Logging PIC as a PPL for Hire (and taking the reverse high speed)

Captain

Captain

Final Approach
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
8,006
Location
NOYB
Display Name
Display name:
First Officer
Why do some topics get so much attention and seem so contentious?

What do you think are the MOST dead horse beaten topics? Off the top of my head I came up with logging PIC and paying fuel bills with a PPL.

I have a theory that its the FAAs fault for letting all the rule be written in vague 'lawyer talk'. Could be wrong though. Ideas?
 
Ron Levy said:
Because some people can't stand being told they can't do everything they want to do.
Click to expand...


... while staunchly defending indefensible, illogical reasoning to support their mistaken position.

People enjoy watching forum train wrecks.
 
Everyone I've talked to who wanted to become a pilot for utility purposes learned that the utility was severely dampened by commercial / legal requirements. It seems like 15-20% of my training was about what I COULDN'T do, and that certainly provides a bit of drag on the wide-eyed wonder of flying.

The other day a friend of mine asked if I could fly him to pick up a specially made handicapped accessible bike for a charity he runs. I missed his call and he made other arrangements, but the truth is, I had to think through the legality had I offered my "services". I came to the conclusion that I could fly HIM back and forth free of charge with no issue, but me not being a member of his charity (my wife is on the board) AND the fact that I'd be taking cargo... in the end I decided I didn't know enough except that I'd probably run afoul of 2 or 3 laws by helping him out.

That was an interesting and frustrating realization in a long line of interesting and frustrating realizations for private pilots that their privileges are, in fact, limited. It doesn't bother me much since my "professional" flying would be incidental to my business, and I get lots of utility from "personal" flying beyond poking holes in the sky.
 
ChrisK said:
Everyone I've talked to who wanted to become a pilot for utility purposes learned that the utility was severely dampened by commercial / legal requirements. It seems like 15-20% of my training was about what I COULDN'T do, and that certainly provides a bit of drag on the wide-eyed wonder of flying.

The other day a friend of mine asked if I could fly him to pick up a specially made handicapped accessible bike for a charity he runs. I missed his call and he made other arrangements, but the truth is, I had to think through the legality had I offered my "services". I came to the conclusion that I could fly HIM back and forth free of charge with no issue, but me not being a member of his charity (my wife is on the board) AND the fact that I'd be taking cargo... in the end I decided I didn't know enough except that I'd probably run afoul of 2 or 3 laws by helping him out.

That was an interesting and frustrating realization in a long line of interesting and frustrating realizations for private pilots that their privileges are, in fact, limited. It doesn't bother me much since my "professional" flying would be incidental to my business, and I get lots of utility from "personal" flying beyond poking holes in the sky.
Click to expand...

Unless you have a business relationship with your friend (which could potentially benefit from "goodwill"), I'm missing where the "for hire" aspect of this would have been.
 
Palmpilot said:
Unless you have a business relationship with your friend (which could potentially benefit from "goodwill"), I'm missing where the "for hire" aspect of this would have been.
Click to expand...

I'm mostly concerned about transporting cargo.
 
ChrisK said:
I'm mostly concerned about transporting cargo.
Click to expand...

61.113(a) prohibits transporting "persons or property" for hire. It doesn't make any distinction between them.
 
Palmpilot said:
61.113(a) prohibits transporting "persons or property" for hire. It doesn't make any distinction between them.
Click to expand...

So as long as I paid for it I would have been fine.

Still my point remains - I try to stay away from areas that are gray to me :)

Could I have deducted the cost?
 
Sadly by the time you figure out the regs you could have completed the flight and no one would have cared.
 
Captain said:
Why do some topics get so much attention and seem so contentious?

What do you think are the MOST dead horse beaten topics? Off the top of my head I came up with logging PIC and paying fuel bills with a PPL.

I have a theory that its the FAAs fault for letting all the rule be written in vague 'lawyer talk'. Could be wrong though. Ideas?
Click to expand...

Concealed Carry at 10,000 feet, getting a medical after an ADD diagnosis and buying a plane while still working on your PPL. Are twins really safer than singles?
 
Lol. Cracks me up a PPL for hire discussion breaks out on a thread asking why that's such a hot topic.
 
Captain said:
What do you think are the MOST dead horse beaten topics? Off the top of my head I came up with logging PIC and paying fuel bills with a PPL.
Click to expand...

I've seen a lot of "Why is GA dead?" and "How can we bring back GA?" type topics. They always seem to go the same way.
 
Palmpilot said:
Trying to figure out who is a jerk and who isn't. :D
Click to expand...

Common, I havent posted one of those in a long time. :)

In fact, there may be more copy cat jerk threads than originals.
 
ChrisK said:
AND YET I STILL DON'T KNOW
Click to expand...

Ummmm. Well maybe that lends itself to my theory the FARs are purposely vague. Sometimes I think they are more worried about being responsible and being sued than they are about oversight. 91.3 comes to mind.
 
Captain said:
Ummmm. Well maybe that lends itself to my theory the FARs are purposely vague. Sometimes I think they are more worried about being responsible and being sued than they are about oversight. 91.3 comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Of course they're purposely vague. That gives the bureacrats more power! ;)
 
Ron Levy said:
If it was a legitimate charitable organization, yes, and the FAA doesn't consider such a deduction to be "compensation" in this context.
Click to expand...
Thanks!

Sorry to derail this pointless thread with an actual question.

;)
 
Captain said:
Why do some topics get so much attention and seem so contentious?

What do you think are the MOST dead horse beaten topics? Off the top of my head I came up with logging PIC and paying fuel bills with a PPL.

I have a theory that its the FAAs fault for letting all the rule be written in vague 'lawyer talk'. Could be wrong though. Ideas?
Click to expand...

The part 61 logging rules are just hilarious, sort of regulatory version of a Simpsons episode. It's a horse that is always fun to beat.

The thing is the acutal flight of airplanes is governed by the laws of physics, so a new pilot is used to working in a reality based frame work.

But when the new pilot encounters Part 61 logging lore, reality goes out the window. The rules make no sense.

Because the logging rules make no sense (for example, they allow an infinite number of PIC's sometimes, and no PICs other times) us old geezers can have fun beating up on new pilots who can't grock them.

New guys have trouble shifting from the reality based world to the bizzaro-land of Part 61 + 'letters' + lore. It's kind of a hazing ritual.
 
Ron Levy said:
Because some people can't stand being told they can't do everything they want to do.
Click to expand...
That pretty much takes care if the compensation rules.

The logging rules are a bit different. That one seems to be a combination of the FAA's decision to use the term PIC for "a certain type of pilot time that will be counted toward certificates and ratings" and people's inability or refusal to understand that.
 
midlifeflyer said:
That pretty much takes care if the compensation rules.

The logging rules are a bit different. That one seems to be a combination of the FAA's decision to use the term PIC for "a certain type of pilot time that will be counted toward certificates and ratings" and people's inability or refusal to understand that.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Ditto the re-use of "high performance" in the 1997 Part 61 re-write, changing the meaning but not the name. Also the seven different definitions of "cross-country" and three types of night.
 
Ron Levy said:
Agreed. Ditto the re-use of "high performance" in the 1997 Part 61 re-write, changing the meaning but not the name. Also the seven different definitions of "cross-country" and three types of night.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the change in definition of "solo" from 1929 to some time in the 1950s :D There are still people who think it has the old definition of "without an instructor."
 
midlifeflyer said:
Don't forget the change in definition of "solo" from 1929 to some time in the 1950s :D There are still people who think it has the old definition of "without an instructor."
Click to expand...


As far as I am concerned. your comatose grandmother can be riding in the back seat while you fly as PIC with no else, and yet you can not log SOLO.
 
When I drive on the Beltway I'll sometimes do a bit above the posted speed limit. I don't worry about it much, if I get pulled over I'll take my penalty and move on.

There are lots of aviation equivalents. The silliest threads are about how the aviation equivalents of speeding will bring death and destruction on all of GA....
 
Anything that has to do with a tailwheel airplane.
 
cirrusmx said:
As far as I am concerned. your comatose grandmother can be riding in the back seat while you fly as PIC with no else, and yet you can not log SOLO.
Click to expand...
The FAA agrees -- at least until she stops breathing -- corpses don't count agains solo.
 
Bill Watson said:
Can a CFI-I give instrument instruction in a tail wheel airplane if the instructor lacks a tail wheel endorsement?
Click to expand...
AFS-800 says no. The Chief Counsel hasn't been asked.

Note 1: Grandfathering is OK, but per Flight Standards, you need one or the other.
Note 2: A CFI-IA cannot give flight training at all: s/he must also have an ASE/AME rating (as appropriate) in addition to the IA rating on his/her CFI ticket.
 
Last edited:
cirrusmx said:
As far as I am concerned. your comatose grandmother can be riding in the back seat while you fly as PIC with no else, and yet you can not log SOLO.
Click to expand...
You're correct. Point is, it wasn't always like that and some folks have been hesitant to change in the past 50-60 years.

Or are you taking the reverse point of view? That what is today always was? :wink2:
 
Ron Levy said:
AFS-800 says no. The Chief Counsel hasn't been asked.

Note 1: Grandfathering is OK, but per Flight Standards, you need one or the other.
Note 2: A CFI-IA cannot give flight training at all: s/he must also have an ASE/AME rating (as appropriate) in addition to the IA rating on his/her CFI ticket.
Click to expand...
I'm curious. Have a reference other than the defunct FAQ?

Are you saying that, were I (no tailwheel endorsement) to give a flight review to a current pilot in his tailwheel, I would be violating some reg in addition to not being too bright?
 
midlifeflyer said:
I'm curious. Have a reference other than the defunct FAQ?
Click to expand...
The FAQ file is not defunct, just available only to Flight Standards personnel. It remains AFS-800's policy guidance to its field personnel.

Are you saying that, were I (no tailwheel endorsement) to give a flight review to a current pilot in his tailwheel, I would be violating some reg in addition to not being too bright?
Click to expand...
I'm saying that AFS-800 is saying that. They feel that "authorized instructor" includes all certifications and endorsements necessary to act as PIC.
 
Ron Levy said:
The FAQ file is not defunct, just available only to Flight Standards personnel. It remains AFS-800's policy guidance to its field personnel.
Click to expand...

Not true. You will not find the FAQ anywhere on the online library. Some inspectors still refer to it using their own copy.


Ron Levy said:
I'm saying that AFS-800 is saying that. They feel that "authorized instructor" includes all certifications and endorsements necessary to act as PIC.
Click to expand...

Show a memo from AFS-800 stating that or showing that the FAQ is still authorized as guidance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top