fingers crossed for the next 10 minutes

woodstock

woodstock

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
9,342
Location
Out of a suitcase
Display Name
Display name:
iTravel
We canned my flight today b/c of the snow coming in. I just spoke to my CFI - one of his students had taken his plane this morning to look at a piece of land and decided to fly back here this afternoon despite being outside of the minimums and oh yeah snow and icing.

My CFI counseled him not to (on top of it, it's my CFI's Diamond) and he took off anyway - brand new instrument pilot.

I hope he lands ok. We're watching him on flightaware right now - he should be landed pretty soon if not already...
 
I understand it is your CFI's plane. Does he have a set of weather minimums that he uses for people to rent it?
 
no offense, but doesnt he control the keys? hoping the best for hapless pilots.
 
I don't know? My CFI is a REALLY nice guy so I doubt he had much to say. (I mean - super super nice guy). The pilot told him it was all textbook and in fact it was a skosh about the mins so he was fine. I'd still worry about icing though.

I wonder if setting your own mins on your plane before leasing it out has the potential to include you in any sort of liability? in other words, if someone followed your mins and still got into a weather related accident... unless the mins are standard and government regulated (i.e. conservative) ones...
 
woodstock said:
I wonder if setting your own mins on your plane before leasing it out has the potential to include you in any sort of liability? in other words, if someone followed your mins and still got into a weather related accident... unless the mins are standard and government regulated (i.e. conservative) ones...
Click to expand...

I was thinking the exact same thing. I would let the legal standards be the precedent if I was renting a plane and not say anything. Just make sure they have all their documentation (medical and cert) in order and turn them out. If you tell them what they can and can't do, then if they have an accident "Well you told me I couldn't..." when it's actually legal, then you have a potential problem.
 
that's my thought.

I should mention - I did tell my CFI to call me when he knew he landed safely, but he didn't indicate the conversation itself just that it worked out ok.

The funny thing is, this Diamond is one I've had my eye on for a while... my CFI is considering rolling it over this year and I'm biding my time.
 
woodstock said:
I wonder if setting your own mins on your plane before leasing it out has the potential to include you in any sort of liability? in other words, if someone followed your mins and still got into a weather related accident... unless the mins are standard and government regulated (i.e. conservative) ones...
Click to expand...

Yep!

As I think I have stated before I teach scuba. Our risk management department is pretty clear about setting such standards. They state if we do set such standards and a mishap occurs then it is our responsibility to defend those standards. If we use the industry guidelines and standards then those standards are more easily defensible and our insurance will cover us in any litigation.
 
smigaldi said:
Yep!

As I think I have stated before I teach scuba. Our risk management department is pretty clear about setting such standards. They state if we do set such standards and a mishap occurs then it is our responsibility to defend those standards. If we use the industry guidelines and standards then those standards are more easily defensible and our insurance will cover us in any litigation.
Click to expand...

I was diving with mantas and leopard sharks over Christmas.
 
Generally speaking, it is failure to set minimum requirements, not setting them, that lands you in trouble in the airplane rental business. That said, if someone was using my plane, and I told them not to fly it until conditions improved, and they flew it anyway, that would certainly be their last flight in my plane. Further, I'd be sorely tempted to have law enforcement meet them when they landed and charge them with unauthorized use of the plane.
 
Ron Levy said:
Generally speaking, it is failure to set minimum requirements, not setting them, that lands you in trouble in the airplane rental business. That said, if someone was using my plane, and I told them not to fly it until conditions improved, and they flew it anyway, that would certainly be their last flight in my plane. Further, I'd be sorely tempted to have law enforcement meet them when they landed and charge them with unauthorized use of the plane.
Click to expand...

The FAA has already set minimum standards. You go mess with them and you can get involved in litigation. Once it gets into court, things get silly. Remember the suit that put The Old Piper under? I can hear the arguement already. "My clients husband wanted to follow a legal and well established..."
 
Henning said:
The FAA has already set minimum standards. You go mess with them and you can get involved in litigation. Once it gets into court, things get silly. Remember the suit that put The Old Piper under? I can hear the arguement already. "My clients husband wanted to follow a legal and well established..."
Click to expand...
If you're referring to the Cub vs tractor on takeoff case, Piper lost because they did not use higher standards than the government required at the time. Further, I have yet to see Hertz, Avis, etc., get in trouble for telling their customers what they are not allowed to do with their cars (read the fine print in the contract). If someone can find a case in which an FBO was successfully sued for setting weather minima above FAA standards, I'd sure like to hear about it.
 
Ron Levy said:
Generally speaking, it is failure to set minimum requirements, not setting them, that lands you in trouble in the airplane rental business. That said, if someone was using my plane, and I told them not to fly it until conditions improved, and they flew it anyway, that would certainly be their last flight in my plane. Further, I'd be sorely tempted to have law enforcement meet them when they landed and charge them with unauthorized use of the plane.
Click to expand...

re: mins: isn't stating "legal govt mins" enough?

re: usage of plane/last flight: even if it's on leaseback? Technically he isn't managing the plane...
 
As far as "minimums" where I rent they have it in the rental agreement, you fill out every time before you get the keys to the plane in BOLD text, you cannot take off unless you have 2,000 ceiling and 3 miles vis. and the weather must be forcast to be the same at your intended destination.

Their plane their rules is how I look at it.

They have "black listed" renters before when "caught" violating their policy.
Mark B
 
I think Ron has nailed it - I don't see why giving minimums higher than the minimums given by the government (i.e. More Safe) could possibly lead to a lawsuit, unless the higher minimums somehow led to the crash, but I can't fathom a way for that to happen.

That said, I also don't see a reason to give higher than the regulated minimums to anyone above the "Student Pilot" level either, ADM is implied when you have the ticket in my eyes. I see it as a grasp of control that shouldn't happen, but that's just my opinion.
 
SkyHog said:
I think Ron has nailed it - I don't see why giving minimums higher than the minimums given by the government (i.e. More Safe) could possibly lead to a lawsuit, unless the higher minimums somehow led to the crash, but I can't fathom a way for that to happen.
Click to expand...

Widow's attorneys get very creative.
 
SkyHog said:
I think Ron has nailed it - I don't see why giving minimums higher than the minimums given by the government (i.e. More Safe) could possibly lead to a lawsuit, unless the higher minimums somehow led to the crash, but I can't fathom a way for that to happen.
Click to expand...

I can see how someone would say "Well, they had all these rules that should have kept me safe, but I obeyed them all and still crashed." Or, "They had these rules, but they didn't have THIS rule, which would have kept me safe, so it's their fault."
 
Ron Levy said:
True, but I don't think anyone can find a case where this actually happened.
Click to expand...

Ron:

Not taking sides, but I wouldn't let the lack of a written opinion on point sway things a whole bunch here.

You know most district courts seldom publish a written opinion; even if they do, it may not be comprehensive as an appellate courts' must be.

Also, cases that settle don't have to disclose what the terms were, as a matter of fact, many have confidentiality agreements signed as a condition of the agreement.

So, the lack of written case law may not mean a whole lot. The attorneys engaged in the arena and insurers paying out on settlements probably have a good feel for why they are suggesting one course of action or another.

Best,

Dave
 
WAIT A SECOND! All this minimums talk aside. Do I understand that the CFI told him to sit tight and he flew the plane anyway against his instruction?
 
AdamZ said:
WAIT A SECOND! All this minimums talk aside. Do I understand that the CFI told him to sit tight and he flew the plane anyway against his instruction?
Click to expand...

The facts as I understand them is that a legal PIC with at least a PP and an instrument rating rented a plane from an FBO and looking at the information available made decision to fly his legally rented airplane. The owner of the airplane, who placed it on leaseback, then felt, in his opinion, that the first PIC should not make the flight.

What I do not know are all the information surrounding the weather at the time to decide for myself who made the better informed decision. But I would tend to tilt to the CFI for the higher standard of knowledge. I do not believe the CFI had a real recourse in stopping the flight from happening.
 
AdamZ said:
WAIT A SECOND! All this minimums talk aside. Do I understand that the CFI told him to sit tight and he flew the plane anyway against his instruction?
Click to expand...

it was the CFI's plane... but said pilot is a fully licensed instrument rated pilot. I think "urged" or "suggested" is maybe a better way to say it than "don't take my plane up or else".

CFI wasn't actually instructing him at the time. and like Scott said - I don't truly know all the weather facts, especially as I am not intrument rated - but I do know the light snow was already an hour or more underway when he landed and we were heading towards freezing precip at that point.
 
Last edited:
woodstock said:
CFI wasn't actually instructing him at the time. and like Scott said - I don't truly know all the weather facts, especially as I am not intrument rated - but I do know the light snow was already an hour or more underway when he landed and we were heading towards freezing precip at that point.
Click to expand...

Snow isn't automatically a no-go. Just over a week ago, I had a successful flight through snow and I was VFR most of the way. I wouldn't have launched had I not been instrument rated, and I did end up air-filing as conditions deteriorated (which, of course, caused conditions to improve dramatically as soon as I got my IFR clearance :rolleyes:). I kept a VERY close watch on the wings and surfaces, and never got a touch of ice.

I don't know what my CFII would have said about the flight. I do know I never went flying with him in snow. I also know that I learned a LOT about flying in snow from Dr. Bruce's article on the subject. Finally, the real trick to successfully completing a flight like this is to have lots of options, and be ready to use them. Without speaking with the pilot, it's hard to tell what he may have been thinking and what particular things led him to make a "go" decision.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Snow isn't automatically a no-go. Just over a week ago, I had a successful flight through snow and I was VFR most of the way. I wouldn't have launched had I not been instrument rated, and I did end up air-filing as conditions deteriorated (which, of course, caused conditions to improve dramatically as soon as I got my IFR clearance :rolleyes:). I kept a VERY close watch on the wings and surfaces, and never got a touch of ice.

I don't know what my CFII would have said about the flight. I do know I never went flying with him in snow. I also know that I learned a LOT about flying in snow from Dr. Bruce's article on the subject. Finally, the real trick to successfully completing a flight like this is to have lots of options, and be ready to use them. Without speaking with the pilot, it's hard to tell what he may have been thinking and what particular things led him to make a "go" decision.
Click to expand...
One thing to keep in mind flying in snow is that, depending on the destination airport, the runway may not be cleared in a timely fashion. Thus, even though the FLIGHT is fine, the LANDING can be adventuresome. And that also goes for airports en route that you may need to use in case of an emergency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top