Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:43 AM - 52 lower cowl (Stephen Fox)
2. 08:47 AM - Re: Airshow compensation (forrest johnson)
3. 09:14 AM - Re: Airshow compensation (Brian Lloyd)
4. 09:25 AM - Re: Airshow compensation (Fraser, Gus)
5. 10:07 AM - Re: New purchase (Scooter)
6. 10:09 AM - Re: Yak 50 for sale (Sarah Tobin)
7. 11:09 AM - Re: Airshow compensation (Roger Kemp)
8. 12:31 PM - Commercial and Compensation (Jay Land)
9. 01:26 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Roger Kemp)
10. 02:17 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (the wades)
11. 02:41 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (Fraser, Gus)
12. 04:28 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (Ron Davis)
13. 05:16 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Sarah Tobin)
14. 05:53 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (Shinden33)
15. 06:53 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Jay Land)
16. 07:40 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Roger Kemp)
17. 08:11 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (A. Dennis Savarese)
18. 08:25 PM - Re: Airshow compensation (Brian Lloyd)
19. 08:33 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (Brian Lloyd)
20. 08:40 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Brian Lloyd)
21. 08:58 PM - Re: Re: New purchase (A. Dennis Savarese)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Stephen Fox <jsfox@adelphia.net>
Ok Folks I'm shopping for a lower cowl for my 52. If any one has one
or a lead on one please contact me off list.
Thanks,
Steve Fox
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Airshow compensation |
Drew; Has any body considered the fact that we are actually being " reimbursed
" not compensated. To be compensated means to work or make a profit. We spend
far more than the reimbursement and are not air show performers. Has this been
pointed out to the FAA?
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Airshow compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
forrest johnson wrote:
> Drew; Has any body considered the fact that we are actually being "
> reimbursed " not compensated. To be compensated means to work or make a
> profit. We spend far more than the reimbursement and are not air show
> performers. Has this been pointed out to the FAA?
The problem is that the flying is not ancillary to other activity
(airshow). When I fly to visit a client for business I may be reimbursed
by my employer for costs because the flying is *ancillary* to the
business activity, e.g. I could drive my car and still accomplish the
business activity.
When I fly to an airshow the activity (airshow) and travel to the
activity are inexorably intertwined. I could not drive my car and still
accomplish the activity.
Therefore you cannot convince the FAA that flying to the airshow is
ancillary to the airshow and that reimbursement is appropriate.
They have us by the proverbial plums on this one.
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak@lloyd.com
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Airshow compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
So Brian what about this,
"I flew to the airport to have a lunch meeting and wouldn't you know it
there was a bloody air show on there."
:))
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow compensation
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
forrest johnson wrote:
> Drew; Has any body considered the fact that we are actually being "
> reimbursed " not compensated. To be compensated means to work or make
> a profit. We spend far more than the reimbursement and are not air
> show performers. Has this been pointed out to the FAA?
The problem is that the flying is not ancillary to other activity (airshow).
When I fly to visit a client for business I may be reimbursed by my employer
for costs because the flying is *ancillary* to the business activity, e.g. I
could drive my car and still accomplish the business activity.
When I fly to an airshow the activity (airshow) and travel to the activity
are inexorably intertwined. I could not drive my car and still accomplish
the activity.
Therefore you cannot convince the FAA that flying to the airshow is
ancillary to the airshow and that reimbursement is appropriate.
They have us by the proverbial plums on this one.
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak@lloyd.com
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
Actually I believe I was just calling the fsdo to work out the details on my new
required paperwork. They asked the right questions and determined that I was
ferrying the aircraft without a permit. What followed was a very heated telephone
conversation.
Had I flown it w/o the permit then walked in to their office and told them the
truth then my nuts really would have been in the fire. It's probably legal w/o
the ferry permit but i'd have to convince them of that.
My advice is: do it their way no matter how stupid it is. This avoids any potential
conflict. Remember you are guilty until proven otherwise.
brian wrote:
> Scooter wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I don't recall now why I needed the ferry permit. Must have been because
the airworthiness certificate was no longer considered valid (because I was buying
the airplane and moving it away from its home base).
> >
> >
>
> No, there was no need to do anything besides have the previous owner
> send a FAX to the local FSDO saying that the bird was flying to your new
> home.
>
> Most of the problems crop up when people start trying to analyze and
> second-guess the rules and regs. And the guys at the FAA probably
> understand those rules no better than you do.
>
> Sure you need to change the AC and the LOL *when* *you* *change* *the*
> *aircraft's* *home* *base*. But when you buy the aircraft and fly it
> home, its home base is still its old home base and the AC and existing
> LOL are still valid. Changing the registration does not invalidate the
> AC and LOL unless the existing LOL says that it does. I have never seen
> an LOL that does but am prepared to be enlightened.
>
> So why do you want to change the LOL and AC? Because you want to be able
> to fly the airplane for proficiency within the 300nm radius of your
> airport AND the airplane is going to reside withing the jurisdiction of
> the new FSDO. But until you do that, you send a fax to the old FSDO and
> then fly away. The airplane is flying to its new home temporarily and
> the old FSDO is still the authoritative office. No ferry permit needed.
>
> So, fly it to its new home and then go visit the new FSDO with the old
> AC and LOL in hand. Carry your new program letter with you. If you make
> an appointment ahead of time you should be out of there in about 15 minutes.
>
>
> > I contacted the fsdo where the aircraft was based and my local fsdo. Seems
like my local fsdo thought i needed the ferry permit but the other fsdo didn't.
> >
> >
>
> That is because you made the mistake of asking the question. Remember,
> if you ask a question be prepared to be instructed that you may not do
> what you want to do. The most restrictive answer is also the safest for
> the FAA employee answering your question.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22904#22904
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I gotta admit the Extra 300L has been a kick to fly, but when was the last time
an extra won the worlds? Hmm...
If you really wanna 2 place, should've gone for the SU29 dude!
I am going to be at El Reno (RQO). Hangars are just being completed and I will
be out there on Wed. Can't wait to get the Yak out there and start flying
in the box there on the field!
Smash
Roger Kemp <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } Hitman,
Deserting us for a flat 6! Oh man, what's a YAKKER to do?
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: John W. Hilterman Jr.
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: 3/17/2006 4:31:59 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak 50 for sale
I know, I know.Ill be picking up my Extra in April. What did you decide to
do hangar wise?
Hitman
---------------------------------
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sarah Tobin
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak 50 for sale
Selling your round motor....for shame!! What are you going to fly this year?
"John W. Hilterman Jr." <johnhilterman1@cox.net> wrote:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "John W. Hilterman Jr."
1984 Yak-50 For Sale
TTAF 365, M14P TTSN 303, dynamically balanced MTV-9-29 TTSN 142.
Skytronics alternator, ADC oil filter, intake manifold drain kit, cockpit
"snot" valve, new US hoses on engine/landing gear/brakes, hobbs meter, US
paint and fabric, new LP Aero glass all around, round wingtips with
nav/strobes, landing light, new McFarlane elevator/rudder cables, custom
built baggage compartment, tail FOD barrier, Comant combo VHF/GPS antenna,
Garmin GPS-196 hard wired, Aux fuel tank with quantity gauge, US altimeter
and airspeed with Knots and KPH, UMA interior lighting, smoke system,
---------------------------------
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
---------------------------------
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Airshow compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Yeh and you have multiple 5x8 glossy's of the client you met with along
with minutes from the meeting you had with that client. Oh, by the way,
there was an airshow there too. They were kind enough to refuel my plane at
no cost because it was a warbird that I incidentally flew to KXXX airport.
Since they really would like to have that kind of warbird on the ramp, they
also included a rental car and motel room for me so I would stick around
for a couple of days with my warbird. Now of course, since I was just
sticking around, I did fly in the mass formation. After all I am FAST
qualified and I need to proficiency flights so I can keep my card along
with that 10% discount on my insurance. Well of course, since I did fly in
this ancillary airshow that just happened to be at the airport I chose to
have free finger foods from the pilots lounge while meeting with my client,
I should not have to claim this as reimbursement. It is a buisness expense
for me to be there is it not Mr. IRS and FAA man???!!
Lets see here, does this pass the Sh_ _ test....It smells like sh--...It
tastes like S---, It must be S---. Glad I did not step in it! I'll write
you at Folsom.
Seriously, instead of looking for ways to get around this rule just do the
time and get the T Shirt. If this is so important, then spend the money,
invest the time, and get the commercial. Most of us can do the Lazy 8's,
turns around a pylon (Hell how about a dime with a YAK, sorry ChiYak
guys... a quarter for you all), spot landings, and max performance TO's. So
what's the big deal? You can read and write correct...so you can pass the
written. Now all it takes is clicking the mouse to take the test. Just do
it...then we can get back to arguing about more important things
like...flame proof nickers!
If you take the test in your warbird, the examiner gets to have fun too
along with you! If you have a prick for a examiner, come to 08A, we have a
guy that loves to give the check rides in warbirds. After all, what is more
boring that doing floating spot landing and figure 8's in a spam can?!
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Fraser, Gus <gus.fraser@gs.com>
> To: yak-list@matronics.com <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/20/2006 11:30:34 AM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Airshow compensation
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
>
> So Brian what about this,
>
> "I flew to the airport to have a lunch meeting and wouldn't you know it
> there was a bloody air show on there."
>
> :))
>
> Gus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:13 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow compensation
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
> forrest johnson wrote:
> > Drew; Has any body considered the fact that we are actually being "
> > reimbursed " not compensated. To be compensated means to work or make
> > a profit. We spend far more than the reimbursement and are not air
> > show performers. Has this been pointed out to the FAA?
>
> The problem is that the flying is not ancillary to other activity
(airshow).
> When I fly to visit a client for business I may be reimbursed by my
employer
> for costs because the flying is *ancillary* to the business activity,
e.g. I
> could drive my car and still accomplish the business activity.
>
> When I fly to an airshow the activity (airshow) and travel to the activity
> are inexorably intertwined. I could not drive my car and still accomplish
> the activity.
>
> Therefore you cannot convince the FAA that flying to the airshow is
> ancillary to the airshow and that reimbursement is appropriate.
>
> They have us by the proverbial plums on this one.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian-yak@lloyd.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
Doc
As you said, it really isn't too difficult to get the Commercial. The 2nd
class medical might become the issue. It sure was nice to get some
formation practice in this weekend at Columbus and have it all paid for.
Will your DE do an initial private pilot exam in an EXTRA? I gotta find one
before next year that will.....!
Jay
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Jay,
I will ask him if he will or not. He likes to do them in the YAK so what's
so what would be so different about the Extra? It is still lazy 8's and
spot landings. Yeh, for some the Class II medical maybe an issue. Some may
require a waiver for eyes (greater than 20/200), Heart Dz, s/p CABG, HTN,
Diabetes and thyriod dz, to name a few. It is still not that hard to get
done though.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/20/2006 2:36:35 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Commercial and Compensation
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
>
> Doc
>
> As you said, it really isn't too difficult to get the Commercial. The 2nd
> class medical might become the issue. It sure was nice to get some
> formation practice in this weekend at Columbus and have it all paid for.
>
> Will your DE do an initial private pilot exam in an EXTRA? I gotta find
one
> before next year that will.....!
>
> Jay
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "the wades" <wade154@frontiernet.net>
Hi all I was curious about the operating limitations for an aircraft that
I'm trying to sell got most of my answers at
www.utility-aircraft.com/catalog/certificate/order.htm the aircraft that I'm
selling had a paragraph stating that if it was equipped to operate night
and/or IFR it could be done, but when asked to come into the local FSDO they
changed it to VFR-DAY only. How many aircraft with OL can be operated
IFR-NIGHT?
Bill Wade
N4450Y
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> Scooter wrote:
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
> >
> > I don't recall now why I needed the ferry permit. Must have been
because the airworthiness certificate was no longer considered valid
(because I was buying the airplane and moving it away from its home base).
>
> No, there was no need to do anything besides have the previous owner
> send a FAX to the local FSDO saying that the bird was flying to your new
> home.
>
> Most of the problems crop up when people start trying to analyze and
> second-guess the rules and regs. And the guys at the FAA probably
> understand those rules no better than you do.
>
> Sure you need to change the AC and the LOL *when* *you* *change* *the*
> *aircraft's* *home* *base*. But when you buy the aircraft and fly it
> home, its home base is still its old home base and the AC and existing
> LOL are still valid. Changing the registration does not invalidate the
> AC and LOL unless the existing LOL says that it does. I have never seen
> an LOL that does but am prepared to be enlightened.
>
> So why do you want to change the LOL and AC? Because you want to be able
> to fly the airplane for proficiency within the 300nm radius of your
> airport AND the airplane is going to reside withing the jurisdiction of
> the new FSDO. But until you do that, you send a fax to the old FSDO and
> then fly away. The airplane is flying to its new home temporarily and
> the old FSDO is still the authoritative office. No ferry permit needed.
>
> So, fly it to its new home and then go visit the new FSDO with the old
> AC and LOL in hand. Carry your new program letter with you. If you make
> an appointment ahead of time you should be out of there in about 15
minutes.
>
> > I contacted the fsdo where the aircraft was based and my local fsdo.
Seems like my local fsdo thought i needed the ferry permit but the other
fsdo didn't.
>
> That is because you made the mistake of asking the question. Remember,
> if you ask a question be prepared to be instructed that you may not do
> what you want to do. The most restrictive answer is also the safest for
> the FAA employee answering your question.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>
>
> --
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
I think your FSDO is behaving badly !
8130.F is the smorgus board of regulations from which the FSDO will select
and include paragraphs, pretty much verbatim, into your OP lim letter. The
section that deals with lights, night and IFR reads as follows
(13) Unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in
accordance with 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only.
See the point here is that the FSDO is supposed to select from the menu,
there should be no ala carte option.
If I were you Bill I would challenge them on it. If they still refuse to see
the light set EAA on them those government affairs guys just love a good
scrap with the feds.
Best of luck with that.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of the wades
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
--> Yak-List message posted by: "the wades" <wade154@frontiernet.net>
Hi all I was curious about the operating limitations for an aircraft that
I'm trying to sell got most of my answers at
www.utility-aircraft.com/catalog/certificate/order.htm the aircraft that I'm
selling had a paragraph stating that if it was equipped to operate night
and/or IFR it could be done, but when asked to come into the local FSDO they
changed it to VFR-DAY only. How many aircraft with OL can be operated
IFR-NIGHT?
Bill Wade
N4450Y
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> Scooter wrote:
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
> >
> > I don't recall now why I needed the ferry permit. Must have been
because the airworthiness certificate was no longer considered valid
(because I was buying the airplane and moving it away from its home base).
>
> No, there was no need to do anything besides have the previous owner
> send a FAX to the local FSDO saying that the bird was flying to your new
> home.
>
> Most of the problems crop up when people start trying to analyze and
> second-guess the rules and regs. And the guys at the FAA probably
> understand those rules no better than you do.
>
> Sure you need to change the AC and the LOL *when* *you* *change* *the*
> *aircraft's* *home* *base*. But when you buy the aircraft and fly it
> home, its home base is still its old home base and the AC and existing
> LOL are still valid. Changing the registration does not invalidate the
> AC and LOL unless the existing LOL says that it does. I have never seen
> an LOL that does but am prepared to be enlightened.
>
> So why do you want to change the LOL and AC? Because you want to be able
> to fly the airplane for proficiency within the 300nm radius of your
> airport AND the airplane is going to reside withing the jurisdiction of
> the new FSDO. But until you do that, you send a fax to the old FSDO and
> then fly away. The airplane is flying to its new home temporarily and
> the old FSDO is still the authoritative office. No ferry permit needed.
>
> So, fly it to its new home and then go visit the new FSDO with the old
> AC and LOL in hand. Carry your new program letter with you. If you make
> an appointment ahead of time you should be out of there in about 15
minutes.
>
> > I contacted the fsdo where the aircraft was based and my local fsdo.
Seems like my local fsdo thought i needed the ferry permit but the other
fsdo didn't.
>
> That is because you made the mistake of asking the question. Remember,
> if you ask a question be prepared to be instructed that you may not do
> what you want to do. The most restrictive answer is also the safest for
> the FAA employee answering your question.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>
>
> --
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <L39parts@hotmail.com>
All of them, except yours. You got screwed for being gullible.
----- Original Message -----
From: "the wades" <wade154@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "the wades" <wade154@frontiernet.net>
>
> Hi all I was curious about the operating limitations for an aircraft that
> I'm trying to sell got most of my answers at
> www.utility-aircraft.com/catalog/certificate/order.htm the aircraft that
> I'm
> selling had a paragraph stating that if it was equipped to operate night
> and/or IFR it could be done, but when asked to come into the local FSDO
> they
> changed it to VFR-DAY only. How many aircraft with OL can be operated
> IFR-NIGHT?
>
> Bill Wade
> N4450Y
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
>
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> Scooter wrote:
>> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
>> >
>> > I don't recall now why I needed the ferry permit. Must have been
> because the airworthiness certificate was no longer considered valid
> (because I was buying the airplane and moving it away from its home base).
>>
>> No, there was no need to do anything besides have the previous owner
>> send a FAX to the local FSDO saying that the bird was flying to your new
>> home.
>>
>> Most of the problems crop up when people start trying to analyze and
>> second-guess the rules and regs. And the guys at the FAA probably
>> understand those rules no better than you do.
>>
>> Sure you need to change the AC and the LOL *when* *you* *change* *the*
>> *aircraft's* *home* *base*. But when you buy the aircraft and fly it
>> home, its home base is still its old home base and the AC and existing
>> LOL are still valid. Changing the registration does not invalidate the
>> AC and LOL unless the existing LOL says that it does. I have never seen
>> an LOL that does but am prepared to be enlightened.
>>
>> So why do you want to change the LOL and AC? Because you want to be able
>> to fly the airplane for proficiency within the 300nm radius of your
>> airport AND the airplane is going to reside withing the jurisdiction of
>> the new FSDO. But until you do that, you send a fax to the old FSDO and
>> then fly away. The airplane is flying to its new home temporarily and
>> the old FSDO is still the authoritative office. No ferry permit needed.
>>
>> So, fly it to its new home and then go visit the new FSDO with the old
>> AC and LOL in hand. Carry your new program letter with you. If you make
>> an appointment ahead of time you should be out of there in about 15
> minutes.
>>
>> > I contacted the fsdo where the aircraft was based and my local fsdo.
> Seems like my local fsdo thought i needed the ferry permit but the other
> fsdo didn't.
>>
>> That is because you made the mistake of asking the question. Remember,
>> if you ask a question be prepared to be instructed that you may not do
>> what you want to do. The most restrictive answer is also the safest for
>> the FAA employee answering your question.
>>
>> --
>> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
>> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
>> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>>
>> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
>> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commercial and Compensation |
IMHO, I think that it is a huge difference between an Extra and a C172 as far as
lazy 8s and turn around/on pylons go. It shows the skill level of a student
that can fly a perfect lazy 8 in a non-aerobatic a/c. But, that is the old school
instructor coming out in me.
Bottom line is, if you can get away with it, do it.
Smash
Roger Kemp <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp"
Jay,
I will ask him if he will or not. He likes to do them in the YAK so what's
so what would be so different about the Extra? It is still lazy 8's and
spot landings. Yeh, for some the Class II medical maybe an issue. Some may
require a waiver for eyes (greater than 20/200), Heart Dz, s/p CABG, HTN,
Diabetes and thyriod dz, to name a few. It is still not that hard to get
done though.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jay Land
> To:
> Date: 3/20/2006 2:36:35 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Commercial and Compensation
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land
>
> Doc
>
> As you said, it really isn't too difficult to get the Commercial. The 2nd
> class medical might become the issue. It sure was nice to get some
> formation practice in this weekend at Columbus and have it all paid for.
>
> Will your DE do an initial private pilot exam in an EXTRA? I gotta find
one
> before next year that will.....!
>
> Jay
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Shinden33" <shinden33@earthlink.net>
Scooter,
I would have to disagree with regards to arguing. The more we let them get
away with the more lax and criminal they will get. 90% of the government
agencies and workers I have dealt with are nothing more than jobs programs
(hence one of the main reasons I am leaving my current job as a DOD
civilian). These people must be kept in check to the best of our ability
or they will end up making life harder on everyone. Believe me, I
understand how difficult it is to do so but they are not the Gods they think
they are. One on one they will scorn you. Bring up the regs in more public
forum or to their superiors (at whatever level you need to go to) and you
will find generally they back down.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Scooter
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
Actually I believe I was just calling the fsdo to work out the details on my
new required paperwork. They asked the right questions and determined that
I was ferrying the aircraft without a permit. What followed was a very
heated telephone conversation.
Had I flown it w/o the permit then walked in to their office and told them
the truth then my nuts really would have been in the fire. It's probably
legal w/o the ferry permit but i'd have to convince them of that.
My advice is: do it their way no matter how stupid it is. This avoids any
potential conflict. Remember you are guilty until proven otherwise.
brian wrote:
> Scooter wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I don't recall now why I needed the ferry permit. Must have been
because the airworthiness certificate was no longer considered valid
(because I was buying the airplane and moving it away from its home base).
> >
> >
>
> No, there was no need to do anything besides have the previous owner
> send a FAX to the local FSDO saying that the bird was flying to your new
> home.
>
> Most of the problems crop up when people start trying to analyze and
> second-guess the rules and regs. And the guys at the FAA probably
> understand those rules no better than you do.
>
> Sure you need to change the AC and the LOL *when* *you* *change* *the*
> *aircraft's* *home* *base*. But when you buy the aircraft and fly it
> home, its home base is still its old home base and the AC and existing
> LOL are still valid. Changing the registration does not invalidate the
> AC and LOL unless the existing LOL says that it does. I have never seen
> an LOL that does but am prepared to be enlightened.
>
> So why do you want to change the LOL and AC? Because you want to be able
> to fly the airplane for proficiency within the 300nm radius of your
> airport AND the airplane is going to reside withing the jurisdiction of
> the new FSDO. But until you do that, you send a fax to the old FSDO and
> then fly away. The airplane is flying to its new home temporarily and
> the old FSDO is still the authoritative office. No ferry permit needed.
>
> So, fly it to its new home and then go visit the new FSDO with the old
> AC and LOL in hand. Carry your new program letter with you. If you make
> an appointment ahead of time you should be out of there in about 15
minutes.
>
>
> > I contacted the fsdo where the aircraft was based and my local fsdo.
Seems like my local fsdo thought i needed the ferry permit but the other
fsdo didn't.
> >
> >
>
> That is because you made the mistake of asking the question. Remember,
> if you ask a question be prepared to be instructed that you may not do
> what you want to do. The most restrictive answer is also the safest for
> the FAA employee answering your question.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22904#22904
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
Have no fear- he can do a fine lazy eight in the old Archer. This
instructor thought the right DE might find the turns around a point more
interesting when demonstrated inverted. ;)
Personally, I think the skillful execution of an Advanced aerobatic routine
can also demonstrate sufficient skill level.
From: Sarah Tobin <aerobaticgirl@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Commercial and Compensation
IMHO, I think that it is a huge difference between an Extra and a C172 as
far as lazy 8s and turn around/on pylons go. It shows the skill level of a
student that can fly a perfect lazy 8 in a non-aerobatic a/c. But, that is
the old school instructor coming out in me.
Bottom line is, if you can get away with it, do it.
> Smash
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commercial and Compensation |
Now Smash,
I see your IMHO and raise you a what if the YAK or CJ is their only aircraft and
they only want to fly large Red Star fromation gaggles at airshows.
I know rent a spam can!
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Sarah Tobin
Sent: 3/20/2006 7:21:52 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Commercial and Compensation
IMHO, I think that it is a huge difference between an Extra and a C172 as far as
lazy 8s and turn around/on pylons go. It shows the skill level of a student
that can fly a perfect lazy 8 in a non-aerobatic a/c. But, that is the old school
instructor coming out in me.
Bottom line is, if you can get away with it, do it.
Smash
Roger Kemp <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp"
Jay,
I will ask him if he will or not. He likes to do them in the YAK so what's
so what would be so different about the Extra? It is still lazy 8's and
spot landings. Yeh, for some the Class II medical maybe an issue. Some may
require a waiver for eyes (greater than 20/200), Heart Dz, s/p CABG, HTN,
Di abetes and thyriod dz, to name a few. It is still not that hard to get
done though.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jay Land
> To:
> Date: 3/20/2006 2:36:35 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Commercial and Compensation
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land
>
> Doc
>
> As you said, it really isn't too difficult to get the Commercial. The 2nd
> class medical might become the issue. It sure was nice to get some
> formation practice in this weekend at Columbus and have it all paid for.
>
> Will your DE do an initial private pilot exam in an EXTRA? I gotta find
one
> before next year that will.....!
>
> Jay
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
Each paragraph from the smorgus board you speak of has specific group
applicability. Some say "All", others say Group III under 800 horsepower
(our aircraft), etc.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
>
> I think your FSDO is behaving badly !
>
> 8130.F is the smorgus board of regulations from which the FSDO will select
> and include paragraphs, pretty much verbatim, into your OP lim letter. The
> section that deals with lights, night and IFR reads as follows
>
> (13) Unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in
> accordance with 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day
> only.
>
> See the point here is that the FSDO is supposed to select from the menu,
> there should be no ala carte option.
>
> If I were you Bill I would challenge them on it. If they still refuse to
> see
> the light set EAA on them those government affairs guys just love a good
> scrap with the feds.
>
> Best of luck with that.
>
> Gus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of the wades
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:15 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "the wades" <wade154@frontiernet.net>
>
> Hi all I was curious about the operating limitations for an aircraft that
> I'm trying to sell got most of my answers at
> www.utility-aircraft.com/catalog/certificate/order.htm the aircraft that
> I'm
> selling had a paragraph stating that if it was equipped to operate night
> and/or IFR it could be done, but when asked to come into the local FSDO
> they
> changed it to VFR-DAY only. How many aircraft with OL can be operated
> IFR-NIGHT?
>
> Bill Wade
> N4450Y
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
>
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> Scooter wrote:
>> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
>> >
>> > I don't recall now why I needed the ferry permit. Must have been
> because the airworthiness certificate was no longer considered valid
> (because I was buying the airplane and moving it away from its home base).
>>
>> No, there was no need to do anything besides have the previous owner
>> send a FAX to the local FSDO saying that the bird was flying to your new
>> home.
>>
>> Most of the problems crop up when people start trying to analyze and
>> second-guess the rules and regs. And the guys at the FAA probably
>> understand those rules no better than you do.
>>
>> Sure you need to change the AC and the LOL *when* *you* *change* *the*
>> *aircraft's* *home* *base*. But when you buy the aircraft and fly it
>> home, its home base is still its old home base and the AC and existing
>> LOL are still valid. Changing the registration does not invalidate the
>> AC and LOL unless the existing LOL says that it does. I have never seen
>> an LOL that does but am prepared to be enlightened.
>>
>> So why do you want to change the LOL and AC? Because you want to be able
>> to fly the airplane for proficiency within the 300nm radius of your
>> airport AND the airplane is going to reside withing the jurisdiction of
>> the new FSDO. But until you do that, you send a fax to the old FSDO and
>> then fly away. The airplane is flying to its new home temporarily and
>> the old FSDO is still the authoritative office. No ferry permit needed.
>>
>> So, fly it to its new home and then go visit the new FSDO with the old
>> AC and LOL in hand. Carry your new program letter with you. If you make
>> an appointment ahead of time you should be out of there in about 15
> minutes.
>>
>> > I contacted the fsdo where the aircraft was based and my local fsdo.
> Seems like my local fsdo thought i needed the ferry permit but the other
> fsdo didn't.
>>
>> That is because you made the mistake of asking the question. Remember,
>> if you ask a question be prepared to be instructed that you may not do
>> what you want to do. The most restrictive answer is also the safest for
>> the FAA employee answering your question.
>>
>> --
>> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
>> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
>> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>>
>> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
>> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Airshow compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Fraser, Gus wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
>
> So Brian what about this,
>
> "I flew to the airport to have a lunch meeting and wouldn't you know it
> there was a bloody air show on there."
Then they hit you with the old, "failure to collect and utilize all the
information available to you."
And when all else fails and they can't think of what to hit you with
they can always fall back on "careless and reckless", by their
definition, of course.
Dealing with the FAA is like dealing with the three laws of
thermodynamics. In the vernacular they are:
1. you can't win;
2. you can't break even;
3. you can't get out of the game.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Scooter wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
>
> Actually I believe I was just calling the fsdo to work out the details on my
new required paperwork. They asked the right questions and determined that I
was ferrying the aircraft without a permit. What followed was a very heated telephone
conversation.
No, you need a ferry permit to operate an aircraft that does not have a
valid airworthiness certificate. The airplane had a valid airworthiness
certificate. You did not need a ferry permit.
The airworthiness certificate is NOT tied to the aircraft registration.
They are separate and disconnected.
> Had I flown it w/o the permit then walked in to their office and told them the
truth then my nuts really would have been in the fire. It's probably legal
w/o the ferry permit but i'd have to convince them of that.
No, you don't have to convince them of anything. You just tell them that
you are changing the aircraft's home base to a new field that happens to
be within their jurisdiction. Until they issue a the AC with a new LOL
indicating the new home field, you are operating on a valid AC whose LOL
indicates a different home field that falls within the jurisdiction of a
different FSDO. No rocket science here.
> My advice is: do it their way no matter how stupid it is. This avoids any potential
conflict. Remember you are guilty until proven otherwise.
You are doing it their way. They wrote the regs and you are adhering to
them. You just aren't doing it the made-up way that some bonehead came
up with on-the-fly at your local FSDO when you happened to call on the
phone. Big difference.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Jay Land wrote:
> Personally, I think the skillful execution of an Advanced aerobatic
> routine can also demonstrate sufficient skill level.
When I took my Comm check ride in June of 1972 (at the ripe old age of
18) I was having just a bit of a problem with my lazy eights. They were
marginal. I commented to the examiner that I did better wingovers than
lazy eights so he said, "then demonstrate a wingover." I proceeded to do
several and he pronounced them acceptable. I passed the checkride.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New purchase |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
If you have moved to a new address along with moving your airplane to a new
home base airport within the same FSDO's jurisdicton, you must first obtain
a new registration with your new address before the FSDO will issue a new
airworthiness certificate and OL's. That means you must present your new,
hard copy registration to the FAA inspector. He can't issue a new AC and
OL's without physically see it.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: New purchase
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> Scooter wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
>>
>> Actually I believe I was just calling the fsdo to work out the details on
>> my new required paperwork. They asked the right questions and determined
>> that I was ferrying the aircraft without a permit. What followed was a
>> very heated telephone conversation.
>
> No, you need a ferry permit to operate an aircraft that does not have a
> valid airworthiness certificate. The airplane had a valid airworthiness
> certificate. You did not need a ferry permit.
>
> The airworthiness certificate is NOT tied to the aircraft registration.
> They are separate and disconnected.
>
>> Had I flown it w/o the permit then walked in to their office and told
>> them the truth then my nuts really would have been in the fire. It's
>> probably legal w/o the ferry permit but i'd have to convince them of
>> that.
>
> No, you don't have to convince them of anything. You just tell them that
> you are changing the aircraft's home base to a new field that happens to
> be within their jurisdiction. Until they issue a the AC with a new LOL
> indicating the new home field, you are operating on a valid AC whose LOL
> indicates a different home field that falls within the jurisdiction of a
> different FSDO. No rocket science here.
>
>> My advice is: do it their way no matter how stupid it is. This avoids
>> any potential conflict. Remember you are guilty until proven otherwise.
>
> You are doing it their way. They wrote the regs and you are adhering to
> them. You just aren't doing it the made-up way that some bonehead came up
> with on-the-fly at your local FSDO when you happened to call on the phone.
> Big difference.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
> brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|