CFI signing off questionable flight

[I am the OP]

I'm posting this under lessons learned because I would like to be anonymous...

I am a CFI, and I have recently acquired a new student. She is a student pilot and she owns a high performance airplane. She has about 150 hours as a student pilot that she has logged in the last two years since purchasing the plane. Yesterday she asked me to fly her to a business meeting in another state. The weather was IFR, and the only way to make the flight was to file and fly IFR. I gave her some instruction along the way (for the most part she was sole manipulator of the controls, I worked radio.)

Clearly this flight was far beyond her skill level and would not at all have been something that I would have worked into the private pilot curriculum. We had to shoot approaches at both ends of the trip, and we were on autopilot in the soup most of the time. She brought her husband (non-pilot passenger) along. In looking through her logbook, she logged several flights like this as dual received with previous instructors.

I am wondering about the appropriateness of signing her logbook and logging this flight as dual received. I tried to keep the flight instructional, but I feel that it could be looked on as a commercial pilot for hire, and not really an instructional flight. How would the FAA or a DPE look upon these flights? Legit instruction, or something else?

 

[kath]

I gave her some instruction along the way (for the most part she was sole manipulator of the controls, I worked radio.)

I think the answer to your question is in the statement above.

Nothing in the FAR's says that "instruction" has to constitute a particular topic in a particular order on a particular flight during a particular phase of training or a particular student skill level, etc.
There are students who bring an instructor along for all kinds of flights, for all kinds of reasons, including not being qualified for a particular operation (solo endorsement or high-performance, or out of currency or flight review, or just feeling rusty, or whatever). There are student pilots who can't get a medical and so just remain students forever and fly everywhere with CFI's. There are plenty of CFI's who would purposefully launch with a student pilot into the soup under IFR in order to gain that experience and see what being beyond one's skill level feels like.

From your description, it doesn't sound like a commercial op to me, I wouldn't sweat it.

 

[dmspilot]

Even if no instruction took place, she hired you to fly her own airplane...seems like it's still part 91 to me. If not comfortable with it, don't do it again.

 

[mondtster]

If you gave her instruction, your responsibility as a flight instructor is to document the instruction you gave her.

 

[bradg33]

I don't think there's any issue signing it off as dual for the reasons described above, but if an incident were to occur, you can guarantee the FAA will view it as a commercial for-hire operation. Assuming you have a valid second-class medical, there's no legal issue with you providing pilot services in her airplane, but don't kid yourself into thinking it's only an instructional flight. If you're instructing on a 3rd class (which you're allowed to do), you've probably got a bigger issue in this case.

 

[MauleSkinner]

but if an incident were to occur, you can guarantee the FAA will view it as a commercial for-hire operation.

How can you guarantee that? Do you have examples of violations?

 

[Brad W]

I don't know the answer..... but if this is just a one off thing, first and only time you've flown with the student.....then this just seems weird to me.

If you've flown with her before or at least there are indications that you will fly with her again as a more traditional lesson program as in she was just checking you out to see if you're a good fit to be her new instructor, then it seems less weird to me.

I flew lots of fun cross countries with my instructor, while working on private and instrument. He had already developed into also being a friend, and we figured we have to go anyway so might as well go someplace fun. In your case substitute useful for fun.

Is husband a pilot or a student? That would make it seem a little less weird that she owns a high performance plane....in preparation for their future flying..... But the 150 hours seems like a red flag variable to me. What's up with that?

 

[SkyDog58]

Log it however you feel comfortable logging it as long as you have at least a second class medical as @bradg33 alluded to. But if you do not have a second class or above, I’d suggest that you definitely log it as instruction. It was definitely an unusual flight lesson and included areas typically outside of a normal PP curriculum but there is nothing wrong with that.

What it is not is a commercial operation in the sense of a 135. What it could be construed as is private carriage where she hired you to fly her and her husband in her plane under an owner Part 91 flight. If anyone construed it that way, then you would need the second class.

Of course as a commercial pilot and CFI, you know all of that.

 

[Clip4]

I wouldn’t worry about.

 

[RussR]

If you actually provided some kind of instruction on the flight, then as a CFI you are REQUIRED to sign her logbook:

§ 61.189 Flight instructor records.
(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.

Many CFIs have done exactly the same type of flight. It's very valuable training, conducted in a real-world setting, with a real-world "mission" and real-world pressures. Nothing wrong with it, in fact it's a perfect opportunity.

 

[RyanShort1]

I don't know the answer..... but if this is just a one off thing, first and only time you've flown with the student.....then this just seems weird to me.

If you've flown with her before or at least there are indications that you will fly with her again as a more traditional lesson program as in she was just checking you out to see if you're a good fit to be her new instructor, then it seems less weird to me.

I flew lots of fun cross countries with my instructor, while working on private and instrument. He had already developed into also being a friend, and we figured we have to go anyway so might as well go someplace fun. In your case substitute useful for fun.

Is husband a pilot or a student? That would make it seem a little less weird that she owns a high performance plane....in preparation for their future flying..... But the 150 hours seems like a red flag variable to me. What's up with that?

It could be worse, like my student that started taking his T182 into class Charlie locations solo cross country without my signoff. I would FAR rather have had him ask for me to go along and provide some instruction. Some people start out well, have the money to buy a plane, and have a hard time finding the time to finish or wrap up due to other waaay bigger issues they are dealing with. This is by far not that uncommon.

 

[martym]

I tried to keep the flight instructional, but I feel that it could be looked on as a commercial pilot for hire, and not really an instructional flight.

She owns the plane and you are hired to fly it. That's how corporate flying works. Perfectly legit. It doesn't matter if you give instruction or not.
One of the best jobs I had was flying a lawyer in his Turbo Arrow IV. He scared the $&!+ out of himself in the clouds once and wouldn't fly alone again, even in clear skies. So when he needed to go somewhere, he'd hire me to fly along with him. He was white knuckles in the clouds but I made him tough it out and he eventually got pretty good but he said flat out he will never fly solo again.

 

[Mxfarm]

Why are some considering it an ‘unusual instructional flight’? What makes unusual? Sure seems like a prime opportunity for longer cross country instruction ( and the planning that’s required) which sure seems valuable to me.

 

[TommyG]

CFIs have been doing this stuff for years. Can it be looked at as possibly shady, sure. Can it be looked at as legit, sure. It’s all up,to how you wanna view it if asked.

 

[SkyDog58]

It really gets shady when the 2 hours of flight instruction is made routinely from point a to point b a couple of times a month with no trips to the practice area or around the pattern. Those 134 1/2 types eventually end up on the FAA radar. But the OP situation does not appear to be of that nature.

 

[RussR]

It really gets shady when the 2 hours of flight instruction is made routinely from point a to point b a couple of times a month with no trips to the practice area or around the pattern. Those 134 1/2 types eventually end up on the FAA radar. But the OP situation does not appear to be of that nature.

Even if they did this same flight every week with no other training it still would be completely legit, since the CFI is just acting as a commercial pilot, flying the owner's airplane. Part 91, routine operation.

 

[Lindberg]

I tried to keep the flight instructional, but I feel that it could be looked on as a commercial pilot for hire, and not really an instructional flight.

Why not both? I don't see what's "shady" about this.

 

[SkyDog58]

Even if they did this same flight every week with no other training it still would be completely legit, since the CFI is just acting as a commercial pilot, flying the owner's airplane. Part 91, routine operation.

Correct. My mind drifted away from the OP’s situation to a situation that I know of where a CFI who owned a plane did the 134 1/2 type of thing. I did not mean to confuse. If you read my earlier post, you’ll see that I understand the regs.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

I've been on the receiving end of that sort of flight, in my own plane, decades ago. We flew in the soup (without an A/P!) and it was logged as instruction. Because I was instructed. And I also happened to deliver some computer equipment at the other end of the flight.
OTOH, I'd be questioning a 150-hour "student" as to why they are a student.

 

[midlifeflyer]

How can you guarantee that? Do you have examples of violations?

Well, there are no guarantees but illegal charter is an FAA enforcement priority right now and they are not just looking at corporate jets with sham dry leases. I doubt they are looking as hard but they say they are looking at transportation disguised as such things as demo flight and flight instruction. I must get a question every month from a CFI asking about a specific scenario. No guarantee but it's a safe bet that if there is an incident, accident, or deviation, the FAA will look at the issue (seen it happen).

The thing about asking for examples is funny. Most "examples of violations" are handled privately and unless you make a FOIA request, you are unlikely to see them. Even then you might not. Basically, you'd need a pilot who insisted they were in the right and forced the FAA to trial on the issue. So absence of reported violations doesn't mean there haven't been any. If you really want an example, that's what I think the Warbird case is really all about.

Of course, assuming the OP has a second class medical and the airplane belongs to the customer, and there's nothing else going on between the lines, it kind of looks like basic Part 91 whether considered transportation or instruction.

 

[Tantalum]

Why are some considering it an ‘unusual instructional flight’? What makes unusual? Sure seems like a prime opportunity for longer cross country instruction ( and the planning that’s required) which sure seems valuable to me.

Totally. I don't see the issue.

PS, even if someone is not doing IR lessons I believe there's tremendous instructional value for them to get some actual with a CFI from time to time. It's scary stuff and is enough to warn a student or private pilot 'don't ever try this alone or not appropriately trained'

I used to love grabbing an instructor here before I had my IR and go for a morning flight when it was overcast. Once I started actual IR training it made it that much easier that I already had some actual dual received in the books.. not much, but something like 3.4 is better than 0. That was actually what finally made me sign up for an IR course.. I did an IR cross country from SEE to VNY in a steam gauge 172, flew the approach each way and was in the clouds for nearly all of it. Upon landing I paypal'd him my deposit for the accel. course

 

[MauleSkinner]

Well, there are no guarantees but illegal charter is an FAA enforcement priority right now and they are not just looking at corporate jets with sham dry leases. I doubt they are looking as hard but they say they are looking at transportation disguised as such things as demo flight and flight instruction. I must get a question every month from a CFI asking about a specific scenario. No guarantee but it's a safe bet that if there is an incident, accident, or deviation, the FAA will look at the issue (seen it happen).

The thing about asking for examples is funny. Most "examples of violations" are handled privately and unless you make a FOIA request, you are unlikely to see them. Even then you might not. Basically, you'd need a pilot who insisted they were in the right and forced the FAA to trial on the issue. So absence of reported violations doesn't mean there haven't been any. If you really want an example, that's what I think the Warbird case is really all about.

Of course, assuming the OP has a second class medical and the airplane belongs to the customer, and there's nothing else going on between the lines, it kind of looks like basic Part 91 whether considered transportation or instruction.

I agree with almost all of this, but the quote I responded to said he would guarantee that this instance would not be considered an instructional flight. That indicates to me that he’s got additional information. I don’t think the Warbird case would be a good example, because that’s not the student’s airplane.

im not saying there aren’t examples that exist, and yes, as long as the OP holds at least a second class medical that wouldn’t be a problem, either, but I’ve never heard anything from the FAA that would indicate this wouldn’t be considered an instructional flight.

 

[bradg33]

Other than willful blindness, how can this not seem like unusual instruction? "Student Pilot" with 150 hours. Owns a high performance airplane. Instruction well outside standard curriculum for a private pilot candidate. The only reason this isn't really problematic is the fact that she owns the airplane. If this was a rental aircraft being provided by a school that employs the CFI, it screams illegal charter. If we had additional facts, is it possible some of those might swing it back towards normal instruction? Sure. Might some of those additional facts that might make it seem even more like a part 91 flight for hire (on the instructor's part)? Sure.

Would you feel differently if you learned the student had never solo'd? Would you feel differently if you learned the student hadn't taken the written? Would you feel differently if you learned the student rarely did local instructional flights, but routinely took these kinds of "cross country" instruction flights that just happened to correspond with business? Again, assuming the CFI has a valid second-class medical, there's nothing illegal about this situation; he's just providing pilot services. But let's not pretend this is ordinary student pilot instruction that doesn't raise any eyebrows at all (even if the lessons learned during the flight may be beneficial, depending on the student's progress otherwise).

 

[I am the OP]

I am the OP...

For those asking why I found this flight unusual, and why I'm questioning the appropriateness of logging it as dual...

Taken by itself, it isn't an unusual flight. I have flown many "mission based" training scenarios in the past, including taking students on cross countries to places that they needed to be.

But... Looking at the totality of the situation... Very high time student pilot making repeated IFR cross country flights that provide little if any instructional value towards attaining the private pilot certificate. Was the purpose of this flight (or any of the others in her logbook) to advance her progress towards the PPL, or was it simply to transport her and her husband from one place to another? If I'm hired as a commercial pilot to move a person from point A to point B in their own plane, fine... but if I'm being asked to log that time as dual received when the instruction was incidental to the flight, then I start to wonder whether or not I should be signing my name in her logbook.

 

[WannFly]

I have been on this receiving end too. have about 10 hours of actual where i asked the CFI to fly with me because i want that experience. I dont see why this is a problem

 

[MauleSkinner]

Other than willful blindness, how can this not seem like unusual instruction? "Student Pilot" with 150 hours. Owns a high performance airplane. Instruction well outside standard curriculum for a private pilot candidate. The only reason this isn't really problematic is the fact that she owns the airplane. If this was a rental aircraft being provided by a school that employs the CFI, it screams illegal charter. If we had additional facts, is it possible some of those might swing it back towards normal instruction? Sure. Might some of those additional facts that might make it seem even more like a part 91 flight for hire (on the instructor's part)? Sure.

Would you feel differently if you learned the student had never solo'd? Would you feel differently if you learned the student hadn't taken the written? Would you feel differently if you learned the student rarely did local instructional flights, but routinely took these kinds of "cross country" instruction flights that just happened to correspond with business? Again, assuming the CFI has a valid second-class medical, there's nothing illegal about this situation; he's just providing pilot services. But let's not pretend this is ordinary student pilot instruction that doesn't raise any eyebrows at all (even if the lessons learned during the flight may be beneficial, depending on the student's progress otherwise).

Maybe “unusual”, but definitely not “abnormal” or “illegal”. I’ve seen several pilots over the years with a couple hundred hours of dual flying trips in their own airplanes. Nothing wrong with that.

Since the OP states he’s not providing instructional value, I’d say that’s a problem, but it doesn’t change the scenario.

 

[Tantalum]

unusual

who defines what 'usual' is? Some people take years and hundreds of others to get their PPL.. others crank it out in 40. Some go to a big school, others visit their local mom and pop school once a month or so.. I financed my own flying between high school and and college.. while it didn't take me 150 hours (I solo'd in 8) it also took me a few years

"Student Pilot" with 150 hours

I bet that's not as uncommon as you think.. some people can only dedicate so much time and emotional effort to training. Sure, most do in 50-80.. but I bet there are a lot of 100+ hr students out there.

Owns a high performance airplane

people do buy their own planes to receive training in it.. they do it with 172 all the way SR22 and everything in between

Instruction well outside standard curriculum for a private pilot candidate

there's nothing unusual about flying a long cross country together, especially one that involves weather

it screams illegal charter

..some of you guys are super paranoid, but we're all adults, next time someone offers money to teach them flying feel free to say 'no - you have to do the same 50.01 nm VFR cross country flight that 9 million other students do. We won't do anything interesting that will add additional value to your aviation knowledge, no you can't bring anyone and I won't fly you for a burger, to visit a friend, or attend a meeting'

 

[Tantalum]

Since the OP states he’s not providing instructional value

did he, the initial post says

for the most part she was sole manipulator of the controls

I tried to keep the flight instructional

sounds like OP got worried that this flight was not the usual cookie cutter flight and got paranoid. I don't think what he did was wrong, but if it's this upsetting he (or she) can decline future such flights.

 

[MauleSkinner]

did he, the initial post says….

In his subsequent post, he noted

that provide little if any instructional value

 

[RussR]

Other than willful blindness, how can this not seem like unusual instruction?

Since the flight is legal regardless of whether or not there is instruction taking place, I really don’t see the issue. It’s a legal flight. I don’t think I’m being willfully blind. The fact that the student owns the aircraft is absolutely what makes the difference, and is an important factor. Plus, if there is any instruction going on, 61.189 requires the CFI to sign the student’s logbook.

Yes, it is somewhat unusual for a student pilot to have 150 hours. But so what? It happens. It’s unusual for someone to learn to fly in a twin, but it happens. It’s unusual for someone to take 50 hours to solo, but it happens. It’s unusual for someone to get a gyrocopter rating, but it happens. It’s all legal.

I fly a non-pilot owner back and forth between his home and his business often twice a week. He’s interested in aviation, even took some lessons in the past. He often asks questions about what’s going on, and listens to ATC. I explain to him what I’m doing. It’s a perfectly legal Part 91 commercial operation. If he wanted to, I’d be willing to increase the amount I’m explaining and let him do most of the flying, and count it as instruction, because it very much would be. Same situation as the OP, just seen in reverse.

 

[Tantalum]

^ah, thanks. Sounds like maybe he got paranoid or is trying to rationalize why he may get in trouble

I did a couple flights like this, I'm not fancy enough to have business meetings to fly to, but grabbing a CFI for an IMC flight 300-400 nm doesn't scream 'WRONG' to me. It's different, sure, but I'm not sure what about it is illegal. He gave instruction, the student had the yoke

Anyway, I digress (but hopefully not regress!)

 

[WDD]

At 150 hours, she probably doesn't need any more hours in any category to get her to the check ride (except the three hour test prep). I would error on the side of caution and not sign it as instruction. Her plane - you could charge her as a commercial pilot flying her and her husband. As the non student husband was there, I wouldn't think you could be carrying passengers and teaching at the same time. Just a hunch - no FAR/AIM to reference.

 

[MauleSkinner]

As the non student husband was there, I wouldn't think you could be carrying passengers and teaching at the same time. Just a hunch - no FAR/AIM to reference.

No FAR/AIM reference because it doesn’t exist. There’s absolutely no problem (legally) with having passengers along for on training flights. Nor is there any problem giving instruction that’s not legally required…in fact, the FAA encourages that one.

 

[thito01]

..it screams illegal charter.

..some of you guys are super paranoid, but we're all adults, next time someone offers money to teach them flying feel free to say 'no - you have to do the same 50.01 nm VFR cross country flight that 9 million other students do. We won't do anything interesting that will add additional value to your aviation knowledge, no you can't bring anyone and I won't fly you for a burger, to visit a friend, or attend a meeting'

Tantalum; you really did a disservice to bradg33 the way you clipped his post. You made him appear to say 180 degrees from what he really said.
For the record, his statement about it screaming illegal charter was "If this was a rental aircraft being provided by a school that employs the CFI, it screams illegal charter." You made him seem to say that the flight in question, in the students own aircraft, would be illegal.
They, you go and jump on him for what he did not say.

 

[Tantalum]

Tantalum; you really did a disservice to bradg33 the way you clipped his post. You made him appear to say 180 degrees from what he really said.
For the record, his statement about it screaming illegal charter was "If this was a rental aircraft being provided by a school that employs the CFI, it screams illegal charter." You made him seem to say that the flight in question, in the students own aircraft, would be illegal.
They, you go and jump on him for what he did not say.

Rented aircraft or not I don't understand what is so egregious about this..

But it's a free world, if a lesson don't feel right no one's forcing you to do it! I'm not a CFI but I have turned down opportunities to go flying as a pax, safety, etc., if it didn't feel right

PS, I quote typically tiny portions.. no ill intent towards the quotee, but saves space and it gives me a prompt to speak to. The person I quoted either way was expressing some issue with the trip in question so not a full 180, maybe a 45

Cheers

 

[Hengelo]

Yes, it is somewhat unusual for a student pilot to have 150 hours. But so what? It happens. It’s unusual for someone to learn to fly in a twin, but it happens. It’s unusual for someone to take 50 hours to solo, but it happens. It’s unusual for someone to get a gyrocopter rating, but it happens. It’s all legal.

Paging Mr. Jones...

 

[martym]

At 150 hours, she probably doesn't need any more hours

there is no "maximum" amount of instruction for any certificate, rating or endorsement. An instructor could give a student 1000 hrs of dual. Maybe it just means he is a crappy instructor. Certainly not illegal in anyway and the ones claiming faux charter don't know the regs.

 

[WDD]

Not illegal - agree. My point with this is that there would be nothing lost in context of achieving the required hours for the PPl check ride.

 

[DaleB]

Let's look at this another way. Let's assume I'm a guy who has no intention of ever obtaining a pilot certificate, I just want to fly around once in a while and see my neighborhood from above. I go down to the local flight school and sign up for an hour of instruction or even just a discovery flight. Illegal? If so, why?

What if I happen to buy an airplane, and do the same thing? Illegal? If so, why?

Let's say I am a pilot and I buy an airplane that happens to be a few hundred miles away. My flight review has expired, and I need to get the plane to my home field. I hire a CFI to fly back with me, since I can't legally do it by myself (flight review). How is this significantly different?

In the OP's situation I really don't see the problem. That is, unless the OP were to ask the Chief Counsel for their opinion. I'm pretty sure asking the chief counsel about toast for breakfast would result in a letter outlining some incredibly convoluted way in which eating toast for breakfast is a violation of some FAR or other.

 

[DFH65]

No FAR/AIM reference because it doesn’t exist. There’s absolutely no problem (legally) with having passengers along for on training flights. Nor is there any problem giving instruction that’s not legally required…in fact, the FAA encourages that one.

Agree, when I was a student my wife sat in the back a lot. I am paying for the aircraft why not get the most of it. Glad we did as she absolutely loves to fly and gets mad when I go without her.

I don't see any issue with signing off on the book if you gave any instruction at all.

I bet there are a lot of folks with health issues or other certificate issues that can no longer fly by themselves but hire a CFI to ride along.