skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Mike, In the interests of staying in sj's good graces I have to say "no comment". :evil: This discussion could easily get out of control.
Experimental LODA Requirements - We’re not happy until you’re not happy…
- Thread starter akomara1
- Start date
RedOwlAirfield
Registered User
Nevada
MTV;
So if the pilot doesn't log the time - it's all good? Remember we're only required to log time germane to currency. So despite what most pilots think you can actually fly and not log it. If it's free time and you're going to be current anyway it stills sounds like a good deal to me.
Interesting that a rule like this has absolutely nothing to do with flight safety - at all. This sort of thing is what makes it hard to take the FAA seriously.
ROA
mvivion
SPONSOR
Bozeman,MT
Who knows? Bear in mind that a private pilot would be absolutely legal to fly a particular airplane (assuming they are appropriately rated). So, if they're not taking ANY compensation, and their only goal is simply to build experience, why would they "need" a Commercial certificate, or a medical?
Please don't look for logic here. And, please don't expect logic to prevail.
The current "decision" unfortunately opens the door for further decisions, none of which are likely to promote aviation or aviation safety.
Opinion only,
MTV
RedOwlAirfield
Registered User
Nevada
As claimed earlier in the thread, the FAA regards the experience as compensation. The situation I'm interested in is where the pilot is merely doing a favor for a friend. That is to say, my friend has to get his plane to the mechanic but is out of town for a week. I can do it for him and his plane can be ready to go upon his return. If I don't claim the experience, all I get out of this is doing a favor for a friend. Mind you, helping one's friends is a great thing but still of no redeemable value.
And yes I realize that when dealing with the "gubmint" common sense and logic are often scarce commodities. I'm not overly proud of it, but the last 10 years of my working career I worked for a well known federal government. I am intimately familiar.
I don't expect anything written here to have any effect whatsoever, but showing that there are things that can happen that do not fall under the preconceptions the regulators have used may lead to others. Pepper the preconceptions with enough contradictory facts, and the basis for the interpretation fails.
Either way, shining the light on governmental lunacy, even in a private forum such as this, is a good thing. One never can tell from where progress will begin.
RaisedByWolves
FRIEND
Tx
This must be what the decided to spend all there free time on now that the Fsdo’s don’t do ferry permits or field approvals.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
18 years on this site, and this is definitely on the short list of worst threads ever. Quite possibly the worst.
All this yak about the FAA causing a problem is misguided. A Federal Judge heard a case challenging an FAA ruling to shut down a warbird carrier who gave rides under the guise of instruction. Who pushed them to challenge that limited ruling? I’ve read it was AOPA but I don’t know for sure. Regardless, the case ends up in front of a judge who wrote an opinion that flight instructors are providing a professional service for compensation, the roots of commerce, and that by being present in the aircraft they’re carrying passengers. The ruling that I read sounds credible, and by the reaction of the FAA I believe they agree the ruling will likely withstand any challenge.
Moving on, how it applies to my experimental Cub is this. CFR91.319 (a) defines limitations on commercial ops.
And also written into the regs is part (h).
See? There’s nothing new here except an aggressive effort to get these letters distributed.
Fortunately for me the FAA recognized the implications of the court ruling and quickly set up a program to get permission letters into EXP owner’s hands so they can continue to receive instruction in their planes. What does this mean for the future of instructors? I’m not immersed in that world and don’t know that answer, but given that my instructors maintain 1st Class medicals and ATPs I don’t anticipate any problems. How AOPA has responded in their press release is embarrassing. Whoever wrote that release for Mark Baker must be fresh out of high school. The FAA is not the problem here. A court ruling is, and apparently AOPA has some responsibility in that. Congratulations, AOPA.
All this yak about the FAA causing a problem is misguided. A Federal Judge heard a case challenging an FAA ruling to shut down a warbird carrier who gave rides under the guise of instruction. Who pushed them to challenge that limited ruling? I’ve read it was AOPA but I don’t know for sure. Regardless, the case ends up in front of a judge who wrote an opinion that flight instructors are providing a professional service for compensation, the roots of commerce, and that by being present in the aircraft they’re carrying passengers. The ruling that I read sounds credible, and by the reaction of the FAA I believe they agree the ruling will likely withstand any challenge.
Moving on, how it applies to my experimental Cub is this. CFR91.319 (a) defines limitations on commercial ops.
And also written into the regs is part (h).
See? There’s nothing new here except an aggressive effort to get these letters distributed.
Fortunately for me the FAA recognized the implications of the court ruling and quickly set up a program to get permission letters into EXP owner’s hands so they can continue to receive instruction in their planes. What does this mean for the future of instructors? I’m not immersed in that world and don’t know that answer, but given that my instructors maintain 1st Class medicals and ATPs I don’t anticipate any problems. How AOPA has responded in their press release is embarrassing. Whoever wrote that release for Mark Baker must be fresh out of high school. The FAA is not the problem here. A court ruling is, and apparently AOPA has some responsibility in that. Congratulations, AOPA.
Last edited:
The problem FAA has is that it is in direct conflict with prior LOIs. The most significant being the Fretwell letter back in 1995. Fretwell - (1995) Legal Interpretation (faa.gov) In that legal opinion, FAA Chief Counsel made the interpretation that Flight Instructors were being compensated for the instruction given, and not for piloting the aircraft. As such, only Private Pilot privileges' were required while in the aircraft. This new ruling from a judge throws out 26 years of precedent for CFIs not acting as Commercial Pilots, but rather Private Pilots while providing instruction under their CFI. It's going to be interesting to see how FAA digs out of this one!
In any case, I sent my email to FAA yesterday requesting a LODA to flight instruct in any aircraft for which I'm rated. We'll see how that goes over! I would suggest everyone that holds a CFI to send a similar letter and absolutely flood their in box so they are overloaded!
In any case, I sent my email to FAA yesterday requesting a LODA to flight instruct in any aircraft for which I'm rated. We'll see how that goes over! I would suggest everyone that holds a CFI to send a similar letter and absolutely flood their in box so they are overloaded!
And all of this stems from the B-17 909 crash at BDL, the major operational deviance's of the Collings Foundation and their "Bob Collings" steadfast refusal to operate under regulations. His son Rob had done a masterful job creating the world for the warbird ride experience to operate under. But since their operation was shut down during the crash investigation with their refusal to comply, this now is at least for now all dumped on us. This is what Stewart's note is referring to. This is not a trivial case which hopefully gets dealt with properly.
For guys interested in the ruling, here’s an article that touches on the ruling and earlier case references.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/indust...a-and-far-threaten-flight-training/25805/amp/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/indust...a-and-far-threaten-flight-training/25805/amp/
frequent_flyer
Registered User
Arizona, USA
I applied for LODA to receive instruction in my experimental aircraft and to give instruction in other experimental aircraft. Application was made 7/9/21 and LODA were received 7/13/21. That's less than three business days. Maybe I got in ahead of the rush.
Unfortunately each LODA specifies AX as my state of residence instead of AZ. When that's corrected I shall be free, once again, to make my fortune as a flight instructor.
Unfortunately each LODA specifies AX as my state of residence instead of AZ. When that's corrected I shall be free, once again, to make my fortune as a flight instructor.
frequent_flyer
Registered User
Arizona, USA
Well it was my mistake in the application email and the LODA faithfully reproduced the address I had given them. Corrected in a few hours by SDL FSDO.
JDWilliams
Registered User
I applied for a LODA today - 7/13/21. Got an immediate automated reply email acknowledging receipt. I’m told by a FSDO rep that FAA outsourced the work and response time should be prompt. I’ll update this post when I get something back.
Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
sj
Staff member
Northwest Arkansas
My acknowledgement came from DigitaliBiz and my signed LODA from ANC FSDO came less than 3 hours after. I’m impressed.
JDWilliams
Registered User
Haven’t seen my come back yet. I’ll post when it does.
RaisedByWolves
FRIEND
Tx
And I’ll post how quickly I get a ferry permit after requesting it. Last year it took half a day. I don’t expect much different this year.
And field approvals too. I hope for your sake the Alaska Fsdo’s don’t change. They can not issue them out of the two Fsdo’s around here. Hell they wouldn’t even respond to me when I had a question if you can put a transponder in a airplane with out a engine driven power source.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mvivion
SPONSOR
Bozeman,MT
Here’s the latest: FAA will prosecute any instructor who provides instruction in limited, EX, etc planes, even if they didn’t accept ANY money. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...QRcSSTFBUdik77l7USRshx4AeJPAoWuxDJ2zID7HpNSFY
Apparently, the experience is compensation…..
Cant make this stuff up.
MTV
Apparently, the experience is compensation…..
Cant make this stuff up.
MTV
FWIW, here's a snapshot of my LODA. No problem for my instructors. In fact it appears an instructor can get a LODA that's valid in any airplane he's qualified in using the same process. Seems pretty uneventful, at least with respect to experimentals. I don't know anything about limited category rules.
Last edited:
frequent_flyer
Registered User
Arizona, USA
Went there, did that, got the LODA, and also posted about it earlier in this thread.
For FAA to make such a quick turn around is astounding. That said, it goes to say that this entire fiasco has absolutely nothing to do with safety. My letter simply asked for a loda that would cover me as CFI in every aircraft for which I was rated. Just a paperwork shuffle, no review of experience, no interview, just send an email and get an email back. I suppose they actually checked to see I had a CFI, but nothing more.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
J
jackndiane
I hear it's really nice out there in Aoxamoxa, our 51st state.
J
jackndiane
Gosh, is this retroactive? I like looking at airplanes, but don't have a CPL. I was thinking about going to Oshkosh... Those C-47s are really neat. But hey, don't they gross out over 12,500? Do I need a type rating? An instrument hood? Black contact lenses?
JDWilliams
Registered User
And I’ll post how quickly I get a ferry permit after requesting it. Last year it took half a day. I don’t expect much different this year.
I’m hearing from my LIT FSDO contacts (a very GA friendly FSDO) that the days of getting a ferry permit quickly are pretty much gone. Same day turn around still possible - but don’t count on it.
I don’t anticipate any problem and the young lady I spoke to at FSDO this morning said it should be simple. If anything delays the process its that FSDO staff is still working from home. They may see some return to their offices in August. I’m a couple of weeks ahead of the game so there’s no rush on my account.
FWIW, a good friend in Georgia says he got a SFP a couple of weeks ago. Business as usual. Well, as usual as remotely staffed FSDOs can be.
FWIW, a good friend in Georgia says he got a SFP a couple of weeks ago. Business as usual. Well, as usual as remotely staffed FSDOs can be.
