Discovery flights.

Archimago

Archimago

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
156
Location
kprb
Display Name
Display name:
Archimago
New CFI question.
Can I give free discovery flights to family and friends in my plane? I wouldn't log the training time on my logbook so not for hire. No 100 hr inspection requirement.
If I sign a logbook for them for the flight am I running afoul somewhere? If I am always the PIC (no one's soloing in my plane) them is insurance going to be an issue?
Thanks,
Richard
 
Hi.

Archimago said:
If I sign a logbook for them for the flight am I running afoul somewhere?
Click to expand...
That will create a problem. If you sign a log book you need to keep track of it as Dual given / Instruction given.
 
Archimago said:
New CFI question.
Can I give free discovery flights to family and friends in my plane? I wouldn't log the training time on my logbook so not for hire. No 100 hr inspection requirement.
If I sign a logbook for them for the flight am I running afoul somewhere? If I am always the PIC (no one's soloing in my plane) them is insurance going to be an issue?
Thanks,
Richard
Click to expand...
No one is keeping you from taking them up in the air, just because. If you own a plane, the government generally doesn't intervene in private carriage. Intentionally taking it into instruction then theoretically moves it into different categories in the insurance companies eyes, for instance. And yes, this kind of stuff should have been part of CFI training.
 
RyanShort1 said:
It could with Homeland Security, potentially...
Click to expand...
I get it, but you can do a disco ride without going the distance to confirm citizenship and comply with Homeland Security requirements and such. All I’m saying is, what the OP is asking about is completely legal.
 
RyanB said:
I get it, but you can do a disco ride without going the distance to confirm citizenship and comply with Homeland Security requirements and such. All I’m saying is, what the OP is asking about is completely legal.
Click to expand...
Agreed that it's legal, but he did also ask about insurance. That's where he needs to read his policy's fine print carefully.
 
Skyrys62 said:
Not being snarky but I would think this was a required part of knowledge for an exam.

And yes, insurance would be something you would definitely want to check into.
Click to expand...
No snarkiness taken. I don't recall this instance coming up in training and I am not seeing it in the PTS. Not arguing that it has to be there to be important information I should know. The regulations refer to "for hire" which doesn't fit my situation. In commercial training these types of questions came up a lot and there are a lot of good legal sources including advisory circulars to guide us in determining what is and is not legal when being compensated.
Is me getting to log dual instruction time considered "compensation" enough to be in violation
 
RyanB said:
I get it, but you can do a disco ride without going the distance to confirm citizenship and comply with Homeland Security requirements and such. All I’m saying is, what the OP is asking about is completely legal.
Click to expand...
I agree. Plus the actual rule is "flight training" .. is a duscovery flight considered "training" ?
 
Tantalum said:
I agree. Plus the actual rule is "flight training" .. is a duscovery flight considered "training" ?
Click to expand...
Yes, an intro flight or discovery flight is considered flight training. I log it as dual given and if the "student" whether stranger or newcomer wants to continue, it is logged as dual received.

Using your own airplane for instruction is a question for your insurance agent.
 
I guess I don't see the confusion. Plenty of cfi give lessons in their own planes. Check the passport/birth certificate accordingly as needed

Sounds like more of an insurance question
 
Tantalum said:
I guess I don't see the confusion. Plenty of cfi give lessons in their own planes. Check the passport/birth certificate accordingly as needed

Sounds like more of an insurance question
Click to expand...
If the FAA considers the ability to log time as compensation then I would also need 100 hour inspections.
 
Who is paying for these discovery flights?
 
Archimago said:
If the FAA considers the ability to log time as compensation then I would also need 100 hour inspections.
Click to expand...
The word "compensation does not appear in 91.409(b). the language is "flight instruction for hire." And the policy issues are different. The broad use of "compensation" is in the context of differentiating Part 91 from 119, 135, etc, which don't apply to flight instruction.
 
Is insurance a legal requirement if you are giving instruction in your own airplane?

CFI’s are supposed to endorse the citizenship in a logbook for any instruction given. I guess there is a grey area when calling it a “discovery flight”.
 
mandm said:
CFI’s are supposed to endorse the citizenship in a logbook for any instruction given. I guess there is a grey area when calling it a “discovery flight”.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that the TSA does not require confirming citizenship until the second instructional flight. Our school does a lot of introductory flights where the "student" does not continue training. If they schedule a second lesson, we require proof of citizenship.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The word "compensation does not appear in 91.409(b). the language is "flight instruction for hire." And the policy issues are different. The broad use of "compensation" is in the context of differentiating Part 91 from 119, 135, etc, which don't apply to flight instruction.
Click to expand...
Which also ties back to medicals and being able to instruct on a class 3
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
It is my understanding that the TSA does not require confirming citizenship until the second instructional flight. Our school does a lot of introductory flights where the "student" does not continue training. If they schedule a second lesson, we require proof of citizenship.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I don't believe this is correct. If you're looking at the letter of the law it states it clearly in CFR 1552.3. in our case, assuming the us citizen, we are concerned with subpart (h)

§ 1552.3 Flight training.
This section describes the procedures a flight school must follow before providing flight training.

(h) U.S. citizens and nationals and Department of Defense endorsees. A flight school must determine whether an individual is a citizen or national of the United States, or a Department of Defense endorsee, prior to providing flight training to the individual.

Both say prior to providing flight training. I suppose maybe your school gets around it by not considering the first flight as training, but to the points made above earlier then are they all so not marking the time as dual given?

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.ecfr.gov
 
Tantalum said:
Unfortunately I don't believe this is correct. If you're looking at the letter of the law it states it clearly in CFR 1552.3. in our case, assuming the us citizen, we are concerned with subpart (h)

§ 1552.3 Flight training.
This section describes the procedures a flight school must follow before providing flight training.

(h) U.S. citizens and nationals and Department of Defense endorsees. A flight school must determine whether an individual is a citizen or national of the United States, or a Department of Defense endorsee, prior to providing flight training to the individual.

Both say prior to providing flight training. I suppose maybe your school gets around it by not considering the first flight as training, but to the points made above earlier then are they all so not marking the time as dual given?

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.ecfr.gov
Click to expand...
Check the definition of "flight training" in §1552.1

===
Flight training means instruction received from a flight school in an aircraft or aircraft simulator. Flight training does not include recurrent training, ground training, a demonstration flight for marketing purposes, or any military training provided by the Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard, or an entity under contract with the Department of Defense or U.S. Coast Guard.
===

The TSA's FAQ goes on to say that they consider discovery flights as a form of "demonstration flight for marketing purposes."

1689247223417.png
 
If the OP just wants to take family members up for a spin, the only thing he's doing that triggers this discussion is creating a log entry for the passenger (student). No log entry, no issue.
Is it worth all the hassle so your friends/family can log an extra hour?
 
Hang 4 said:
If the OP just wants to take family members up for a spin, the only thing he's doing that triggers this discussion is creating a log entry for the passenger (student). No log entry, no issue.
Is it worth all the hassle so your friends/family can log an extra hour?
Click to expand...
Well yeah, but the question asks about "discovery flights." That says two things to me. The OP wants to log it for them (and says so) and wants to treat it as a lesson. The friends/family aren't logging an extra hour. It's their first hour. That's part of the fun. And it's a wonderful part of the fun to provide a logbook and entry memento. I used to create this one on cardstock. Cover (not shown) and a single page of entries. Besides, I don't see the hassle.
1689255955328.png
 
midlifeflyer said:
Flight training does not include recurrent training, ground training, a demonstration flight for marketing purposes
Click to expand...
Thanks - but would you still log that as dual given? I mean I get the spirit of the law vs letter, but if you're just 'marketing' then are you really counting it as dual given? Splitting hairs a bit. But?
 
Tantalum said:
Thanks - but would you still log that as dual given? I mean I get the spirit of the law vs letter, but if you're just 'marketing' then are you really counting it as dual given? Splitting hairs a bit. But?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. If I'm giving a lesson and logging it as training given for the recipient, I can't think of a reason I wouldn't log it as training given in my logbook.

I'm not sure but we might disagree on letter vs spirit. I think they are the same in this case. The "letter of the law" exempts "a demonstration flight for marketing purposes" from the TSA definition of "flight training." The TSA's interpretation of its own regulations includes discovery flights as part of the exemption. I'm not sure what any "flight training" exemption applies to if not a person-instructor relationship that is logged.

If that doesn't make sense to you, I guess we will agree to disagree.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Well yeah, but the question asks about "discovery flights." That says two things to me. The OP wants to log it for them (and says so) and wants to treat it as a lesson. The friends/family aren't logging an extra hour. It's their first hour. That's part of the fun. And it's a wonderful part of the fun to provide a logbook and entry memento. I used to create this one on cardstock. Cover (not shown) and a single page of entries. Besides, I don't see the hassle.
View attachment 118937
Click to expand...
That's cool! I like it
 
But if the CFI did not confirm citizenship and the person is a citizen, is there any violation?
 
mandm said:
But if the CFI did not confirm citizenship and the person is a citizen, is there any violation?
Click to expand...
If the TSA rule applies, yes. The rule requires citizenship confirmation. Not doing it is the violation even if, after investigation, the person turns out to be a citizen.

TSA actively goes through flight school records to check for compliance. It's a reason many flight schools do a check on everyone, even those to whom the requirements don't apply. just makes the compliance exam easier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top