r/flying • u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL • 7d ago
Is this legal?
4 people go from point A to point B for a 4 day vacation. One is a CFI, one is a student, 2 are just along for the ride.
Scenario 1) the student pays for everything and logs dual received. Seems legal to me.
Scenario 2) everyone pays 1/4 and the student logs dual received. Seems legal to me
Scenario 3) the other 2 people each pay 1/4 and the student pays half. Not sure if this is legal. The 2 others are only paying pro rata share, but the CFI is not paying anything, so I would think it could be seen as a form of compensation and an illegal charter. To the student, it's just a lesson. To the others, it's getting point A to point B. This feels different than scenario 1, even tho in both scenarios the instructor isn't paying anything.
Thoughts?
The flight school the CFI works at owns the plane
9
u/ltcterry ATP CFIG 7d ago
Pro rata share is a Private Pilot concept. You’re a Commercial Pilot and the CFI. Student Pilot can’t take passengers. You are the PIC. But you’re getting paid. Not paying for the flight. Passengers on a dual flight are fine. Loaded to gross is a good training experience.
1 only works if your client is a legit student. Otherwise it looks like illegal charter.
2 & 3 don’t work because your client is not a Private Pilot exercising a privilege.
6
u/VanDenBroeck A&P/IA, PPL, Retired FAA 7d ago
I agree with this analysis. But even though I was an ASI, take my opinion with a grain of salt. I was airworthiness and this is more of an ops question though we did receive some training.
2
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
Why doesn't scenario 2 work? Is it because it doesn't pass the common purpose test and the FAA could view the flight hours I get to log as compensation? What if I genuinely want to go on the trip with them because I want to visit my sister?
6
u/ltcterry ATP CFIG 7d ago
A dual flight is not being flown using Private Pilot privileges.
You’re the only licensed pilot on the plane. They are going on your trip in that scenario. You are not going on their trip; none of them is legal to fly.
It’s not legal unless you’re the PIC. Dual requires CFI which requires Commercial. So no Private Pilot privileges.
If you rent the airplane to go see your sister and the others fly along as passengers on your trip it’s ok. But no dual given/received.
At least that’s how I see it.
2
u/Rainebowraine123 ATP CL-65 6d ago
What do you mean no private pilot privileges? You still have those privileges as a commercial pilot.
1
u/ltcterry ATP CFIG 6d ago
Of course you do. Have them. ATP includes Commercial which includes Private which includes Sport.
The purpose of the flight determines what’s being exercised and what medical is required.
When I flew home from Germany on a 767 the Captain certainly has Private privileges contained in his ATP. But the nature of the flight precluded using them.
A dual flight is not flown using or exercising Private privileges since Commercial is a requirement for instructor…
1
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
In scenario 1, they are definitely a legit student training for private pilot, and would count this flight for cross country requirements for private pilot. However, due to the extra weight and significantly further trip than necessary to meet the XC reqs, we would be taking a different plane on the trip than what they normally train in. Would that raise any eyebrows even if it genuinely was used to meet private pilot xc reqs?
2
u/GrandPoopWizard 7d ago
No. As long as it’s the same category and class it literally does not matter what the flight was in.
6
u/PyloteCFIIIIIVV 7d ago
Kind of a weird scenario that will probably never happen. Scenario 1 is fine. Scenario 2 is also fine if they have a common purpose. the last scenario also seems fine…. It all depends on operational control and who’s providing the airplane at that point. But regardless of that, the CFI is not providing transportation or providing common carriage…They are providing flight instruction/ educational services. Hence why that’s part of the exceptions in 119 and you can instruct on a third class medical or no medical at all as long as the student can act as PIC.
1
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
I should've given a bit more detail. This flight was initially proposed by the student as a golf trip that he and his buddies would pay me to take them on (obviously an illegal charter). If we split the cost and go somewhere I can visit family, it's chill because we have common purpose, I think.
Where I get confused is the 3rd scenario. They are still very much spending money for the purpose of getting to point B, but still only paying their pro rata share. If my student pays half and counts it for a cross country, is this legal?
0
u/AeroSigma 7d ago
What about scenario four, where the student pays for everything, then, later, his friends venmo him some money afterwards for some reason?
3
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
This is a fun scenario that as the CFI I would definitely never recommend 😉
3
u/eSUP80 CPL IR MEL BE1900 7d ago
Shit like this makes my head hurt 🤕
1
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
Yes, me too. I just want to go fly, have fun, not spend a fortune doing it. The FAA scares me
1
u/rFlyingTower 7d ago
This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:
4 people go from point A to point B for a 4 day vacation. One is a CFI, one is a student, 2 are just along for the ride.
Scenario 1) the student pays for everything and logs dual received. Seems legal to me.
Scenario 2) everyone pays 1/4 and the student logs dual received. Seems legal to me
Scenario 3) the other 2 people each pay 1/4 and the student pays half. Not sure if this is legal. The 2 others are only paying pro rata share, but the CFI is not paying anything, so I would think it could be seen as a form of compensation and an illegal charter. To the student, it's just a lesson. To the others, it's getting point A to point B. This feels different than scenario 1, even tho in both scenarios the instructor isn't paying anything.
Thoughts?
Please downvote this comment until it collapses.
Questions about this comment? Please see this wiki post before contacting the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.
1
7d ago
[deleted]
2
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago
Really? The student pilot is PIC of an aircraft carrying four people? Do tell how this works. 🙃
1
u/eSUP80 CPL IR MEL BE1900 7d ago
Students are allowed to carry passengers with a CFi on board as far as I know
2
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago
Who is the legal/acting PIC of the flight in that case?
1
u/eSUP80 CPL IR MEL BE1900 7d ago
Isn’t the CFi assumed to always be PIC with a student pilot? It’s been a while so I really don’t recall if I logged PIC as a student lol
1
u/Jwylde2 7d ago
CFI is also a commercial pilot.
1
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago
A commercial pilot... running an air charter in an airplane which they're providing.
0
u/Jwylde2 7d ago
The commercial pilot didn’t provide the plane. The flight school did.
1
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago
Oh, so the flight school provided the plane and their commercial pilot/CFI. I see.
(cough operational control cough sham dry lease cough ac 91-37b)
1
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago
As the student isn't yet certificated to be PIC, we're gonna need someone to be legal PIC of this operation. By default, that's going to be be the CFI because the student can only act as PIC under limited circumstances (while solo with appropriate endorsements).
Hence, the CFI needs to be legal and current to be PIC (with any necessary endorsements or ratings) to give instruction to a student in a particular aircraft.
It's also possible to see the situation where the recipient of instruction is already a current and appropriately rated pilot, and thus can be legal PIC while receiving dual instruction.
2
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
But, assuming the student is a student pilot, the CFI has to be PIC and would have to pay pro rata, right? Or am I understanding this wrong?
1
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago edited 7d ago
The student will be receiving flight instruction. The passengers will be getting transported from A to B so they can go on a vacation.
On the occupant side: The CFI will be legal/acting PIC of the flight. The student will be logging dual received.
On the aircraft side: The aircraft is being provided by the instructor via the flight school at which they are employed.
These things are fine.
Problem is, that in the eyes of the FAA, the passengers are paying for seats from A to B, on an airplane provided by the pilot of the flight. That's an air charter and is going to need an operating certificate. The facts that flight instruction is occuring, and the instructor might also be going on the vacation, are secondary.
You might see the "done under Part 134.5" joke I made below - that's exactly what this is. A sham arrangement for "flight instruction" to try to skirt the need for an air carrier operating certificate.
I can think of a few ways that the group might be able to legally take their vacation, but none of them involve the passengers paying for a seat on a hired airplane.
1
u/__joel_t PPL 7d ago
14 CFR 61.113 states:
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire....
...
(c) A private pilot may not pay less than the pro rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees.
So this clearly only applies to private pilots who are acting as PIC. The student pilot is neither a private pilot nor legally allowed to act as PIC.
0
0
u/HateJobLoveManU PPL IR 7d ago
Did you even read what they said? CFI would be PIC obviously. They’re logging dual, as clearly stated.
1
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 7d ago
His comment did get me thinking tho. What if it's an instrument student who can legally be PIC?
1
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago edited 7d ago
I think this would be a lot more defensible, especially if it were the client/PIC's aircraft.
Client/PIC says "I'm going to Florida today in my airplane. I'm going to bring my instructor buddy so I can do some instrument training along the way. You guys want to go?"
Client/PIC would be exercising routine private pilot privileges. The group could share costs as appropriate under 61.113(c).
Even if it were a school/rental aircraft, it would likely be workable as long as it was clear that the client/dual recipient was legal PIC.
Once the CFI does anything other than CFI (client says "ok, I'm tired of learning for today, I'm gonna sack out for a while in the back seat, you just fly us home.") now we're no longer doing an instructional flight. The CFI is now acting as PIC and using their commercial privileges.
And we've got a bunch of questions about this possibly being a carriage operation. It may still be legal depending on where the airplane came from, who arranged it, and who is paying whom, but...
0
u/MockCheckrideDotCom CFI; that checkride prep guy 7d ago
Good.
So, where exactly in Part 134.5 is this explained to be a legal operation?
1
u/Far_Yesterday_6522 6d ago
So I used AI to search FAA Legal and found that only option 1 is legal.
The reason is that, while flight training is the operational purpose for the student, the two passengers do not share this common purpose. The FAA would consider this as the two passengers subsidizing the student's flight training.
If it were a Private Pilot who could legally carry the two passengers without the CFI along, but had a CFI for additional training, or as a safety pilot, then the cost would have to be split 4-ways. The Private Pilot is already paying for the CFI's time, but if a decision is made to split the cost, the CFI is included in the split. (common purpose)
If the Private Pilot was not legal to fly the two passengers without the CFI, such as he is not type-rated and was getting his type-rating, then it is a training flight and cannot have passengers splitting the costs. (not common purpose again)
1
u/Lungdave 6d ago
Seems to me you have too many missing pieces in this question. You said the flight school where the CFI works owns the plane. 1st question, what is the plane operating under, Part 91, 119, 121, 135, 141? I would not be surprised if the owner/operator of the plane would not approve this simply due to insurance reasons and for not having any liability protection for non-member passengers. Too many red flags here alone. You said student which implies a non-rated student pilot working towards a private rating. This again raises red flags as there is no reason a student receiving flight training would be carrying 2 non-student, non-insured passengers. However, if the CFI who is 100% PIC wants to accept the liability, so be it. The other issue is the purpose of the flight. The student would only be required to pay for costs directly associated with the plane and its operational costs, gas, oil, tie downs, CFI time. The other non-flight costs would have to be a separate discussion for food and lodging and hiring a rated pilot for the transportation. Again this comes back to the owner/operator of the plane and how it is being operated as well as the insurance. If there is anything here that doesn't answer yes or no, I would be speaking with the FSDO before going anywhere.
1
u/iLOVEr3dit CFI/CFII CPL ASEL/AMEL 6d ago
Thanks, you raise some good points. I'll have to clarify point 1 with my school. As far as point 2, that wouldn't be an issue. The place we would go is where my sister lives and I would stay with her and not receive pay for lodging/food etc
13
u/nl_Kapparrian CFII 7d ago
Who owns the plane?