Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by Morgan3820, Apr 21, 2022.
i was talking about safety of the operation, not comfort level of the OP.
Did that a few times for a young lady once upon a time ago... She'd then go door to door to try to sell the pictures. In my plane the struts were often in the way of the most ideal shot and she insisted on the window being open too. It took a couple flights to settle into a rhythm that was efficient and resulted in less skidding and slipping to move the struts out of her way. I would circle once for her to chose the best angle, then I'd make a forward slip toward the farm from the direction she wanted. That way her shot was forward of the strut outside of the prop arc. Less skidding around while low and slow and less disorienting than circling 'round and 'round like in pin the tail on the donkey before striking out in search of the next farm on the itinerary. You might offer that solution as a way to mitigate the risks, but I think he seems to be aware of the rules and is attempting to comply.
Sounds like the OP doesn't own the airplane anymore, as he sold it to a partnership.
1) Not the OP's decision or call alone - unless the other partners just do what he says, or by laws of partnership says any one person can do something, etc.
2) If the OP and other partners are kurfufalled, don't rent it to the guy again
3) Unsafe? Doesn't seem so.
MKe sure the renter is familiar with Moose stalls?
stop renting your plane?
What kind of plane? All the low altitude maneuvering seemed to be at or above 110 mph and (within the limitations of flightaware) at or above 500' AGL. In a 172 I'd have 0 problem with that (though questions about how it flew that fast!). How far above stall is he?
With your partners, you need to decide if this is outside your comfort zones. Your (collectively) plane, your rules. But in general, unless there's a bunch of yanking and banking going on, that looks reasonably safe.
If' its' a high performance job where Vso is 90, that's a whole 'nother ball of fish.
Steep turns at 500 AGL isn't a great idea, even if you keep the speed up.
If the partners are equity partners, they should have a say in this as co-owners.
Agreed.. I have already talked with them. The decision is to get a commitment of 1000’ , unless landing, taking off. My gripe is I previously mentioned the issue to the renter, just the other day and I feel that I am getting a pat on the head, sonny. If it was his plane, I could not care but it is not his plane. When I borrow stuff, I treat it with extra care than I may if it was my own.
Is this some $$$,$$$,$$$ plane that you all can’t collectively afford?
why do you need partners AND income from a renter? Stopping the rental seems like a simple answer..??..??
No, the renter is an acquaintance that sold his plane but wanted to keep flying. We are doing him the favor. I would like it if he left on his own but he knows that would likely end his flying. Plus, he lives down the street from me. We have mutual acquaintances. It could get socially awkward. I know that is not a good reason, but my wife might suffer socially as well and stuff runs downhill.
Ok. New information. There was an established rule of 1000 with your partners. Remind him of that and if happens again no more renting.
Another thought. You feel disrespected - "Pat on the head sonny", etc. If the guy doesn't want to be a friend if you hold your ground then he isn't really a friend. Don't be an a$$, just tell him that is the rule the three of you have. It's his choice now if he commits and follows through with it, and he know if he breaks it no more renting.
Then this whole thread was pointless hot air to make you feel better. Stop complaining and keep your insurance paid-up. Solved.
I agree, plenty good enough to look over or take pictures at 1000’ AGL. The rest of it, work it out with other owners.
Us pilots are supposed to have thick skin. I’d just tell the guy, you can’t help but notice his ADS track, seemed a bit low. Last time I rented they had about 20 pages of rules, part of the deal.
Gotta love ADSB.
What is the qualifications of the pilot? Is he low-time private or is he commercial rated? Low-level, tight turns and such may be part of the training for a private, but maybe some special training should be required.
If he is getting any 'compensation' for the flight, then that might trigger it as a 'for profit' operation. Which, in turn, could cause insurance issues if he was to "terminate the fight at other than an airport." (I am not worried about FAA slapping the pilot, as that's his problem, but your insurance coverage provisions.)
Yeah, and like previously noted, take the route with a grain of salt. They aren't going to be a 100% accurate copy of the actual flight profile. Maybe you should just talk to the renter and say 'hey renter, please no more low and slow flights'. Like an adult, or something.
A few years ago, when a whale washed up on the beach, we went up to take some pics. Not very low, but slower than normal.
Did he / she get paid for this?
That was my first thought. Had the smell of someone running "Part 134.5" in your plane, in which case that's a mess.
Any followup? Did you speak to the renter about the owners agreeing on 1000' AGL except for landings and takeoffs? Did it go well? Still renting to him?
A rule is a better idea than "don't do low level maneuvers", IMO. Former is a clear limitation.
The opposite is also true.
An accident resulting from a stall at ~500' with passengers on board will result in multiple fatalities and the OP being sued for multiple millions of dollars. You can rest assured. Dealing with that is significantly more complicated than dealing with collecting money.
This is why if you’re renting, you place the plane in an LLC.
Then they can only sue for the value of the LLC, which will be the payout from the insurance company.
You won't be over reacting if something goes wrong... But you should fly the route yourself, try to mimic the turns at an altitude that makes you feel safe. If it feels wrong, well maybe you can think about it. But as you are aware, the definition of "safe" changes among pilots.
Also, does your insurance company knows that you're renting the plane?
My point was that you should expect that sort of thing to happen before you make the decision to rent your aircraft out. There will always be complications with renting things out.
Risk management is an ongoing process.
I would take a good look at your insurance and make sure you are covered for rentals. You also now have to perform 100 hour inspections and you want to make absolutely sure every AD is complied with. I would tell him it’s no longer feasible to rent the aircraft with those requirements and leave it at that.
Different concern - is he getting paid for this? Are the tree huggers interested in a farm for a commercial operation? Is your rental airplane being used for a commercial operation?
Ask him if you can borrow his car to take on the race track for a few laps at 120 mph. If he says "no" he probably isn't as good of a friend to you, as you are to him so stop renting out your plane. Jokes aside, if you're not comfortable with his flying style, just stop renting your plane to him. I wouldn't rent out my plane to anyone - hell even when I'm on the plane with another pilot and they ask for controls I take over if they bank my plane more than 15 degrees for no good reason. My plane, my rules. If you're concerned about him being weird afterwards, just tell him "the group of owners" decided you can no longer rent the plane or some insurance excuse - no renters allowed anymore. I'm sure he can find a flight school or some other place to rent planes if he really wants to go flying.
No, volunteers all
I spoke at length with the insurance guy and we changed some wording and the underwriter was ok. For what it’s worth, I think the problem may go away as the renter might decide it’s not worth writing the next quarterly check. He has not been flying much.
"Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceding 100 hours of time in service the aircraft has received an annual or 100-hour inspection and been approved for return to service in accordance with part 43 of this chapter or has received an inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter. The 100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess time used to reach a place where the inspection can be done must be included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service."
My understanding is that renting out an aircraft is not by itself considered to be a for-hire operation. See, for example, this excerpt from the Greenwood letter:
Scenario 1: Fly By Knight uses an aircraft for both flight instruction and rental. The aircraft has accumulated 95 hours of time in service since the last annual inspection. A rental customer reserves the aircraft for a weekend trip and anticipates flying an additional 10 hours. We assume Fly By Knight does not provide a pilot. Fly By Knight performs a 100-hr/annual inspection upon the aircraft's return.
The fact pattern in scenario 1 does not violate § 91.409(b). As explained above, the 100-hour maintenance inspection requirement depends on how the aircraft is operated. lf the rental customer rents the aircraft and Fly By Knight does not provide the pilot, then the aircraft is not being operated to carry a person (other than a crewmember) for hire, or to provide flight instruction for hire. Thus, the 100-hour maintenance inspection requirement does not apply, and the rental customer may pilot the aircraft the additional 10 hours. Fly By Knight must perform an annual or 100-hour maintenance inspection, however, prior to operating the aircraft to provide flight instruction for hire.