On Thu, 04 May 2006 18:58:22 GMT, Jose
wrote:

Way off topic, Jose, but take a look at this from FAA Legal Opinions[...]

As outlined above, it is our opinion that compensation for the flight
exists in two forms: [...] and (2) the acquisition of pilot in
command time, which can be used to demonstrate aeronautical
experience eligibility for an airman certificate.

I wonder what they'd say in my case as more hours wouldn't qualify me
for anything including ratings.

I'm aware that the FAA has decided, without making rules, what
constitutes "compensation". In my mind they are making this law up out
of whole cloth, without going through a proper rulemaking procedure.
Nonetheless, they will hang you on it.

In like manner, I am convinced the FAA will hang you on reliance (not

They can "hang" you for relying on anything to the exclusion of
something else. IE ... fixation. He was neglecting his scan and
fixating on the AI, or altimeter, or making sure his passenger had
their head in the "lunch bag", or he was watching the left wing as it
broke off instead of flying the airplane, or maybe someone heard the
pilot wasn't feeling good so he/she must have been flying when they
shouldn't.

I'm firmly of the opinion that any time something important breaks I
should be some where else.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
"use") on a handheld GPS in IMC under IFR. The FAA doesn't appear to
need to make official rules.

Thus my proposing the parallel.

Jose