Flight Instructor with Stints

MBDiagMan

MBDiagMan

Final Approach
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
5,013
Location
NorthEast Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Doc
Flight Instructor with Stents

I just got my FAR/AIM manual yesterday, but couldn't find the answer to my question, probably because I don't understand the particular terms associated with heart disease.

My new Flight Instructor had an emergency and had to go in the hospital. They put two stents in his leg. This was Tuesday or Wednesday. He is not supposed to even walk until Saturday.

Now here's the question: I own and insure my own plane. Is he legal to fly and if not, and he insists on flying anyway, what would be the ramifications for me as not only his student, but the owner/operator of the aircraft.

Thanks very much for your help.
Doc (Obviously a nick name or I would understand the medical terms.)
 
Last edited:
MBDiagMan said:
I just got my FAR/AIM manual yesterday, but couldn't find the answer to my question, probably because I don't understand the particular terms associated with heart disease.

My new Flight Instructor had an emergency and had to go in the hospital. They put two stints in his leg. This was Tuesday or Wednesday. He is not supposed to even walk until Saturday.

Now here's the question: I own and insure my own plane. Is he legal to fly and if not, and he insists on flying anyway, what would be the ramifications for me as not only his student, but the owner/operator of the aircraft.

Thanks very much for your help.
Doc (Obviously a nick name or I would understand the medical terms.)
Click to expand...

A "stint" is a period of time, they probably put two stents in your instructor's leg.
 
Just because he insists on flying doesn't mean you HAVE to let him in your plane.

He had a limb threatening emergency. You know about it. And you know what he's supposed to be NOT doing.

Do the right thing.
 
NOPE. YOU are a student pilot and he is governed by 67.313. He cannot be PIC. If he insists, he has insufficient integrity. So, you needed a new CFI anyway.

If he is lucky, we can get him re-qual'd in three to six months.
 
Steven,

Thanks for correcting my spelling. As I said, I'm not a doctor.

Dave & Bruce,

Thanks very much for the useful information. I thought that I was correct, but I could not confirm this. I will not be flying with him.

Doc
 
MBD, when you are certified below CFI, there is nothing in the PTS or prep material or oral exams about part 67. So he's thinking 61.53 and self certify back to flight status. But when you become a CFI, you have to read part 67 and you get to 67.313.

That one forces you to ask an AME. AMEs are directed to point out that FAA considers peripheral vascular disease to be a marker for Coronary Disease. He needs to run a 9 minute treadmill to (220-HisAge)*.9 for 9 minutes if under age 70; (220-HisAge)*.85 for 6 minutes if over 70, without demonstrable cardiac ischemia. He needs an evaluation letter from a cardiologist, and a bunch of lab.

The most disturbing thing is when certified to this level, FAA can stick him with certificate penalties if they want to. This reg seems vague, but actually has teeth. Lots of 'em. If you fly with him, there is no legal PIC. Then FAA clobbers YOU (or tries to, or the insurance co. refuses to pay out.).

Maybe give Tom Richards another call. He won't toot his own horn, I'll do it for him.
 
bbchien said:
MBD, when you are certified below CFI, there is nothing in the PTS or prep material or oral exams about part 67. So he's thinking 61.53 and self certify back to flight status. But when you become a CFI, you have to read part 67 and you get to 67.313.

That one forces you to ask an AME. AMEs are directed to point out that FAA considers peripheral vascular disease to be a marker for Coronary Disease. He needs to run a 9 minute treadmill to (220-HisAge)*.9 for 9 minutes if under age 70; (220-HisAge)*.85 for 6 minutes if over 70, without demonstrable cardiac ischemia. He needs an evaluation letter from a cardiologist, and a bunch of lab.

The most disturbing thing is when certified to this level, FAA can stick him with certificate penalties if they want to. This reg seems vague, but actually has teeth. Lots of 'em. If you fly with him, there is no legal PIC. Then FAA clobbers YOU (or tries to, or the insurance co. refuses to pay out.).

Maybe give Tom Richards another call. He won't toot his own horn, I'll do it for him.
Click to expand...


Bruce,

Thanks very much for the further clarification.

Through extensive googling and dialing, I have come across what appears to be an EXCELLENT instructor that lives very near my home field. He is a high time helicopter, multi engine, tailwheel, on & on. I spoke with him at length over the phone and we seem to communicate well and have alot in common. He learned to fly in a Cessna 140.

I am scheduled to go up with him on Tuesday, weather permitting. It appears that he is the answer I've been looking for, but will have to wait and see how well he can "teach." Anyone that can teach a Bozo like me is a sure'nuff teacher. He recently retired to my rural area and I feel lucky to have found him.

I sure would like to fly with Tom Richards. It just doesn't seem to be practical unless I were to get transferred to Joplin. It was, however, an inspiration just to speak with him on the phone.

After you hooked me up and I emailed him, he left a Voice Mail saying that he would not be able to help, but that he had some ideas he would like to speak with me about. I called him back and spoke at length, soaking up his encouragement and positive energy.

Tell me, how many total strangers would call someone two states away just to offer encouragement? What a great guy. The pilots in his area are very lucky to have him.

Thanks again,
Doc
 
Last edited:
Wow, sounds like that medical condition killed your CFI's flying career for all intents and purposes. I guess now he can start drinking.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Wow, sounds like that medical condition killed your CFI's flying career for all intents and purposes. I guess now he can start drinking.
Click to expand...


Well, he's also an IA/AP and seems to have a reasonable amount of hanger business so I guess he'll be okay. I hate that this has happened to him. I was getting to know and like the old fellow (listen to me, he's 70 and I'm 62 so I guess I'm an old fellow too.)

He also has retirement from a previous career and doesn't seem stretched for dough. I don't know his health insurance situation so I don't know just how effected he will be financially.

Doc
 
Bruce,

Upon thinking about this, I came up with a curiosity question. When I was flying as a Student Pilot many years ago, I flew an hour or two with a CFI just to see how I liked a particular Piper. I remember that at the time he said that he had recently had ear surgery. I remember that something that required stitches and he said the stitches had been removed and that he could now fly.

Does this sound like he could have been flying illegally?

Again, just curious.

Thanks for all your help on this forum.

Doc
 
I have a question that is a variation on this theme:

A pilot qualified in category and class flies with a CFI who doesn't have a current medical. The purpose of the flight is for checkout. If something happens, who assumes liability?
 
Jaybird180 said:
I have a question that is a variation on this theme:

A pilot qualified in category and class flies with a CFI who doesn't have a current medical. The purpose of the flight is for checkout. If something happens, who assumes liability?
Click to expand...

Whoever has the insurance policy with the highest limits.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I have a question that is a variation on this theme:

A pilot qualified in category and class flies with a CFI who doesn't have a current medical. The purpose of the flight is for checkout. If something happens, who assumes liability?
Click to expand...

Let's assume the airplane is damaged and nobody's hurt and there's no property damage.

From an insurance/financial standpoint:

First, the insurance policy in effect on the airplane will cover the damage to the airplane and to any third parties. Then that insurer will likely sue the renter AND the CFI to recoup their losses. This may all be negotiated among the insurers (assuming everyone has insurance) before any suits get filed. If someone doesn't have insurance coverage, he may get sued.


From an FAA/Violation standpoint:
Both parties will get interviewed, and the FAA may choose to pursue certificate action against both of them. Even though the CFI may not have been acting as PIC (no medical, so he can't), he was STILL acting as a CFI and I'll bet that's enough to for the FAA to hang a violation - now, they may only be able to suspend his CFI certificate and not his pilot certificate, but I don't know.

The "normal" discussion about "A CFI is always PIC" is usually when a CFI is NOT instructing but merely sitting at a control station, and fails to "save" a situation where a violation occurs.
 
TMetzinger said:
Let's assume the airplane is damaged and nobody's hurt and there's no property damage.

From an insurance/financial standpoint:

First, the insurance policy in effect on the airplane will cover the damage to the airplane and to any third parties. Then that insurer will likely sue the renter AND the CFI to recoup their losses. This may all be negotiated among the insurers (assuming everyone has insurance) before any suits get filed. If someone doesn't have insurance coverage, he may get sued.


From an FAA/Violation standpoint:
Both parties will get interviewed, and the FAA may choose to pursue certificate action against both of them. Even though the CFI may not have been acting as PIC (no medical, so he can't), he was STILL acting as a CFI and I'll bet that's enough to for the FAA to hang a violation - now, they may only be able to suspend his CFI certificate and not his pilot certificate, but I don't know.

The "normal" discussion about "A CFI is always PIC" is usually when a CFI is NOT instructing but merely sitting at a control station, and fails to "save" a situation where a violation occurs.
Click to expand...

Interesting twist, Tim. I wonder how that would legally work? Some other threads suggest there's an issue if a CFII is giving instrument instruction, but in this case, we're talking VFR.

Not questioning the credibility of your answer just don't know enough to understand your basis.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Interesting twist, Tim. I wonder how that would legally work? Some other threads suggest there's an issue if a CFII is giving instrument instruction, but in this case, we're talking VFR.

Not questioning the credibility of your answer just don't know enough to understand your basis.
Click to expand...

Well a CFI certificate comes with privileges, so I have to assume the FAA can suspend or revoke those privileges. ACTING as PIC is not required to exercise the privileges, so they aren't "protected" by the "I wasn't the PIC" argument. However, I'm not sure the FAR has any standards for instruction the way they do for being PIC of an aircraft.

So I'm not sure that the FAA can hang a FAR violation on a CFI who is legally not capable of acting as PIC.

But I don't want to be the test case, either....:D
 
Didn't the Administrator hang a CFI for an SFRA bust while instructing another PP? I recall reading about that one...I did't read all the details, but as I recall, that CFI was warm about it. IIRC it was a PA-28 based at KMTN :stirpot:

Then I heard about similar situation where they hung the PP, so I dunno:dunno:
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top