Sightseeing Question

MSmith

MSmith

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
903
Location
Hamilton, NJ
Display Name
Display name:
Mark Smith
My club's owner is relatively new at the game. He had a question the other day (he was asking an instructor) and I promised to do a little digging and get back to him.

The club is closer to an FBO than a partial-ownership club. Instruction is strictly part 61, and they aren't up to standards for part 135.

Can they offer sightseeing, or are they limited to discovery/intro lessons? Does the 25-mile limit apply?
 
MSmith said:
My club's owner is relatively new at the game. He had a question the other day (he was asking an instructor) and I promised to do a little digging and get back to him.

The club is closer to an FBO than a partial-ownership club. Instruction is strictly part 61, and they aren't up to standards for part 135.

Can they offer sightseeing, or are they limited to discovery/intro lessons? Does the 25-mile limit apply?
Click to expand...

The major FAA difference between flight instruction (discovery/intro lessons) and sightseeing (25-mile limit) is drug testing the pilot(s). Insurance policy considerations would be a second item.

Exceeding the 25-mile limit would kick the operation into Part 135.
 
The sightseeing exemption is stated in 135.1:
(5) Nonstop sightseeing flights for compensation or hire that begin and end at the same airport, and are conducted within a 25 statute mile radius of that airport; however, except for operations subject to SFAR 50-2, these operations, when conducted for compensation or hire, must comply only with §§135.249, 135.251, 135.253, 135.255, and 135.353.
​
Of course, 91.409(b) also applies:
(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 in accordance with part 43 of this chapter or has received an inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter. The 100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.
​
 
Of course, 91.409(b) also applies:
(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 in accordance with part 43 of this chapter or has received an inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter. The 100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.


​
[/QUOTE]


Bruce:

In light of the above, help me understand how I can be given a BFR, IPC or other training in my plane where I compensate the CFI (or at a programs such as BPPP in my aircraft). It may be more than 100 hours from an annual at the time and don't do 100-hour inspections (flew about 250 hours last year). :redface:
Never had a CFI ask to see my logbooks.

Best,

Dave
 
Ah. A crucial difference. You can receive instruction in your own airplane and pay an instructor without complying with the 100-hour inspection rule because you're not offering the airplane for compensation or hire to another person. You're paying the instructor for his or her services as an instructor.

Note that 91.409 says:
...and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides...
​
This distinction even applies to experimental (homebuilt) aircraft. You can't put an experimental aircraft in a training fleet, but if you own one (even one you didn't build), you can, of course, receive (and pay for) instruction in that aircraft.

(The above is one reason I use the Extra 300L for the training and aerobatic rides that I give. It's certificated in the normal, utility, and acrobatic categories and has a standard airworthiness certificate, just like a Cessna 172. Most comparable high-performance aerobatic airplanes--the Edge 540, Sukois, Yaks, et al. are in the experimental category.)

Somewhat similar logic applies to flight instruction. A CFI doesn't need a current medical (see 61.23(b)5) to provide and be compensated for giving flight instruction, provided the pilot receiving the instruction is properly certificated (i.e., holds at least a private pilot certificate), has a valid medical, and is legal to act as PIC (i.e., has a current flight review on the date the instruction is given, has logged 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days, and is IFR legal if the flight takes place in IMC, etc.)
 
Thanks Bruce. That 'xplains it. Just didn't remember. Thought that was the case, but what you posted wasn't making sense to me.

Dave
 
Thanks, guys. The club is good as far as 100-hour inspections - we do training so the planes are already inspected on that schedule (and the new owner has tightened that up as well).
 
BruceAir said:
Ah. A crucial difference. You can receive instruction in your own airplane and pay an instructor without complying with the 100-hour inspection rule because you're not offering the airplane for compensation or hire to another person. You're paying the instructor for his or her services as an instructor.

Note that 91.409 says:
...and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides...
​
This distinction even applies to experimental (homebuilt) aircraft. You can't put an experimental aircraft in a training fleet, but if you own one (even one you didn't build), you can, of course, receive (and pay for) instruction in that aircraft.
Click to expand...

Does it also apply to experimental exhibition aircraft? If so how do the CFI/owners of warbirds in this category get away with charging for a checkout in one?
 
That's an area of the rules I'm not familiar with. I suggest following up with the Warbirds of America group at www.eaa.org.
 
Experimental Category: Operating Limitations

It appears that FAR 91.319 is the main governing regulation, specifically:

(e) No person may operate an aircraft that is issued an experimental certificate under §21.191 (i) [i.e., a light sport aircraft] of this chapter for compensation or hire, except a person may operate an aircraft issued an experimental certificate under §21.191 (i)(1) for compensation or hire to-
(1) Tow a glider that is a light-sport aircraft or unpowered ultralight vehicle in accordance with §91.309; or
(2) Conduct flight training in an aircraft which that person provides prior to January 31, 2010.
​
But that still leaves the experimental-exhibition category. The warbirds folks are likely the best source of information on this topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top