Experimental (ELSA / E-AB) No Longer Allowed for Flight Training??

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Pocahontas MS
Somebody asked me to cross-post this.
I'm not going to wade back through 19 pages of this thread, but here's the current bottom line.
Any instructor with the *new* LODA can instruct in any homebuilt owned by others.
Any homebuilt with a new LODA issued for it can be instructed in by any instructor (instructor LODA or not).
An instructor-owner can still do *only* transition training, when renting out his personal homebuilt *IF* he has obtained the earlier transition training LODA. This is unrelated to the new LODA process.

The new LODA (which has a 4 year duration) simply resets the immediate legal landscape to where it was before the lawsuit mess started, and gives the FAA 4 years (renewable) to either rewrite the regs or lobby Congress to rewrite laws to force them to rewrite the regs. The fact that the FAA acted so incredibly fast (for a bureaucracy) should prove where their hearts are.
 

PagoBay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2013
Messages
338
Location
US Territory of Guam
The fact that the FAA acted so incredibly fast (for a bureaucracy) should prove where their hearts are.
That was revealed by the FAA itself in a full-hearted manner right here:
https://www.eaa.org/~/media/1091C7E251904915BBF431FC3EB9B628.ashx - PAGE 5 of 8
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Parts 61 and 141 [Docket No.: FAA-2021-0592]
Notification of Policy for Flight Training in Certain Aircraft --
A. Experimental Category Aircraft -- In general, the FAA places limitations on the use of aircraft that hold experimental airworthiness certificates because the airworthiness certification requirements for these aircraft impose no standard and pose unique operational risk to the national airspace system.
 

PagoBay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2013
Messages
338
Location
US Territory of Guam
HOUSE PASSES AMENDMENT TO REVERSE FAA FLIGHT TRAINING POLICY
September 24, 2021 By Amelia Walsh
An amendment included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would reverse the FAA’s sudden change in flight training policy for certain types of aircraft garnered approval from the House of Representatives September 23.
 

Rhino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
1,541
Location
KTHA
October 5, 2021​
Dear xxxxxxx,
Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 4645, the Certainty for General Aviation Pilots Act. It is an honor to represent the people of Tennessee’s Seventh Congressional District, and I appreciate the opportunity to learn your thoughts on this issue.

H.R. 4645 was introduced by Rep. Sam Graves (R-MO) on July 22, 2021. The bill would clarify that individuals engaged in aircraft flight instruction or testing are not operating an aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

This legislation is currently before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Although I am not a member of this committee, I will keep your thoughts in mind should the bill come before the House Floor for a vote. If you would like to discuss this issue further, please call (629) 223-6050. My team would be happy to speak with you.

If you have any other questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Your comments and opinions are a vital source of information to assist me in carrying out my duties as your representative in Congress. Please visit my website at markgreen.house.gov, where you can sign up for my newsletter updates and learn more about my work in Congress on your behalf.
Sincerely,

Mark E. Green, M.D.
Member of Congress
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,653
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
I do not see where this changes anything, not even in the future.

Kahele said, “I am pleased to cosponsor this bipartisan amendment with my colleague, Rep. Sam Graves. This important amendment will clear up the confusion associated with flight instruction for general aviation pilots and I look forward to working with the Senate to ensure it is signed into law.”

It certainly does not 'clear up the confusion" and it is a long way from being signed into law. Even if passed it does not change the current regulation that the courts decided. It just redefines the terms of the existing regulation that the court already ruled on.

That, IMHO, is not how the law works. We have three branches of government for checks and balance. Congress passed the original regulation and the court did the required balanced interpretation. I question that the congress can just tell the court that "I'm sorry your wrong . This is what the regulation says." This looks like a long term mess and will likely take the full two years or longer to straighten it out. Even things as pressing as paying the current bills (government shutdown) can not be adequately addressed.
 

Kiwi303

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
418
Location
En Zed. Aka The Shire.
It's more:

Government passes a law.

Courts say "that law is ambiguous, this is the interpretation of what it MEANS" when ruling on a lawsuit.

Then the governments say, "No, that's what we said, but that's not what we meant" and passes another law saying the same thing differently that explicitly invalidates the court interpretation. hopefully not ambiguous in a different way.

Courts interpret the new law as applied in a lawsuit.


Congress CAN just tell the courts they are wrong by passing a law that invalidates the court interpretation... Unless the court rules it's unconstitutional and not a legal law. Congress can keep invalidating court interpretations any time they feel like it, but not by telling the judges what to rule, the courts aren't a check or balance in THAT way, their check and balance role is in declaring laws unconstitutional and hence void. Constitutionally legal laws they just make a guess as to what the politicians were trying to say when drafting laws, which can be over-ridden if the politicians don't agree with that guess, but only by either amending the law or by striking out and replacing the law entirely.
 

Rhino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
1,541
Location
KTHA
If passed, it would change several things pertinent to the topic of this thread.

117th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 4645

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 22, 2021

Mr. Graves of Missouri introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To clarify that individuals engaged in aircraft flight instruction or testing, including phased testing of experimental aircraft, are not operating an aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.​

Section 1. Short title

This Act may be cited as the Certainty for General Aviation Pilots Act of 2021.

Section 2. Flight instruction or testing

(a)
In general

A certificated flight instructor providing student instruction, flight instruction, or flight training shall not be deemed to be operating an aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

(b)
Authorized additional pilots

An individual acting as an authorized additional pilot during Phase I flight testing of aircraft holding an experimental airworthiness certificate, in accordance with section 21.191 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and meeting the requirements set forth by Federal Aviation Administration regulation and policy, shall not be deemed to be operating an aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

(c)
Use of aircraft

An individual who uses, causes to use, or authorizes to use aircraft shall not be deemed to be operating the aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire for flights conducted under subsection (a) or (b).

(d)
Revision of rules

Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall issue, revise, or repeal its rules, regulations, guidance, or procedures to conform to this section.


Maybe not a panacea, but definite progress.
 
Top