate to "Look at how great this is!" What better way to demonstrate the usefulness of a private plane than a first lesson that takes you to a business meeting that allows you to turn a 3-day trip (a travel day on either end) into a 1-day trip?

People need to get it out of their heads that instructional flights need to have no benefit whatsoever. That mindset doesn't show people just how useful GA is. Then again, I'm the kind of pilot who likes to go places and have passengers (ref: 6Y9).
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Where in the regulations does it say that instructional flights, including a discovery flight, need to serve no purpose other than to congest airways and burn AvGas without any redeemable benefit?

While I agree with the fishy nature of this website, the kind of upper scale clients that they are clearly after (who else could afford those kinds of rates?) is the kind of person who they want to demonstrate to "Look at how great this is!" What better way to demonstrate the usefulness of a private plane than a first lesson that takes you to a business meeting that allows you to turn a 3-day trip (a travel day on either end) into a 1-day trip?
Click to expand...
I agree with your thesis. However, if the customer does not enter a regular course of instruction with progress towards a certificate or rating, the duck wakes up and begins to quack. More than one discovery flight for the same passenger, and the duck is transmogrified to the well done goose. Not for the passenger... for the faux 135 operator.

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
I agree with your thesis. However, if the customer does not enter a regular course of instruction with progress towards a certificate or rating, the duck wakes up and begins to quack. More than one discovery flight for the same passenger, and the duck is transmogrified to the well done goose. Not for the passenger... for the faux 135 operator.

-Skip
Click to expand...

As long as every flight is an instructional flight progressing towards a rating, continued use of instructional flights for transportation is not a problem. Most of my instructional flights for PP also provided me transportation between Long Beach and Catalina Island.
 
I'll tell you what, $450/hr dry and the possibility to rent the airplane solo after a checkout is not really so bad.
 
Ken Ibold said:
I'll tell you what, $450/hr dry and the possibility to rent the airplane solo after a checkout is not really so bad.
Click to expand...

I'm actually considering going to check out in it so it's available to me, I just wish it was down here.
 
Skip Miller said:
I agree with your thesis. However, if the customer does not enter a regular course of instruction with progress towards a certificate or rating, the duck wakes up and begins to quack. More than one discovery flight for the same passenger, and the duck is transmogrified to the well done goose. Not for the passenger... for the faux 135 operator.

-Skip
Click to expand...

Correct, but my thesis assumes that is not the case. The "discovery flight" is just that. After that, you start your regular instruction. It'll take you at least 100 hours of instruction to solo for sure, probably more considering that the insurance wouldn't even touch me in any twin until 200TT, and that is definitely quite an airplane. You figure you're going to do touch and gos all that time? Figure how much trainnig it would take you to get to the point where you'd be good in that plane starting from ground zero, it'd be at least 100 hours I'd suspect.

It's really hard for me to say by looking at it what the guy's intent is. We are all assuming that he's trying to skirt the 135 regs. It does look like it's worded carefully, but if I had a plane like that and was an MEI (and had done the other legal requirements), I could see myself doing something similar for exactly as he states.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
but if I had a plane like that and was an MEI (and had done the other legal requirements), I could see myself doing something similar for exactly as he states.
Click to expand...

no you wouldnt ted. just normal operations are hard enough on the GTSIO's. No way I would want to do initial multi training in it. $$$
 
tonycondon said:
no you wouldnt ted. just normal operations are hard enough on the GTSIO's. No way I would want to do initial multi training in it. $$$
Click to expand...

So I might charge more $800/hr. ;)
 
If someone wants to foot the bill I'll go see if they're legit. :D
 
Henning said:
As long as every flight is an instructional flight progressing towards a rating, continued use of instructional flights for transportation is not a problem. Most of my instructional flights for PP also provided me transportation between Long Beach and Catalina Island.
Click to expand...

So the time my CFI and I flew to Schaumburg to trade an alternator for the shop?

...Maybe I should have charged the FBO for use of my plane.
 
dparter said:
And the scenario they are providing is the need to get there, regardless of the regulations?

Even without the non-pilot link they keep using the phrase "to any needed destination" ...

--david
Click to expand...

What destination does a desired flight training scenario require? Every destination and mission profile has unique demands on the pilots and aircraft that can only be fully experienced in real flights while flying that exact mission.

It could probably take many flights to become comfortable with a certain route and passenger load. Another route and different load would require more training flights to reach an acceptable level of flight safety for that scenario.
 
Last edited:
A lot of the Cirrus pilot training program where they give you an instructor is structured something like this, where you're getting real value from the plane as you train. A MAJOR difference there, though, is that you own the plane, so it cannot be construed as a part-135 op.
 
gprellwitz said:
A lot of the Cirrus pilot training program where they give you an instructor is structured something like this, where you're getting real value from the plane as you train. A MAJOR difference there, though, is that you own the plane, so it cannot be construed as a part-135 op.
Click to expand...
Another major difference is that the FITS-accepted Cirrus syllabus includes a lot of ground training prior to each SBT flight (especially in the early stages) so the trainee is able to comprehend what's going on and learn effectively.
 
I think some here don't think threw the eyes of those that actually have lots of money. Some guy that is loaded, doesn't want to come into a flight school 3 times a week to have a 19 year old CFI teach them to fly a c-150. They want big, they want to go some where, and they want it to be productive in more than one way. Flying to a destination you have to go to anyways is a good way to accomplish some flight training. True it will take longer that way, but hey, they have money.
 
n20junkie said:
I think some here don't think threw the eyes of those that actually have lots of money. Some guy that is loaded, doesn't want to come into a flight school 3 times a week to have a 19 year old CFI teach them to fly a c-150. They want big, they want to go some where, and they want it to be productive in more than one way. Flying to a destination you have to go to anyways is a good way to accomplish some flight training. True it will take longer that way, but hey, they have money.
Click to expand...
That is very true. There is a guy a few hangars away from me at CRG who bought himself a King Air 200. He wasn't a pilot, so he also bought a Chieftain to leard to fly on and to build up time until he can fly the King Air. The Chieftain is his trainer. You should see the guy's hangars. Wow!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top