does'nt the plane need 100 hour inspections if used for commercial purposes ??

 

Yeah, a 100 hr is needed if the aircraft is being used commercially but i think there's a way around it. If you are in the plane with the student then all it needs is an annual, but then i dont know how they would do solo flights.

 

The 100 hour is not required for flight instruction ONLY if the student provides the airplane...

1. Student own airplane
2. Student rents airplane from a club.

If the CFI provides the airplane (or rents the airplane on behalf of the student), that requires a 100 hour.

 

It used to be that if you lent someone your airplane and did not charge them for it it was not considered commercial use, and then no 100 hr was required. however, you could not collect in any way for anything relating to the cost of the plane. Does anyone know if this position has been updated?

 

That would be true if you loaned an airplane to a friend.

However...I suspect that an existing business relationship with a student would invalidate a claim of "loaning" the airplane since the CFI would obviously only loan the airplane under such circumstances to further his own business interests. Shady at best.

Might be different if the student was a friend from way back or family, in which case the existing personal relationship might supersede a business one.

 

Self-insuring or not having any insurance at all can be done in some areas legally and is done quite a bit. Personally I would not want any student flying my airplane without me on board, because that is the time of highest financial risk if they crash or have an incident, but it can be done successfully and often is. Having the student supply the airplane is a far more financially sound. Many middle aged adults have the means and desire to do this. The drawbacks are that to teach in it you really need to know its intricacies especially if it is not a common trainer, and someone who buys an airplane may also be using that as a way to get around their personal incompetence and I have seen this first hand. At the very least, they may be be inclined to swap CFIs whenever the going gets tough rather than stick it out with one that insists on adequate performance.

 

Another thing to consider are the minimum standards at the airport you will be flying out of. Many people ignore them, but they are still the rules.

 

With many manufacturer programs 100 hr maintenance isn't that big of a deal, like Cessna. Each 100 hours constitutes a phase, four phases sub for the annual. If the aircraft goes out for hire, 100 hour inspections are required. I ran a couple of numbers such as "0" time student through AOPA insurance and their premiums are low compared to others. For instance hull and liability are under $1000 for a 152, or BE-77.

Most flight schools today do not allow instruction by others in their aircraft, so I don't think you can work around this. As far as the minimum standards for that particular airport, I don't quite follow?

 

Airports, in order to qualify for FAA money (runway repaving, expanded taxiways, that sort of thing) need to have minimum standards. I don't know all the details as I am not an airport manager, but anybody providing a service for pay must meet the minimum standards at the airport they are operating out of. For instance, my FBO is required to maintain 1 mil of liability insurance for all work we do, be it instruction or maintenance (about $20K/year for our small 2 mechanic, 3 plane FBO). Freelance instructors and mechanics at our airport usually don't meet these requirements, and therefore are not in compliance with the "minimum standards". However, I don't know what the penalty would be for not meeting these standards. Just something to think about.

We often have customers ask why our maintenance rate is $15 to $20/hour higher than the local freelance mechanics. It's because the freelancers work out of the customer's hangar (no overhead), don't have liability insurance and don't use current maintenance manuals (OK if the FAA doesn't come around, and those manuals aren't cheap!). Plus, they only accept cash and maybe check, so there are no credit card fees to cover (about 3.5%, when all is said and done) and of course they never "forget" to report a cash payment on their taxes. They also don't need workers comp insurance or unemployment insurance, also not cheap.

Back to minimum standards, just ask the manager at the airport you are thinking of instructing at for a copy of the standards and they should be happy to give them to you.

 

Ah, "minimum standards". At my home drome, they're enforced at the discretion of the manager. The flight schools are required to be 141, and have two aircraft for rental and instruction, one of which has to be 4 seats and one of which has to be equipped for IFR. The local school still hasn't even filed an application for 141 and they've got a skyhawk and a Seneca II, which according to their website is for Charter only.

Competing with them was difficult, especially when the minimum standards for my school were changing every week. They do this to protect the only FBO on the field, which the other school is affiliated with.

Perhaps it's this experience which has led me to the conclusion that I don't care about the minimum standards. If they get FAA money and they're a public use airport, they can't kick you out. Pay your T-Hangar rent on time and tell 'em to pound sand. It's way too expensive and time consuming to comply...from someone who knows.

Oh, and just for good measure, buy your fuel somewhere else! I didn't buy a drop from them. Drove them crazy.

-mini