FAA letter of deviation: Anybody have one?

[rv9ralph]

LODAs are usually issued to conduct transition training for a specific model of aircraft, e.g. RV, Lancair, etc. It will usually require a training syllabus for that transition training. There are several individuals with LODAs in the RV community spread around the country.
You might find information specific to those at the Vansairforce.com forums.

A CFI can instruct in an E-AB aircraft, no compensation can be charged for the use of an E-AB aircraft.

Ralph

[efwd]

I thought that I read in the FARs that you can charge to instruct in an E-AB. AFTER I paid both for the aircraft rental as well as for the instruction I thought it was strange that I was charged "openly" for it. I didn't object. I would have paid even it weren't allowed. I believe I read that transition training for type was allowed. The premise being safety improvements for those of us preparing to fly our newly built aircraft. I may be wrong but no skin off my back. I'd do it again if I am.

[atc310r]

Thanks everyone for the insight. Just to be clear I would be looking to charge for this flight instruction.

When she spoke on the phone she did elude to the fact that it was kind of FSDO discretion. You can't really blame those guys for being heaitanf thought. If they approve a LODA for some guy to instruct in his E-AB and then they end up crashing during training and somebody is hurt or killed, the NTSB is going to ask that FAA official why the approved the LODA and they better have something to fall back on.

My thoughts are this: make my plane an E-LSA because those have more documentation behind them than an E-AB. You have annuals and I will get the 16 hour cert so at least I have some small degree of documented training. That way they can take comfort in the fact that if something happens they are covered to a degree. I always try to myself in their shoes.

[aviator79]

I thought that I read in the FARs that you can charge to instruct in an E-AB. AFTER I paid both for the aircraft rental as well as for the instruction I thought it was strange that I was charged "openly" for it. I didn't object. I would have paid even it weren't allowed. I believe I read that transition training for type was allowed. The premise being safety improvements for those of us preparing to fly our newly built aircraft. I may be wrong but no skin off my back. I'd do it again if I am.

Not relevant to the OP, but you're right. Per FAA Order 8900.1, a flight instructor may be compensated for providing instruction in an E-AB, but may not be compensated for use of an E-AB. From a practical perspective, this means you can pay a CFI to teach you in a plane that isn't theirs. I wouldn't try to walk the line of claiming that the student was paying only for instruction and not use of the aircraft. I don't think that would hold water at the hearing.

[atc310r]

Not relevant to the OP, but you're right. Per FAA Order 8900.1, a flight instructor may be compensated for providing instruction in an E-AB, but may not be compensated for use of an E-AB. From a practical perspective, this means you can pay a CFI to teach you in a plane that isn't theirs. I wouldn't try to walk the line of claiming that the student was paying only for instruction and not use of the aircraft. I don't think that would hold water at the hearing.

I was thinking the EXACT same thing... Good luck to anyone who wants to try and play that game.

[beeryboats]

As the owner of a model IV I'm going to need training from a CFI. So I can pay him/her as long as I'm the owner. Is this correct?

[t j]

I receintly got a flight review from a CFI for hire in my kitfox. He charged for me for flight instruction.

[Av8r3400]

It is perfectly legal, not any type of grey area, to hire a CFI to instruct you in your own Experimental aircraft.