Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

T H E C O L L I N G S F O U N D A T I O N

P . O. Box 24 8, 1 37 Ba r t on Roa d , St ow, M A 01 7 7 5

 

`

June 13, 2010

Dear Gentlemen,

I appreciate the opportunity to meet with the FAA with regards to Exemption letter 6540J. During the 

meeting we reviewed various issues mostly having to do with typographical discrepancies. All of the 

typographical discrepancies were noted and it was stated that they were to be addressed by the FAA. 

Other issues having to do with operational policy were requested to be submitted in writing. These 

issues are outlined below:

Regarding 6540J:

Issue #1

The Fi-156 is based in N. Florida, not Houston. N156FC has its operating limitations and 

airworthiness issued out of the N. Fl office. 

Issue #2

Section 33. Clarify “during flight” especially with section 33 d. Otherwise we would need to 

notify the FAA every time we shut down the engine/s once on the ground since it does not state 

“in flight”. 

Issue #3

Section 36. Allow PIC or a trained and authorized crewmember conduct passenger briefings 

in accordance with 135.117.

There are a few areas where the FAA did not correctly interpret a law, regulation or precedent.

Issue #4

6540 Section 34 h. “Operations of the F-4 and A-4 are only permitted at airports with airport with 

operational arresting systems”.

 There are no known FAR’s with regards to arresting gear.
Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

 F.R. Vol. 72 No. 194 section 15 c. references passenger training equivalent to DoD 

familiarization flights. Since there is no FAR referencing this subject the policy should be based 

on DoD policy as it is for training for familiarization flights.

 US Navy and Navy Training Command (Cinatra) does not require arresting gear for the TA-4 on 

land operations.

 With regards to the TA-4 

o Utility hydraulic failure causes loss of spoilers, flaps and speed brakes, but gear can be 

extended and brakes are not lost. Safe runway distance is 7000ft under this scenario.

o CF policy requires minimum runway requirement within divert distance of 7000ft for a 

Utility failure divert. 

 USAF Air Combat Command (ACC) criteria for the QF-4, Thunderbirds, Demo Teams, etc is: 

o <7,000 ft runway with arrestor gear. No arrestor gear required above 7,001 ft. runway 

length.

o CF uses the following criteria:

o Minimum runway length 7,000ft

If no arrestor gear at primary airport or runway less than 9,000ft:

o runway with arrestor gear within divert distance.

 or

o 9,000 ft runway without arrestor gear within divert distance.

 The above CF minimums are the same or greater than for military familiarization flights. 

Therefore we feel it is not necessary to include arrestor gear criteria in the exemption.

 No other exemptions have ever contained runway criteria for aircraft like the B-29 that have 

special requirements. There are currently tailhook equipped aircraft flying with exemption letters 

and there is no requirement for these aircraft to be operated at airfields with arrestor gear. 

Therefore, this goes against FAA precedent.

 F.R. Vol. 72 No. 194 does not call for any special runway criteria or arrestor gear with regards 

to jets or any type of aircraft. 

Issue #5

6540J Section 11 e. “have accomplished within the previous 90 days, three takeoffs and landing to 

a full stop in each aircraft for which PIC privileges are sought”. FAR’s only address the need for 

full stop landings for tail wheel equipped aircraft, therefore the “to a full stop” should be 

removed or have “if applicable” added.

Issue#6

6540J Section 35. “The PIC is prohibited from performing aerobatic flights while passengers are

aboard the aircraft”. 
Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

 Precedent: No other FAA issued Exemption Letter has had this provision, including the 

most recent letters for the Commemorative Air Force, Cavanaugh Flight Museum, and 

Indiana Aviation Museum. All of these organizations operate aerobatic capable aircraft 

including P-51’s F4U’s T-28’s etc that offer aerobatic flights. The most recent Exemption 

letters for these organizations were provided to the FAA during the meeting.

 It was stated by the FAA that the provision was added to comply with 91.146. We believe 

that this is an incorrect interpretation of the law. It is important to note that we are exempt 

from 91.315, 91.319 (a)(2), 119.5 (g) and 119.21 (a), not 91.146 since it is not applicable 

to our operation.

 72 F.R. 57197 section 7. “Exemption will be issued for the sole purpose of providing 

living history flights to promote aviation and preserve historic aircraft. The operations 

authorized under these exemptions are specifically not air tour, sightseeing, or air 

carrier operations”. The F.R. Vol. 72 No. 29 outlines FAR 91.146 on February 13, 

2007. Exemption Policy is outlined in F.R. Vol. 72 No. 194 on October 9, 2007, almost 8 

months latter. Therefore, the above statement was made in full knowledge of 91.146 and 

clearly outlines that 91.146 is not FAA policy for exemptions.

 Nowhere in the F.R. Vol. 72 No. 194 does it state that aircraft are prohibited from 

aerobatic flight. In fact it states in section 16. “Passengers must be fully informed of the 

risks associated with the proposed rides, and that occupying a seat in these aircraft may 

subject the rider to a high level of risk”. If it is felt by the FAA that aerobatic flight is a 

risk then, it is clearly outlined in the F.R. how the operator should handle it.

 Collings Foundation is exempt from 91.315 and 91.319 (a)(2) to allow Limited of 

Experimental aircraft from carrying passengers or cargo for compensation or hire. 

Nowhere in Part 91 does it prohibit these Limited or Experimental aircraft from 

performing aerobatics. CF complies with 91.303 for aerobatic flight. 91.146 is 

specifically for Standard category aircraft with low time Private Pilots. 6540J should be 

amended to remove Section 35 since it does not correctly interpreted the law and follow 

precedent

 Incorrect interpretation of law or regulation: 91.146 is for passenger carrying flights for 

the benefit of a charitable, nonprofit of community event. However FAR 91.146 (in 

italics) differs from Exemption Letters in several key areas including: 

(1) The flight is nonstop and begins and ends at the same airport and is conducted within a 25-statute 

mile radius of that airport.

6540J allows flights to go up to 50nm radius if certain conditions are met

(3) The airplane or helicopter has a maximum of 30 seats, excluding each crewmember seat, and a 

maximum payload capacity of 7,500 pounds.
Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

Most aircraft operating with an Exemption Letter and 6540J have a maximum payload capacity well in 

excess of 7500 pounds.

(5) Each airplane or helicopter holds a standard airworthiness certificate, is airworthy, and is operated 

in compliance with the applicable requirements of subpart E of this part.

Exemptions are to allow non-standard category aircraft for offering flight experiences. Additionally 

Exemption letters spell out the criteria for maintenance for all applicable exemption aircraft as follows:

5. Collings must maintain its F-4 in accordance with the:

a. Maintenance requirements as specified in its F-4 operating limitations, as amended;

b. FAA-approved maintenance inspection program that meets the requirements of

§ 91.409(e), (f)(4), and (g);

c. F-4 military technical manuals, and

d. All aircraft systems and components must be maintained in accordance with

manufacturers and US government inspection, maintenance, overhaul, and life limits.

(6) Each flight is made during day VFR conditions.

In 91.155 VFR can be 1000ft/3mi or as little as 1mi and clear of clouds, Exemptions specifically call for 

1500ft/3mi.

(9) A private pilot acting as pilot in command has at least 500 hours of flight time.

Pilot criteria for Exemption Letter flights is much more stringent since PIC’s must be commercial 

multiengine instrument with 2,500hrs total time. Pilot qualifications are outlined:

11. The pilot in command (PIC) for the F-4, and A-4 must:

a. Hold at least a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane multiengine land

rating, an airplane instrument rating, and the appropriate experimental aircraft

authorization;

b. Have completed within the previous 12 calendar months, Collings’ PIC

qualification and recurrent flight and ground training program in each aircraft for

which PIC privileges are sought;

c. Have completed within the previous 12 calendar months, Collings’ PIC

proficiency check in each aircraft for which PIC privileges are sought;

d. Have at least a total of 2,500 hours of aeronautical flight experience,

1,000 hours of aeronautical flight experience in multiengine land airplane and 25 hours

in the specific aircraft; or have at least a total of 1,000 hours of aeronautical flight

experience, 200 hours of aeronautical flight experience in a multiengine land airplanes,

and 100 hours and 50 takeoffs and 50 landings in the specific aircraft; and

e. Have accomplished within the previous 90 days, three takeoffs and three

landings to a full stop in each aircraft for which PIC privileges are sought. For initial

PIC qualification in the specific aircraft or if the pilot has allowed his/her takeoff and

landing currency to lapse in the specific aircraft, the takeoff and landing currency may

not be accomplished during passenger-carrying operations.
Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

(11) Flights are not conducted over a national park, unit of a national park, or abutting tribal lands, 

unless the operator has secured a letter of agreement from the FAA, as specified under subpart B of part 

136 of this chapter, and is operating in accordance with that agreement during the flights.

No limitation with Exemption Letters.

(c) (1) Passenger-carrying flights or series of flights are limited to a total of four charitable events or 

non-profit events per year, with no event lasting more than three consecutive days.

No limitation with Exemption Letters.

(2) Passenger-carrying flights or series of flights are limited to one community event per year, with no 

event lasting more than three consecutive days.

No limitation with Exemption Letters.

(d) Pilots and sponsors of events described in this section are limited to no more than 4 events per 

calendar year.

No limitation with Exemption Letters.

(e) At least seven days before the event, each sponsor of an event described in this section must furnish 

to the FAA Flight Standards District Office with jurisdiction over the geographical area where the event 

is scheduled:

Exemptions 6540J spells out 72hrs not 7 days:

43. No later than 72 hours prior to commencing flight operations under the terms of this

grant of exemption, Collings must notify the jurisdictional FAA FSDO where it intends to

conduct the flight operations and shall provide a copy of this exemption to that jurisdictional

FAA FSDO.

(2) A photocopy of each pilot in command's pilot certificate, medical certificate, and logbook entries 

that show the pilot is current in accordance with §§61.56 and 61.57 of this chapter and that any private 

pilot has at least 500 hours of flight time; and

Pilots operating under the Exemption Letters are required to have Ground instruction, Flight Instruction, 

and Flight Check Rides. The level of training far exceeds 91.146. Training and Checkrides as outlined in 

6540J:

17. Collings must develop and maintain written F-4 and A-4 qualification and recurrent

ground training programs for its PICs in the F-4 and A-4 that cover the training subjects listed

below. Each PIC in the F-4 and A-4 must receive the following training within the previous

12 calendar months and be found to be competent and proficient in these areas prior to serving
Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

in a PIC in the F-4 and A-4:

Conclusion

Exemption Letters like 6540J and 91.146 have virtually nothing in common. FAR 91.146 essentially is 

to allow non-commercially rated pilots to fly flights for compensation or hire, vastly different from the 

high pilot requirements for 6540J. The criteria for pilots and training are vastly different. Aircraft types, 

registration categories, procedures, number of events and mandatory FAA reporting are also completely 

different. It is an incorrect interpretation to pick an aspect of 91.146 that has no bearing to our operation 

and apply it to 6540J. The fact that the Federal Register addresses the issue clarifies that 91.146 has no 

bearing on the exemptions. Furthermore, there are no other FAR’s prohibiting this type of operation. 

Also, there is long standing precedent that this provision has not ever been part of any exemption letter 

for organizations that operate aerobatic capable aircraft. If this precedent for allowing aerobatic flight is 

overturned it will cause great harm to many major organizations that currently fly aerobatic flights in 

several aircraft under their exemption letters. Therefore section 35 “The PIC is prohibited from 

performing aerobatic flights while passengers are aboard the aircraft” should be removed from 6540J.

Issue#7

6540J Section 38 “No persons other than the assigned flight crewmembers may be permitted to

manipulate the flight controls during flight operations”.

 Collings Foundation is exempt from 91.315 and 91.319 (a)(2) to allow Limited or Experimental 

category aircraft from carrying passengers or cargo for compensation or hire. Nowhere in Part 91 

does it prohibit these Limited or Experimental aircraft from allowing a passenger to manipulate 

the controls, not flight training, unless other passengers are carried. Manipulation of flight 

controls is a basic ability that all pilots flying under part 91 have extended to passengers to share 

the joys of flight and does not constitute flight training. CF does not advocate nor is asking for 

the ability to give “stick time” on a B-24 or B-17 (multi pax aircraft) during an Exemption flight. 

A passenger should not be able to manipulate the controls unless he/she is the only passenger on 

board (two person aircraft) and does not occupy the pilot station as outlined in 6540J Section 

37(i.e. aircraft requiring a PIC and SIC). 6540J section 38 should be removed since it does not 

correctly interpreted the law and follow precedent. 

 72 F.R. 57197 does not state in any section that a passenger cannot manipulate the controls. In 

fact since the flight are for living history, not sightseeing as outline in section 7. The use of the 

controls, provided it is not at the pilot station, would be an essential part of the experience.

 The application of this policy is not in line with current FAR’s and would destroy great programs 

like “Young Eagles”, where it would be argued by Inspectors in the field that the flights were for 

compensation or hire since the pilots receive “goodwill”. 
Tel: 978.562.9182 ● Fax: 978.568.8231 ● info@collingsfoundation.org ● www.collingsfoundation.org

 Precedent: No other FAA issued Exemption Letter has had this provision, including the most 

recent letters for the Commemorative Air Force, Cavanaugh Flight Museum, and EAA. All of 

these organizations operate dual control aircraft including T-28’s, T-6’s, PT-22’s and Ryan NYP 

etc. The most recent Exemption letters for these organizations were provided to the FAA during 

the meeting.

Conclusion

Section 38 is not in line with any current FAR since it is not defined as flight training, but manipulating 

the controls. Nowhere in the F.R. does it prohibit this from taking place. Application of this as an FAA 

policy would have a devastating impact on many great programs like “Young Eagles”. Also, there is 

long standing precedent that this provision has not ever been part of any exemption letter for 

organizations that operate dual control aircraft that do not require an SIC. If this precedent for allowing 

manipulation of the flight controls is overturned it will cause great harm to many major organizations 

that currently fly experience flights in several types of dual control aircraft under their exemption letters 

that allow this. Therefore section 35 should be removed from 6540J.

I look forward to resolving these issues with you.

Warmest Regards,

/s/

Rob Collings

Executive Director

The Collings Foundation