MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Not if they’re reasonable.when the minimum standards are the standards of the only FBO, they are unreasonable.
Not if they’re reasonable.when the minimum standards are the standards of the only FBO, they are unreasonable.
It depends on if there is only one FBO because the market is small. Or if they set the standards so high that only one can meet them.when the minimum standards are the standards of the only FBO, they are unreasonable.
With respect, I cannot possibly see how this could be enforced. I'm not going to argue whether or not they have the authority to do this, or whether it's right, I just doubt the enforceability.
How would they know?Cease and desist or even trespass may be options for enforceability, but without specific documentation and applicable ordinances, etc., to review that’s just a SWAG.
They know. Other than transients, we pretty much know everyone taxiing out for takeoff and their flying routines. A strange car inside the fence, or an airplane arrives and the pilot goes to a private hangar - giveaways.How would they know?
I keep asking this and get crickets.
I hire independent CFIs all the time and fly with them and the owners of the airport have no idea.
So now you’re talking about stalking. I’m not allowed to fly with a cfi now. Ridiculous.They know. Other than transients, we pretty much know everyone taxiing out for takeoff and their flying routines. A strange car inside the fence, or an airplane arrives and the pilot goes to a private hangar - giveaways.
How would they know?
I keep asking this and get crickets.
I hire independent CFIs all the time and fly with them and the owners of the airport have no idea.
Further, i do not agree that the airport has any authority to prevent me from getting training in my own aircraft just because it departed or arrived at their airport. I would make it a point to land there on every training flight if I lived nearby.
quote from the OPWant the book answer or the real world answer? There’s a whole lot of guessing going on by everyone here, which is why I qualified my answer.
But, my answer also hinges not on the owner receiving training, but the instructor or commercial operator attempting to operate a business on the field.
Independent Flight Training Operators are prohibited from providing Flight Training in their own aircraft, including aircraft leased to or rented by the Independent Flight Training Operator.
The FBO manager was upset and said he could refer me to the city attorney (city-owned airport) because the FBO has a contract that includes exclusivity for fuel sales, airplane rentals and flight training. He said I was "an unapproved vendor."
quote from the OP
That sounds far more sweeping than just not allowing a business to be operated. For the record, I have no issue with them not allowing an instructor to do ground school in the FBO, or hanging a sign, or even running a school from their hangar. I have issue with the quote above, which is far more sweeping than that.
Now that is one of two things, a manager that misunderstood the contract (not uncommon), or an airport violating Federal Grant assurances (assuming they have received Federal Grants). The "exclusivity" is specifically not allowed. Now overly restrictive CMS may in effect cause that, but then the FAA may say the CMS is in violation. There are some exceptions for small airports with limited facilities available, but those are the exception.
To answer the question of how the airport authority would find out, generally it's going to come as a complaint from a competitor. Maybe the airport would find out on their own, but usually it starts with a complaint.
So should the airport manager take issue with where the training flight originates, or where the ground instruction is given?
I work for an FBO that is owned by the airport manager. His airport manager duties are part of the agreement with the city that owns the airport. He is, in effect, an unpaid city employee who manages the airport in return for the exclusive right to sell fuel, offer training and airplanes for rental, and pilot services for a local company that owns five airplanes. He supervises the rental T-hangars, but the rent all goes to the city.I'm not personally familiar with the airport in question or the FBO but I believe the airport manager owns the FBO.
I work for an FBO that is owned by the airport manager. His airport manager duties are part of the agreement with the city that owns the airport. He is, in effect, an unpaid city employee who manages the airport in return for the exclusive right to sell fuel, offer training and airplanes for rental, and pilot services for a local company that owns five airplanes. He supervises the rental T-hangars, but the rent all goes to the city.
They’re obviously trying to sound photosynthesis.
How do you figure?Sure, the FBO is required to maintain a $5 million liability policy….
Depends of the lease agreement between the FBO and the airport. Normally the FBO is required to maintain insurance that has the airport as a named insured. $5 million is pretty much the norm for a mid sized FBO. An independent CFI is going to be hard pressed to find a CFI liability policy that will allow an airport to be named as an insured.How do you figure?
So if you have a friend that flies out of that field, and you go fly with him a few times a month and during these flights you provide some instruction. Can they really say anything?
Where I work, we pretty much know who is flying every airplane and flight every day. Before I agreed to work for the local FBO, they were aware I was giving independent instruction to one of their former customers, and they were very unhappy with me.Do they really have the manpower to check every person who rides in an airplane to determine whether they're a CFI or just a passenger?
I'm a CFI. Sometimes I'm also a passenger because I like flying with friends. Are all people with CFI ratings now banned from flying with people? Sounds like an awfully murky line.Do they really have the manpower to check every person who rides in an airplane to determine whether they're a CFI or just a passenger?
I'm a CFI. Sometimes I'm also a passenger because I like flying with friends. Are all people with CFI ratings now banned from flying with people? Sounds like an awfully murky line.
I'm based at a really busy urban airport, so that colors my perception of such things.Where I work, we pretty much know who is flying every airplane and flight every day. Before I agreed to work for the local FBO, they were aware I was giving independent instruction to one of their former customers, and they were very unhappy with me.
As someone who used to adjudicate part 16 airport compliance complaints, it really comes down to the facts of the case. The issue is conducting business at the airport, so if you're instructing but not accepting compensation then you're not conducting business at the airport.Nope. For that matter, I don’t think “friendship” is a requirement.
That doesn’t mean they won’t try to stop
I'm a CFI. Sometimes I'm also a passenger because I like flying with friends. Are all people with CFI ratings now banned from flying with people? Sounds like an awfully murky line.
it if they know about it. But when it comes down to it, it’s none of their business who I fly with or what we do during the flight.
That's an important point. An airport/FBO may have a great flight school, but they are likely not going to have CFIs on staff with the right experience to provide type transition training for every make and model of airplane. Their CFIs might not even meet the insurance requirements to teach me in my airplane. So some flexibility is clearly needed here.I'd also argue that like aircraft maintenance, not all flight instruction is the same, and so just as I'd prefer not to have any old A&P work on my plane, I'm choosy about who conducts my flight instruction.
Honestly, if you are giving make/model specific training in a HP/Complex aircraft the flight school does not have qualified staff, a simple request will be granted. If you want to do Cirrus transition training and they have CSIPs on staff and I can see why they would object.That's an important point. An airport/FBO may have a great flight school, but they are likely not going to have CFIs on staff with the right experience to provide type transition training for every make and model of airplane. Their CFIs might not even meet the insurance requirements to teach me in my airplane. So some flexibility is clearly needed here.
- Martin
Sorry, but that just doesn't work for me. Even in the simple case, why should I have to make a request, even if it might be quickly granted?Honestly, if you are giving make/model specific training in a HP/Complex aircraft the flight school does not have qualified staff, a simple request will be granted. If you want to do Cirrus transition training and they have CSIPs on staff and I can see why they would object.
Why? Because you basically are the food truck that wants to operate on the airport with a restaurant while claiming the restaurants rental agreement restricting competition doesn’t matter. An argument you only want to sell meals on limited basis or only serve food the restaurant doesn’t serve really doesn’t matter.Sorry, but that just doesn't work for me. Even in the simple case, why should I have to make a request, even if it might be quickly granted?
And in the Cirrus example, if I don't like the CSIP the flight school has on staff and I want to hire my own, why should I not be able to do that? I pay rent for the hangar at the airport, so I'm a paying customer. The flight school should have final say over which CFIs train in their own aircraft, but when it comes to training in my aircraft, it should be up to me to select the instructor.
Regards,
Martin
Not the right metaphor. Martin is a customer of the airport who doesn't care for the airport restaurant's food. He wants to bring some takeout from off the airport.Why? Because you basically are the food truck that wants to operate on the airport with a restaurant while claiming the restaurants rental agreement restricting competition doesn’t matter. An argument you only want to sell meals on limited basis or only serve food the restaurant doesn’t serve really doesn’t matter.
Not the right metaphor. Martin is a customer of the airport who doesn't care for the airport restaurant's food. He wants to bring some takeout from off the airport.