Contents
Federal Order 5190.6a
Mark Blackwell wrote:
Well it has to do with the use of airports that accept federal funding. Call the AOPA and ask for federal order 5190.6a. That order allows local airports to set up minimum standards for any business that operates using that field. These can vary widely. If you do have your 150 and teach out of it without complying, they have the right to bar you and your aircraft from using the airport.
A typical minimum standard might read, you must have x amount of office space, x amount of parking space, so many aircraft available, and so forth. The sad thing is that the airport is under no obligation to provide office space or the other requirements. Often the minimum standards are set up so that the minimums are exactly what is already existing on the field. They would only be under obligation to lease you some land if any is available for you to build your own buildings necessary to meet the standards. (see how this is beginning to work) How often in today's market is building your own building for flight training smart?
Want to put something like a trailer there and use that for office space? They can also control what types of buildings are there. Ok want to rent an office across the street and walk over to your airplane? Good luck but its doubtful. A through the fence operation there not even a requirement from the feds to be fair with you and the feds are discouraging such operations now. If you are willing to build a building or want to lease an office that does comply, often that building space or land is already leased to the current operator, but isn't being used. The term I believe is land banking and its extremely common. What better way to keep the competition out than to have no place for them to go. This can be fought, but it will take some time and resolve to get it done. Often you might win the battle and get the space, but in doing so alienate so many people that your business has no chance of success.
If you are successful expect premium rents, and a percentage of the gross in most places going to the airport. A common figure is 3% of the gross, but again those rates can vary. Again without compliance, your use of the airport can and most likely will be either suspended or revoked.
This also applies to mechanics. Here it can even be more confusing. You do have the right to use the mechanic of your choice, but you do not have the right to bring another operator on the field. The definition of operator leaves a big gray area. It has been used to the cringing of owners across the country. My personal experience is that every time someone does this its for a reason. Either the work is substandard or they way overcharge, but again that just my opinion. You may also base your airplane in one place, have your maintenance done another, and when your airplane breaks down at home have a problem getting your regular mechanic on the field to deal with it. It doesn't happen all the time, but it can. Everyone should get a copy of that order and read it.
Mark Blackwell
Gene's Experience
I have fought numerous 'windmills' in my life; here is one that may be of interest. Over twenty-five years ago I was arrested for giving ground instruction in the pilots lounge at Buchannan Field. I was teaching a group of students who belonged to my flying club for no charge. The airport manager showed up and said that what I was doing did not meet the requirements the county about having a maintenance facility, rented office space and a hangar. He had been set upon me by the local association of FBO's who objected to what I was doing based upon the local ordinance. He threatened me with arrest if I did not leave. I said that I would wait and when the officer arrived I had to sign an arrest citation that involved a $50 infraction fine.
At the time I was teaching step-son of a former assistant district attorney to fly. I called him and struck a deal for his representation for the cost of the flying lesson. (Yeah, I know barter is taxable.) Forturnately, the week before my case came to court, the attorney came down with the flu and had nothing to do but prepare my case.
The day of the trial the county prosecuter was a young lady who had never had a case before. By the time the case was finished before the judge the lady was in tears and the judge had taken the case under advisement. A couple of weeks later the case against me was dismissed. It cost me $1,200. Since that time, no similar charges have ever been brought against a free-lance flight instructor at a public use airport in California to the best of my knowledge.
Apparently the legal citations given by my attorney were extensive enought to stand as court law for these many years. I doubt if more than a couple of instructors know why they can free-lance with impunity. Had I lost my case the situation at airports would be considerably different. My flying student went on to be an airline pilot.
Dudley writes:
Regarding CFI Checkride Failures Due to Unairworthy Aircraft
It might be a bit harsh to fault an examiner for asking about these things. There is a line of course, where they begin to look nit picky, but that's rare. The main point here is that regardless of the item selected for discussion by the examiner, what he/she is looking for is an intelligent judgment call on the item, not a detailed answer that requires specific knowledge of the run-out time, or replacement status of the item. What's being asked is a go/no go judgment, based on current condition. In that context, all equipment condition questions are fair game on a flight test.
More than one pilot has been killed by a rusty bolt that failed. When asked about a specific item by a flight examiner, I strongly suggest inspecting the item yourself and give a go/no go call on the basis of that inspection. If an examiner asks a question that requires research in order to supply an answer, simply tell him/her that the answer requires research information, and you will be glad to supply it if given the time to do so. The main thing here is that the examiner will want a go/no go decision from you, and you should be prepared to supply that decision based on a visual inspection of any item on your aircraft at any time during the preflight.
The examiner has every right to ask you about a crazed landing light cover. As PIC, you should have the answer. This situation is no different than a preflight being done on the airplane without the examiner being present. The landing light cover would still be crazed, and you would be making that go/no go decision just the same. Examiners are looking for your preflight habit patterns and your ability to ascertain what's right and what's wrong with your airplane. It's perfectly reasonable, and I suggest that all pilots taking flight tests spend a bit more time concentrating on being prepared, and a lot less time worrying about bad examiners.
Major CFI Applicant Problem Areas
1. Not fitting lesson to student level
2. Too much talking without check on comprehension.
3.Avoiding unknown an answers
4. Not 'hearing' the student
5. Quitting lesson before needed level of proficiency.
6. Instructor loses control of lesson.
7. Incomplete paper work.
Everything Goes in the CFI Checkride.
--May ask you for a detailed technical explanation while flying. Tell him that you will explain later.
---Expect questions while flying to be brief .
--For procedures just teach the steps and techniques not aerodynamics.
For Initial CFI, the PTS List of Areas Of Operation
--Technical Subject Areas. Are these topics limited to oral questioning.
--Navigation and flight planning
--Use of checkpoints, ground speed and fuel remaining
--Lost Procedures?
CFI Instruction Questions
--Questions come from FAA-H8083-9 and concern the learning process. A few involve endorsements.
--Commercial written questions emphasize night flying.
--Instrument questions concern chart interpretation to obtain runway/airport information.
Why CFIs Fail Checkrides
--80% of CFIs fail on first try
--CFI PTS is over 150 pages.
--CFI applicants must exhibit instructional knowledge of task elements through descriptions, explanations, simulations and common errors.
1. There is a trend of poor performance
2. Unable to find information
3. Sectional knowledge
4. Radio/Radar procedures
5. Aerodynamics
6. Weight and Balance.
7. Weather understanding and interpretation
8. Operational features of aircraft used.
Continue To Next Page