100 Hour Inspection Question

Dear Mr. Knox:

I'm afraid you are mistaken.

Renting out an aircraft is a commercial operation in itself, and an aircraft
cannot be used in any operation for compensation or hire beyond the currency of
the 100 hours inspection. An application can be given to the FAA whereby the
FAA can extend this by ten hours - but that is the only break there is.

I can assure you that when a plane is out of a hundred hour inspection that it
cannot be rented out.



"James M. Knox" wrote:

Jeff wrote in :

I used to use my cherokee 180 as a lease back, when it was over its
100 hours, As the owner, I was the only one allowed to fly it.
If your renting it, then it must have a current 100 hr inspection.
Its not your airplane, so its a plane for hire.

You can certainly set up any more restrictive rules you wish, including
limiting flight of the aircraft to only you if it is over 100 hours on the
inspection. However, I think if you will check further, you will find that
you are incorrect as for USA rules by the FAA.

The plane can not be used for hire, meaning air charter, flight instruction
offered by the provider of the aircraft, etc. But it most certainly can be
rented to a pilot for his own private (personal or business) part 91
flight.

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:52:41 -0800, Pat Barry wrote:

Renting out an aircraft is a commercial operation in itself

True

and an aircraft
cannot be used in any operation for compensation or hire beyond the currency of
the 100 hours inspection.

That is NOT what the relevant FAR states

An application can be given to the FAA whereby the
FAA can extend this by ten hours - but that is the only break there is.

I can assure you that when a plane is out of a hundred hour inspection that it
cannot be rented out.

I can assure you that your opinion does not agree with that of most FSDO's.
Which FSDO supports your thesis?


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:52:41 -0800, Pat Barry wrote:

Renting out an aircraft is a commercial operation in itself

True

and an aircraft
cannot be used in any operation for compensation or hire beyond the
currency of
the 100 hours inspection.

That is NOT what the relevant FAR states

An application can be given to the FAA whereby the
FAA can extend this by ten hours - but that is the only break there is.

I can assure you that when a plane is out of a hundred hour inspection
that it
cannot be rented out.

I can assure you that your opinion does not agree with that of most
FSDO's.
Which FSDO supports your thesis?

None for long, if Pat posts their name here.

It must have been some sort of misunderstanding ...

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:52:41 -0800, Pat Barry wrote:

Dear Mr. Knox:

I'm afraid you are mistaken.

Renting out an aircraft is a commercial operation in itself, and an aircraft
cannot be used in any operation for compensation or hire beyond the currency of
the 100 hours inspection. An application can be given to the FAA whereby the
FAA can extend this by ten hours - but that is the only break there is.

I can assure you that when a plane is out of a hundred hour inspection that it
cannot be rented out.


That statement is certain to **** some of the natives off. I'm sure
the "armchair lawyers" of the group (they know who they are) will
start listing and quoting their sacred "FARS" along with their own
interpretation of such, in anticipation of being elevated to the
position of "Armchair Chief Justice".

Pat Barry wrote in :

Renting out an aircraft is a commercial operation in itself,

It's renting of a piece of property. It is a commercial operation and
will require the renter to hold a state sales certificate (although not
have to pay state tax in most states).

aircraft cannot be used in any operation for compensation or hire
beyond the currency of the 100 hours inspection.

But it can be flown by the renter, or his pilot (including a flight
instructor *the renter provides*, as long as it is in annual and
otherwise airworthy. No 100 hour inspection is required.

I can assure you that when a plane is out of a hundred hour inspection
that it cannot be rented out.

I hate to quote FSDO web sites, because they are frequently in error.
But from, for instance, the Albany FSDO website:

"Aircraft rental by itself isn't "for hire," and applicants bring the
airplane to me for the test. However, the aircraft may have a recurring
AD that requires compliance every 100 hours, so although the 100-hour
inspection may be unnecessary, AD compliance may be."

More officially, here's an FAA Chief Counsel letter interp:

May 3, 1984
Mr. Perry Rackers
Jefferson City Flying Service

Dear Mr. Rackers

This is in reply to your request of May 1, 1984, that we render
an opinion regarding the applicability of the 100-hour
inspections requirement of Section 91.169(b) of the Federal
Aviation Regulations to rental aircraft. Section 91.169(b) of
the Federal Aviation Regulations provides that, except as noted
in Section 91.169(c), a person may not operate an aircraft
carrying any person, other than a crewmember, for hire, and may
not give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that
person provides unless, within the previous 100 hours of time
in service, the aircraft has received either an annual or a
100-hour inspection.

If a person merely leases or rents an aircraft to another
person and does not provide the pilot, that aircraft is not
required by Section 91.169(b) of the Federal Aviation Regulations
to have a 100-hour inspection. As noted above, the 100-hour
inspection is required only when the aircraft is carrying a
person for hire, or when a person is providing flight instruction
for hire, in their own aircraft.

If there are any questions, please advise us.

Sincerely,
/s/
Joseph T. Brennan
Associate Regional Counsel

I'm afraid you are mistaken.

Wouldn't be the first time... but not in this case.

jmk

"James M. Knox" wrote in message
...
Pat Barry wrote in :

Renting out an aircraft is a commercial operation in itself,

It's renting of a piece of property. It is a commercial operation and
will require the renter to hold a state sales certificate (although not
have to pay state tax in most states).

aircraft cannot be used in any operation for compensation or hire
beyond the currency of the 100 hours inspection.

But it can be flown by the renter, or his pilot (including a flight
instructor *the renter provides*, as long as it is in annual and
otherwise airworthy. No 100 hour inspection is required.

Nope, go read your own FAA opinion again.

I can assure you that when a plane is out of a hundred hour inspection
that it cannot be rented out.

I hate to quote FSDO web sites, because they are frequently in error.
But from, for instance, the Albany FSDO website:

"Aircraft rental by itself isn't "for hire," and applicants bring the
airplane to me for the test. However, the aircraft may have a recurring
AD that requires compliance every 100 hours, so although the 100-hour
inspection may be unnecessary, AD compliance may be."

More officially, here's an FAA Chief Counsel letter interp:

May 3, 1984
Mr. Perry Rackers
Jefferson City Flying Service

Dear Mr. Rackers

This is in reply to your request of May 1, 1984, that we render
an opinion regarding the applicability of the 100-hour
inspections requirement of Section 91.169(b) of the Federal
Aviation Regulations to rental aircraft. Section 91.169(b) of
the Federal Aviation Regulations provides that, except as noted
in Section 91.169(c), a person may not operate an aircraft
carrying any person, other than a crewmember, for hire, and may
not give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that
person provides unless, within the previous 100 hours of time
in service, the aircraft has received either an annual or a
100-hour inspection.

If a person merely leases or rents an aircraft to another
person and does not provide the pilot, that aircraft is not
required by Section 91.169(b) of the Federal Aviation Regulations
to have a 100-hour inspection. As noted above, the 100-hour
inspection is required only when the aircraft is carrying a
person for hire, or when a person is providing flight instruction
for hire, in their own aircraft.

If there are any questions, please advise us.

Sincerely,
/s/
Joseph T. Brennan
Associate Regional Counsel

I'm afraid you are mistaken.

Wouldn't be the first time... but not in this case.

jmk

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in news:5YCdnQMkPtw0dyqiRVn-
:

But it can be flown by the renter, or his pilot (including a flight
instructor *the renter provides*, as long as it is in annual and
otherwise airworthy. No 100 hour inspection is required.

Nope, go read your own FAA opinion again.

Okay... been there, done that. Care to try to be more specific?

Note that I specifically referred to a flight instructor PROVIDED BY THE
RENTER. Be very careful when you simply see a sentence about use of the
aircraft "for hire or compenation, including flight instruction." If you
look more carefully you will see that they are talking about the FBO
providing both the plane and flight instructor. That indeed DOES require a
100 hour inspection.

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

"James M. Knox" wrote in message ...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in news:5YCdnQMkPtw0dyqiRVn-
:

But it can be flown by the renter, or his pilot (including a flight
instructor *the renter provides*, as long as it is in annual and
otherwise airworthy. No 100 hour inspection is required.

Nope, go read your own FAA opinion again.

Okay... been there, done that. Care to try to be more specific?

Note that I specifically referred to a flight instructor PROVIDED BY THE
RENTER.

You've changed what you are talking about. Your original assertion was
that any rental was covered by 100 hour. The legal interps posted here
cover that.

Now if you want to talk about the "flight instructor providing the aircraft"
versus "flight instructor provided by the renter" there's another legal interp.


We refer to your letter dated January 28, 1975, which requests our interpretation of FAR 91.169(b) as that regulation might apply
to your flying club.
You state that the Georgia Lockheed Employees Recreation Club, Inc. (GLERC) is a nonprofit organization which owns five Cessna
airplanes. These airplanes are operated by members of GLERC Flying Club, Inc. It is not clear whether Georgia Lockheed Employees
Recreation Club, Inc. is the same organization as GLERC Flying Club, Inc. If these two corporations are in fact different, I assume
that the Recreation Club permits the Flying Club to utilize the airplanes by lease or other similar arrangement.
You pose the following question:
If a student furnishes an airplane which is not operated for hire to be used for his own flight instruction and he then pays a
flight instructor for instruction, must the airplane have received a 100 hour inspection within the previous 100 hours in order to
comply with FAR 91.169(b)?
For the purposes of our reply, we assume that the "student" referred to above is a member of GLERC Flying Club, Inc. and the
airplane furnished is one of the Cessnas operated by the Flying Club.

{p19}

Section 91.169(b) pertinently provides:
... [1] no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and [2] no person may give
flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides unless within the preceding 100 hours of time in service it
has received ... 100-hour inspection ... (Numbers and brackets added.)
In the first instance, the student is not carrying anyone for hire. Moreover, the flight instructor is a crewmember. Thus, there
is no requirement for the airplane to have a 100-hour inspection.
In the second instance, the flight instructor is not providing his own airplane, the airplane being furnished by the student.
Thus, this part of Section 91.169(b) does not appear to be applicable.
In view of the above, it is our opinion that FAR 91.169(b) does not apply to the factual situation presented.

Very truly yours,
R.R. HAGADONE
Attorney
Office of the Regional Counsel

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

"James M. Knox" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
news:5YCdnQMkPtw0dyqiRVn-
:

But it can be flown by the renter, or his pilot (including a flight
instructor *the renter provides*, as long as it is in annual and
otherwise airworthy. No 100 hour inspection is required.

Nope, go read your own FAA opinion again.

Okay... been there, done that. Care to try to be more specific?

Note that I specifically referred to a flight instructor PROVIDED BY THE
RENTER.

You've changed what you are talking about. Your original assertion was
that any rental was covered by 100 hour. The legal interps posted here
cover that.

The airplane did not get safer by changing the transaction and Hagadone's
interpretation seems to have missed the point of the law.

"James M. Knox" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in news:5YCdnQMkPtw0dyqiRVn-
:

But it can be flown by the renter, or his pilot (including a flight
instructor *the renter provides*, as long as it is in annual and
otherwise airworthy. No 100 hour inspection is required.

Nope, go read your own FAA opinion again.

Okay... been there, done that. Care to try to be more specific?

"No pilot shall operate ..."

Note that I specifically referred to a flight instructor PROVIDED BY THE
RENTER. Be very careful when you simply see a sentence about use of the
aircraft "for hire or compenation, including flight instruction." If you
look more carefully you will see that they are talking about the FBO
providing both the plane and flight instructor. That indeed DOES require
a
100 hour inspection.

Nope.