"Maxwell" wrote in news6HIh.16227$TK5.12353
@newsfe13.lga:

No he would not. But no mater what you call him, if he is any kind of
quaified pilot, as opposed to a passenger, 61.57 does not apply. Because
61.57 is about carrying passengers.

If he ever intends to fly with passengers in the future, he may not use
three takeoffs and landings during a flight carrying non-required persons
or property to meet his currency requirement. That's pretty clear.

I disagree with your definition of a passenger. But I'm not an authority.

However, the definition is suspicious to me because you qualify a non-
passenger pilot as anyone who holds a pilot certificate, and also is BFR
and Medical current.

Nothing in 61.23 says that a person needs a Medical in order to "be" a
pilot. Only to excercise the privileges of the pilot. Is "being" a pilot
instead of a passenger a privilege?

And nothing in 61.56 says that a person needs a BFR to "be" a pilot. One
need only have a BFR in order to act as Pilot in Command.

Additionally, 61.56 (h) specifically says that a BFR can be accomplished in
combination with 61.57 at the discretion of the instructor. The implication
to me is that if the rule were not there, and a pilot were to not be
current per 61.57, the instructor would have to be PIC for the flight, and
the pilot getting his BFR would have to kick the instructor out in order to
meet 61.57.

YMMV