What can be done on a LODA?

I have been reading a lot about EAB airplanes recently, with the long term intention of building my own. One of the subjects that I find confusing is the LODA (Letter of Deviation Authority).

It seems they are intended to allow transition training to reduce pilot miscontrol errors on early flights of eab planes, but I am curious how much or how little can be done with them and what is required to maintain them.

My first question is about solo rental, does a LODA allow for solo rental of the aircraft? For example, if I find a plane of the same design as a project I am working on, and I do some transition training a year before it is finished, would I legally have the option to rent that plane solo to maintain proficiency while I finish mine?

My second it about maintenance, does a LODA set a higher maintenance standard for the aircraft being rented or does the plane just need to be maintained like any other EAB?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thisadviceisworthles

I have been reading a lot about EAB airplanes recently, with the long term intention of building my own. One of the subjects that I find confusing is the LODA (Letter of Deviation Authority).
It seems they are intended to allow transition training to reduce pilot mis-control errors on early flights of eab planes, but I am curious how much or how little can be done with them and what is required to maintain them.
My first question is about solo rental, does a LODA allow for solo rental of the aircraft? For example, if I find a plane of the same design as a project I am working on, and I do some transition training a year before it is finished, would I legally have the option to rent that plane solo to maintain proficiency while I finish mine?
My second it about maintenance, does a LODA set a higher maintenance standard for the aircraft being rented or does the plane just need to be maintained like any other EAB?

---

LODA is primarily for "Transition training only". It does not include solo flight by the student.
Any aircraft used for compensation is required to have a condition inspection every 100 hrs. in addition to the annual condition inspection.
Of course all this should be including within the LODA. That would be the controlling document.

A LODA is for a CFI to give instruction in their E-AB airplane and allows them to charge a rental fee for their plane. As just an E-AB owner you’d never be issued a LODA.

If you are a non CFI EAA Flight Advisor do you need a LODA if you’re compensated for use of your EAB?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Auburntsts

A LODA is for a CFI to give instruction in their E-AB airplane and allows them to charge a rental fee for their plane. As just an E-AB owner you’d never be issued a LODA.

---

This is incorrect. The LODA is issued to the OWNER of the aircraft. The owner can then employ any number of CFIs as he or she sees fit. Also, a LODA can cover more than one aircraft, so long as they are all owned by the same owner. I oversaw the LODA that Sonex Aircraft used when they had their "T-Flight" transition training program. We had several aircraft listed on the LODA, and several instructors.

The LODA is issued to the owner, not the individual CFI.

If I rent out my Amateur Built aircraft to someone, which FAR am I breaking?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahramin

If I rent out my Amateur Built aircraft to someone, which FAR am I breaking?

---

14 CFR 91.319. Arguably, 91.9 as well, if you consider the aircraft operation limitations as being included.

Ron Wanttaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahramin

If I rent out my Amateur Built aircraft to someone, which FAR am I breaking?

---

While there are no specific legal interpretations on the subject, it can be argued that you could rent your amateur-built aircraft to someone, so long as they flew it themselves. You could NOT be paid to fly someone in the aircraft if you do the flying. The devil is in the details of how the regulations and operating limitations are worded. The language from 14 CFR 91.319 is as follows (in pertinent part):

(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate—

(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or
(2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.


Item (2) is a critical part of this discussion. Note that it prohibits "carrying" persons or property for compensation or hire. If the person who you rent the aircraft to does the flying themselves, you are not "carrying" them.Thus it could be argued that you would not be in violation of item (2).
And as long as the person who rents the aircraft is operating for education or recreation (the purpose of the amateur-built airworthiness certificate) they would not be in violation of item (1).

Again, there is no legal interpretation or case law on this, so this is just one man's interpretation of the regulation. However, this is how an FAA or DOT lawyer would approach the question. You need to read the regulation, but not read into the regulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joda

While there are no specific legal interpretations on the subject, it can be argued that you could rent your amateur-built aircraft to someone, so long as they flew it themselves. You could NOT be paid to fly someone in the aircraft if you do the flying. The devil is in the details of how the regulations and operating limitations are worded. The language from 14 CFR 91.319 is as follows (in pertinent part):

(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate—

(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or
[I](2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

---

I had an interesting discussion with an FAA guy once. I'd mentioned a man in our Fly Baby club who was an insurance adjuster. When he had an out-of-town check to deliver, he used the Fly Baby to get there.

The FAA guy told me that was in violation of 91.319. He said that the aircraft had been issued a certificate for the purpose of "operating an amateur-built aircraft," and using it for ANY commercial purposes was a violation its operations limitations.

Don't really agree with him, but this does indicate there are FAA folks who may look very hard at anything that departs from the education or recreation basis of Experimental Amateur-Built aircraft.

There is a technical term for people like this: ********.

Ron "Expletive Asterisked" Wanttaja