US Citizenship Verification - What is a "Discovery" Flight?

[Skid]

The school I'm at is getting an increase in the number of transfer students from other areas and there is some confusion about what a discovery flight is and how it applies to the need for 1552.3 US Citizenship verification.

A lot of these new students want to do a flight at first before they actually get started with us, but may already have 20 hours and are continuing into their PPL training. Does anyone have any guidance on whether their "first flight" (i.e interpreted as discovery to some) with us is exempt? It's not a huge deal since they will need to verify citizenship eventually, but many are showing up and are angry that they can't just jump in and go since technically they are pursuing training for a license (and thus need their stuff).

To me a discovery flight means it's literally their first flight to see if they like flying in general, and thereafter they are in training mode. Sort of a gray area I know, but it would be nice if I had some official source or recommendation going forward.

Thanks!

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Was reading the reg cited and I must confess I don’t understand this. 14 CFR 1552.1 defines demonstration flight thusly:

Demonstration flight for marketing purposes means a flight for the purpose of demonstrating an aircraft's or aircraft simulator's capabilities or characteristics to a potential purchaser, or to an agent of a potential purchaser, of the aircraft or simulator, including an acceptance flight after an aircraft manufacturer delivers an aircraft to a purchaser.

How does that cover what is commonly called a discovery flight? In those, no one is trying to sell the person the airplane and it doesn’t seem like one could argue the person taking the flight is an agent of a potential purchaser.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

You’re selling your CFI, your rental and your facility for training.

That may be true; however, the exception to flight training refers to “demonstration flight for marketing purposes” and the meaning of that specific phrase for that section is defined as quoted to refer to marketing the aircraft or a simulator.

Because a specific definition is given, I think an administrative law judge would rule that definition is in force for the exception to flight training, not a more general meaning. This would imply that what is generally referred as a “discovery flight” is flight training per the TSA regulations.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

What do you think a discovery flight is? It’s a marketing flight to sell the flight school (plane/simulator/etc) to a prospective student.

Also you said, administrative law, see kangaroo court, if they really want you for whatever reason, you’re screwed ether which way. The same group accusing you is going to be the judge, jury and executioner, and the buredon of proof is ON YOU to prove a negative/your innocence.

As you know, I certainly agree with your opinion of the TSA's administrative proceedings. The first step in an action arising from a flight school failing to verify the TSA requirements on a "discovery flight" would likely be an administrative proceeding in their court. (Note this is actually run by the Coast Guard). If you wanted to appeal out of that, first you would have to appeal to the TSA administrator. If you don't get the ruling you want there, then you can appeal to the appeals court and get a real judge. Along the way, you would have to raise and preserve the matters of law carefully as no new issues can be raised in the appeals.

I suspect, however, that based on the wording and definitions in the regulation, even at the appellate level, it would be determined that a "discovery flight" is flight training and not a marketing flight per their definition which appears to require an intent to sell the aircraft to a potential purchaser. I really don't think the judge would buy that the wording "a flight for the purpose of demonstrating an aircraft's or aircraft simulator's capabilities or characteristics to a potential purchaser" covers selling the flight school to a prospective student.

I'm not aware of any ruling or interpretation regarding this, though would be interested to hear if any such exist. The cost to get to appellate court on this issue would likely be around $100k if employing an attorney.

So in answer to the OP, it seems unlikely your school is going to be prosecuted on this; however, if the TSA decided to pursue this, it strikes me (IANAL) that the odds are you could be successfully prosecuted. They would probably offer a fine as the punishment.

A better solution might be to make prospective students aware up front, perhaps on the web site, that they will need to verify citizenship to start taking lessons.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

I agree on James with this. Flight instruction, and demonstration of the plane, the school, the process, etc. are not mutually exclusive. I opine that you can log it in your 61.51 log book as flight instruction given (provide you provide the perspective student with a logbook entry), but that it meets the definition of a "Demonstration flight for marketing purposes". There are two different organizations with two sets of terminology that do not overlap. The TSA says in 49 CFR § 1552.1 that "Flight training means instruction received from a flight school in an aircraft or aircraft simulator. Flight training does not include recurrent training, ground training, a demonstration flight for marketing purposes,..." It doesn't say that a demonstration flight may not include instruction. It actually clearly states that Flight training CAN include recurrent training, which is flight training from an FAA perspective.

And right above that it defines exactly what that term means specifically -

“Demonstration flight for marketing purposes means a flight for the purpose of demonstrating an aircraft's or aircraft simulator's capabilities or characteristics to a potential purchaser, or to an agent of a potential purchaser, of the aircraft or simulator, including an acceptance flight after an aircraft manufacturer delivers an aircraft to a purchaser.”

Note that right after “potential purchaser” it says “,of the aircraft or simulator”.

I think that makes it very difficult to argue that this type of demonstration flight covers a discovery flight. One might argue that a “discovery flight” is somehow trying to demonstrate the aircraft’s capabilities to a potential purchaser of those capabilities, but that is not purchasing the aircraft or simulator, which seems to plainly be required to qualify as a “demonstration flight for marketing purposes”.

So if not a demonstration flight for marketing purposes, what is a “discovery flight” per the TSA regs? Depending on what is being done, it might be a training flight, thus requiring the citizenship or approval, but perhaps per the TSA, it is neither.

Then one has to deal with whether one is licensed to perform that type of operation per the FAA.