So- Do I need a LODA to give instruction?

I know this has changed a couple of times recently, but I'm a little fuzzy on how it eventually fell out. Hoping somebody can just spoon feed me the answer off the top of their head.

Here's the scenario: Old college friend has a GlaStar. He put me on his insurance a while back and I did his adult daughters transition training in it.

Now, his wife has decided to get her private and asked if I will teach her in it.

They own the airplane, so I believe that from a regulatory standpoint we are back to the place where I can give instruction, she can log dual, and no LODA is required. If thats the case, seems like the only hurdle is finding a DPE that will give a check ride in it.

Have I got that right?

I think you’ve got it right.

The answer is yes, you (cfi) may be paid. However, the owner may not be paid (e.g., he cannot charge his wife or daughter for the use of the airplane). Same thing for ‘friends’. I think the only thing requiring a LODA now is if you (cfi) give training in YOUR airplane, with money changing hands. The LODA will restrict you to ‘transition training only, and only for those with a bona fide need’, and your typical insurance policy won’t cover this. (You see why transition trainers who can supply the EAB airplane are so hard to find.)

I am not saying I know where the mop flops on this and I suspect it will depend on who you ask.

I recall a case using the rules we have now where warbirds were being flown as Experimental and the operator got in trouble for training his pilots in his airplanes without a LODA.

wawrzynskivp said:

I am not saying I know where the mop flops on this and I suspect it will depend on who you ask.

I recall a case using the rules we have now where warbirds were being flown as Experimental and the operator got in trouble for training his pilots in his airplanes without a LODA.

Click to expand...

The case cited above was in fact the start of all the ‘need a LODA for training in your own plane’ business (now resolved by an FAR change).
Yes, it was a war bird outfit which was basically charging for ‘a pilot experience’ in type, even though the airplane was experimental-exhibition which limited training to pilots who would actually be ferrying the airplane to its next exhibition. The judge told them that what they were doing was illegal, and then, sort of a ‘by the way’ comment, mentioned that the FAA had been misinterpreting the FARs with regard to paid instruction in EAB aircraft, too. And then the FAA’s own legal department agreed with the judge! So out came the temporary LODAs, etc., until the FARs were finally changed to reflect the FAA’s previous interpretation: Owners (or those using the owner’s EAB without charge) could use their plane to receive instruction, pay the cfi, and this would not be considered using the EAB for compensation or hire.

Good explanation here.