vtbvtdk

So I know this is probably a stupid question that I SHOULD know the answer to, but I thought I would pose it and see what people thought:

I have a student who wishes to do a little refresh flight training. He has a SEL/MEL/IRA and wants to get a little flight training in before we do his BFR so he can get back up to speed. He was wondering if it would be possible, on some of the cross country training flights, to fly to a location, drop him off, and have me fly the aircraft back solo. Is this legal? Or does it fall under and illegal commercial operation? I have been banging my head against the wall on this one, and thought I'd ask some advice. Thanks in advance.

rickair7777

Good question. Some of this depends on who owns, or rents, the airplane.

Overnight stops incidental to instruction are allowed, as long as legit instruction is occurring.


Two issues with your proposal...

- If you do not stay with the student on the overnight, then it would start to look more like flying for hire and less like flight instruction.

- You repositioning the airplane is flying for hire. Only exception would be if YOU owned or rented the airplane, in which case you would have to be concerned with commercial maintenance requirements for the airplane. It is actually legal for you to get paid to repo someone else's plane.

This one might actually be a grey area, I think it could go either way. I suspect it would come down to the legitimacy of the flight instruction...if there was a real need for it that the FAA would buy off on, you would probably be OK. But if it was one of those "wink, wink" kind of deals it could bite you in the rear.

zach141

Assuming you're training him on the way there, and you're just ferrying the aircraft back to base, there is no problem. At no point are you carrying him or his goods for hire in a passenger/cargo sense. Not offering legal advice, but I'm saying I wouldn't hesitate to do the operation as I just described it.

Rustee

I agree with zach141. The flight to wherever you are going should be an instructional flight (gauging by how you are saying it), hence perfectly legal under the provisions in FAR 119. Now on the flight back, there is nothing "for sale" aboard the aircraft (you're not transporting persons or property for compensation), so this would not fall under the grounds of common carriage.

Let's even change the scenario. Imagine he rented (or is providing) the aircraft, and is willing to compensate you to fly him to the destination--no flight instruction is even intended. As long as he is not selling anything aboard the plane (like charging passengers to come along or carrying property for a customer) and you were never "holding out" your services, that would be private carriage. You flying the plane back and being paid for it isn't any different because, again, even despite the fact that he's not physically there, he's still not selling anything aboard the plane. Again, FAR 119 specifically excludes ferry flights (which is what you would be doing on the way back) from requiring an operating certificate.

I'm no lawyer, but it sounds legal to me.

rickair7777

The FAA does not allow any and all flying to be deemed as instruction. The purpose of the instruction is training for a cert, rating, operating privilege, even a non-FAA requirement like insurance or club check-out would be legit.

In this case, prep for a BFR would be legit, but only for a few flights. If you do this trip more than once or twice, it becomes obvious that you are transporting this guy more than training him. In the case you described, it sounds OK, but you cannot keep doing it over and over again.

If the FAA decided the flight was NOT legit flight instruction, you now have one of two scenarios:

1) CFI Provided Airplane (owns or rents): This is bad. This would probably be common carriage (an unlicensed charter op), and they would pull your tickets. You might possibly be able to make a claim of private carriage, but you would have to show reason why you would not carry the public...your relationship to the customer would be key. In this case private carriage would likely not hold up.

2) Customer Provided Airplane: You would be OK here.



Correct, you can ferry an airplane with no issues.

I think you can "hold out" to fly someone's airplane for him...that is basically you seeking employment (even if it's temporary) as a pilot. Carriage (common or private) only applies if the pilot supplies the airplane.

mshunter

Think of this statement as flying for a buisness owner who owns the airplane. I belive this is not "holding out," and falls under 91. I was recently asked to fly for a construction company owner who had lost his medical around in his BE-58P. I only fly about once a month for him, but after contacting AOPA, I was advised it was legal, and fell under part 91.

hijack over

rickair7777

You are his employee. This has nothing to do with holding out...

Holding out is making it known to the public or a segment of the public that you will work for them (advertising, soliciting, word-of-mouth, etc).

You are allowed to "hold out" in search of employment as a pilot...to fly an airplane provided by the customer (what you do). You cannot hold out to operate an airplane provided by you unless you have a 135/121 cert (there a few exceptions such as photo and sightseeing).

WEACLRS

Rick has this correct. The instruction is for a legitimate reason - preparation for a BFR. It falls under Part 61.193(g). It needs to be documented in a logbook or other suitable form and needs to not continue for an unreasonable period of time.

The second half is a ferry flight and is exempted from part 135, 125, or 121 by part 119. Ferry flights are specifically allowed under 119.1(e)(3).

I trained an IFR student in his aircraft. Due to his initial desire to keep his airplane in a hanger and not a tiedown (the airplane, a C172, was new in 2002), he kept it at an airport 50 miles from the airport near his home. I would ferry his airplane to his home airport to meet him for his flight instruction, complete the instruction at his home airport, and then ferry the airplane back to the airport it was hangered at. This continued for a several months until he secured a sublease on a hanger at his home airport.

ILS37R

We had a similar situation recently when there happened to be a bunch of Feds hanging around. They told us, to a man:

You're okay so long as you're not dropping the student off, leaving and subsequently returning to pick up the student and fly back to the home airport.

You can take him one-way, while training, and ferry back. If, however, he wants a round-trip, he'll have to put you up in a hotel at the destination until the return.

NoyGonnaDoIt

Great explanation.

Misunderstanding "holding out" seems to be a general problem in understanding the dividing lines between 91 and 135/121. People talk about it as though "holding out" is some sort of evil and that any time you "hold out" you are violating some reg.

Your explanation makes it much clearer: "holding out" is a test for whether or not you are making your services available. That's all. The only time it comes into play is when you are performing a service that the regs don't permit you to perform for the public. Then "holding out" becomes part of the proof that your services were meant for the public.