![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "FryGuy" wrote in message 1... I have a question around a 100 hour inspection requirement. I've had time blocked off at my local FBO for over a month to take a plane this Saturday. Me and another pilot buddy are taking up the coast of North Carolina and are going to hit the airports in the Outer Banks and go to the museum in Kill Devil Hills. I was just told that the aircraft we are renting is over the 100 hour inspection requirement. I asked them if they could get it done between now and then and they said they don't have time. Their argument is that we won't be doing any flight training and therefore the 100 hour inspection requirement is not applicable. I talked with someone at the AOPA and 91.409b says: "Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceeding 100 hours of time in service the aircraft has received and annual or 100 hour inspection....." The rep at the AOPA said that their interpretation is that since it is a rental plane it is "for hire". I talked with the head A&P Mechanic at the FBO and he said "for hire" only means if their are paying passengers. AOPA is correct in that the airplane is for hire, but that is not the subject of the CFR 14 section. For hire, the operator would get paid for the flight and that would include any compensation from any passenger/student. I know this plane well and I know it is a good plane. I just don't want to violate any FARs. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated. How is the flight being paid for? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Irrelevant question Tarver.
You do not need the inspection for the trip. Only if a flight instructor, associated with the FBO who operates the bird is aboard giving flight instruction is it required. You could even use a CFI from outside the FBO and legally train without the inspection. You are not operating this for hire. The fact that the FBO rents to you does not alter the way you are operating the flight. Bill A&P I.A. On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 11:25:44 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "FryGuy" wrote in message . 41... I have a question around a 100 hour inspection requirement. I've had time blocked off at my local FBO for over a month to take a plane this Saturday. Me and another pilot buddy are taking up the coast of North Carolina and are going to hit the airports in the Outer Banks and go to the museum in Kill Devil Hills. I was just told that the aircraft we are renting is over the 100 hour inspection requirement. I asked them if they could get it done between now and then and they said they don't have time. Their argument is that we won't be doing any flight training and therefore the 100 hour inspection requirement is not applicable. I talked with someone at the AOPA and 91.409b says: "Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceeding 100 hours of time in service the aircraft has received and annual or 100 hour inspection....." The rep at the AOPA said that their interpretation is that since it is a rental plane it is "for hire". I talked with the head A&P Mechanic at the FBO and he said "for hire" only means if their are paying passengers. AOPA is correct in that the airplane is for hire, but that is not the subject of the CFR 14 section. For hire, the operator would get paid for the flight and that would include any compensation from any passenger/student. I know this plane well and I know it is a good plane. I just don't want to violate any FARs. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated. How is the flight being paid for? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bill Zaleski" wrote in message news ![]() Irrelevant question Tarver. My question goes directly to wether the flight is a CFR 14 violation. You do not need the inspection for the trip. Only if a flight instructor, associated with the FBO who operates the bird is aboard giving flight instruction is it required. You could even use a CFI from outside the FBO and legally train without the inspection. You are not operating this for hire. The fact that the FBO rents to you does not alter the way you are operating the flight. If his friend pays for half the gas and only fryguy flies, he got compensted for his pilot activity. That is where the line is and I believe that is what the question is about. Please cease your top posting. On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 11:25:44 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "FryGuy" wrote in message . 41... I have a question around a 100 hour inspection requirement. I've had time blocked off at my local FBO for over a month to take a plane this Saturday. Me and another pilot buddy are taking up the coast of North Carolina and are going to hit the airports in the Outer Banks and go to the museum in Kill Devil Hills. I was just told that the aircraft we are renting is over the 100 hour inspection requirement. I asked them if they could get it done between now and then and they said they don't have time. Their argument is that we won't be doing any flight training and therefore the 100 hour inspection requirement is not applicable. I talked with someone at the AOPA and 91.409b says: "Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceeding 100 hours of time in service the aircraft has received and annual or 100 hour inspection....." The rep at the AOPA said that their interpretation is that since it is a rental plane it is "for hire". I talked with the head A&P Mechanic at the FBO and he said "for hire" only means if their are paying passengers. AOPA is correct in that the airplane is for hire, but that is not the subject of the CFR 14 section. For hire, the operator would get paid for the flight and that would include any compensation from any passenger/student. I know this plane well and I know it is a good plane. I just don't want to violate any FARs. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated. How is the flight being paid for? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
My question goes directly to wether the flight is a CFR 14 violation.
You do not need the inspection for the trip. Only if a flight instructor, associated with the FBO who operates the bird is aboard giving flight instruction is it required. You could even use a CFI from outside the FBO and legally train without the inspection. You are not operating this for hire. The fact that the FBO rents to you does not alter the way you are operating the flight. If his friend pays for half the gas and only fryguy flies, he got compensted for his pilot activity. That is where the line is and I believe that is what the question is about. We will both be flying. The other pilot will be flying up there and I'll be flying the return trip. We will be splitting the costs though. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "FryGuy" wrote in message 3... My question goes directly to wether the flight is a CFR 14 violation. You do not need the inspection for the trip. Only if a flight instructor, associated with the FBO who operates the bird is aboard giving flight instruction is it required. You could even use a CFI from outside the FBO and legally train without the inspection. You are not operating this for hire. The fact that the FBO rents to you does not alter the way you are operating the flight. If his friend pays for half the gas and only fryguy flies, he got compensted for his pilot activity. That is where the line is and I believe that is what the question is about. We will both be flying. The other pilot will be flying up there and I'll be flying the return trip. We will be splitting the costs though. I think you are safe. Of course, you were probaly safe before, unless you turned yourself in. ![]() |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think you are safe. Of course, you were probaly safe before, unless you
turned yourself in. ![]() And for only fifty bucks, none of us will report ya! :-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:4LRqb.138212$HS4.1088008@attbi_s01... I think you are safe. Of course, you were probaly safe before, unless you turned yourself in. ![]() And for only fifty bucks, none of us will report ya! :-) How did a MIDO inspector get in this conversation? ![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
100 Hr Inspection | Scott D. | General Aviation | 6 | August 15th 04 01:03 AM |
A question on Airworthiness Inspection | Dave S | Home Built | 1 | August 10th 04 05:07 AM |
Home Inspection Listings | Patrick Glenn | Home Built | 4 | April 26th 04 11:52 AM |
Service Manual - 50 hour inspection | O. Sami Saydjari | Owning | 1 | April 8th 04 03:17 PM |
100 Hour Inspection Question | FryGuy | General Aviation | 59 | November 19th 03 04:01 AM |