Being PIC

She told him well in advance that she might have to go around.
 
olasek said:
Sounds a lot better.
Click to expand...

LOL yes we are talking about briefing passengers IN ADVANCE of any flight out of the ordinary. He's been on very few flights, so, to him, a go around would be "different". To a pilot, however, I would hope they know I am always ready to go around. Therefore, I might not brief a pilot like I did brief my passenger that day (when it was a safe time to do so, not while I was landing the plane etc)
 
steingar said:
Very, very, very smart move. Only the smallest fraction of individuals truly admit when they aren't equal to the task. If more pilots were like you GA would be the safest, not the most dangerous, mode of transportation.
Click to expand...


I didn't know that. Is that true? Do I need to buy a parachute?

-John
 
"So, haha, I trust that you will won't kill me on this flight."

"I have a vested interest in keeping me alive, so I think you're good."

I've never gotten an argument to that response.
 
Sac Arrow;919715[B said:
]"So, haha, I trust that you will won't kill me on this flight."
[/B]

"I have a vested interest in keeping me alive, so I think you're good."

I've never gotten an argument to that response.
Click to expand...

I have a little different response to that statement. Mine goes like this.

"Ya gotta go sometime."
Click to expand...

Or sometimes this.

"Ya gotta go somehow."
Click to expand...

Similar theme though.
 
Anthony said:
I have a little different response to that statement. Mine goes like this.



Or sometimes this.



Similar theme though.
Click to expand...

I ususally tell them to go before getting on the airplane.
 
I don't take people for rides... The exceptions being family and fellow pilots and one long time friend...
When you give rides the public - public being coworkers, casual acquaintances, and Joe's brother's friend, etc. - you are putting up for grabs everything you own and will ever own... It is all risk and no reward - lose/lose....

You can do as you wish, but that has been my policy for over 50 years and has not failed me yet...
It started back in the 60's when I didn't have anything but an old BC-12D T-Craft and a fella hanging around the airport asked for a ride and as we were putting the airplane back he said to the effect, well if we had crashed and died my wife could garnish your wife's paycheck for life to get even... Driving home from the airport it occcured to me that jokes are disguised intent... Casual rides stopped from that day on...
 
Dr. O said:
I don't take people for rides... The exceptions being family and fellow pilots and one long time friend...
When you give rides the public - public being coworkers, casual acquaintances, and Joe's brother's friend, etc. - you are putting up for grabs everything you own and will ever own... It is all risk and no reward - lose/lose....

You can do as you wish, but that has been my policy for over 50 years and has not failed me yet...
It started back in the 60's when I didn't have anything but an old BC-12D T-Craft and a fella hanging around the airport asked for a ride and as we were putting the airplane back he said to the effect, well if we had crashed and died my wife could garnish your wife's paycheck for life to get even... Driving home from the airport it occcured to me that jokes are disguised intent... Casual rides stopped from that day on...
Click to expand...

That's interesting, I never considered that aspect of it. My question is, how do you know a fellow pilot's wife won't do the same thing? That's assuming a family member wouldn't do the same.
 
redtail said:
That's interesting, I never considered that aspect of it. My question is, how do you know a fellow pilot's wife won't do the same thing? That's assuming a family member wouldn't do the same.
Click to expand...
You don't. There was a story many years back of a pilot who truly loved to fly, crashed his plane, and the wife sued everyone that had nything to do with anything on the plane.
And that, my friend, is the reason aviation is so damned expensive. Were it treated like an automobile, you'd sue GM, not the guy who made the radio, the seats, the tires, or the widget that holds the watchamacallit onto the dash.
Aviation taps just about everyone.
 
Sac Arrow said:
"So, haha, I trust that you will won't kill me on this flight."

"I have a vested interest in keeping me alive, so I think you're good."

I've never gotten an argument to that response.
Click to expand...

Haha.

Mine goes like this:
Them: "Please be careful while I'm in the plane"
Me: "Sorry, but my life isn't more valuable with you in the plane"
 
silver-eagle said:
Were it treated like an automobile, you'd sue GM, not the guy who made the radio, the seats, the tires, or the widget that holds the watchamacallit onto the dash.
Aviation taps just about everyone.
Click to expand...
Oh, that's not just aviation. My Dad worked in the trucking industry -- he was VP of product engineering and chief engineer for Fruehauf Corp. He spent a lot of his time as an expert witness and/or consultant on lawsuits, both those involving Fruehauf and those involving other manufacturers.

When a rig crashed or there was some accident involving a trailer, even due to massive incompetence or stupidity on the part of the operator, EVERYONE got sued. Tractor manufacturer, trailer manufacturer, tire company, employers, state roads department, terminal that loaded the truck, everybody.

Operator ignores warnings, defeats safeties and opens the hatch on a pressurized tank and loses an arm or two? Sue everybody. Op falls asleep, hits a light pole and the rig is destroyed by fire? Sue 'em all. The stories he told ranged from amusing to disgusting... more of them on the disgusting end of the scale.
 
Dr. O said:
I don't take people for rides... The exceptions being family and fellow pilots and one long time friend...
When you give rides the public - public being coworkers, casual acquaintances, and Joe's brother's friend, etc. - you are putting up for grabs everything you own and will ever own... It is all risk and no reward - lose/lose....

You can do as you wish, but that has been my policy for over 50 years and has not failed me yet...
It started back in the 60's when I didn't have anything but an old BC-12D T-Craft and a fella hanging around the airport asked for a ride and as we were putting the airplane back he said to the effect, well if we had crashed and died my wife could garnish your wife's paycheck for life to get even... Driving home from the airport it occcured to me that jokes are disguised intent... Casual rides stopped from that day on...
Click to expand...

Its nice that my club includes 2M 'smooth' liability coverage.

I'll give a ride to anyone who wants to go fly. Always a treat to introduce someone to GA.

I understand the OP's reasons for not wanting to go fly with someone who is reluctant.

I can relate to the OP feeling green.. after getting my instrument rating I did not take any passengers up in IMC until I had 7 hours or so of solo time in actual including several approaches. Though i had the skills and license, confidence was not yet 100%.
 
Like just about every pilot, I have taken a number of people up for their first flight. If they are nervous, I spend extra time before the flight explaining aerodynamics, flight controls and then show them everything in detail on preflight. During the flight, they get the yoke for a few minutes. At some time, I point out to them that the throttle is at idle and we have full control in a 500 FPM descent (172). I reduce power while distracting them with having their eyes outside finding something on the ground, and reduce power by taking eight to 12 seconds to get to idle. That's a simulated engine failure, they learn, and 100% of them said it made them much more comfortable for another flight experiencing what it's actually like.
 
ateamer said:
Like just about every pilot, I have taken a number of people up for their first flight. If they are nervous, I spend extra time before the flight explaining aerodynamics, flight controls and then show them everything in detail on preflight. During the flight, they get the yoke for a few minutes. At some time, I point out to them that the throttle is at idle and we have full control in a 500 FPM descent (172). I reduce power while distracting them with having their eyes outside finding something on the ground, and reduce power by taking eight to 12 seconds to get to idle. That's a simulated engine failure, they learn, and 100% of them said it made them much more comfortable for another flight experiencing what it's actually like.
Click to expand...

That is very interesting. I haven't personally heard of anyone showing engine failures but I understand why you did it.
 
Note that I don't pull power like a CFI does for a simulated failure. Power gets gradually reduced so the passenger doesn't realize it until you point it out.
 
Haha so Friday I took a couple friends from the gym on a short trip. The lady sat in the front and it was her first GA flight.

"I guess I should have asked you first, but how long have you been flying?"

"Counting today?"

Dude in the back was all busting out laughing.
 
Most, if not all, personal injury attorneys are also top notch salesmen. They will convince most anyone that they are complete idiots if they do not file suit. "You are not suing your friend, your suing the insurance company."

If someone can glean money from an injury caused by your aircraft, or yourself, it will be gleaned, no matter how close a friend or relative they are.

-John
 
John Baker said:
Most, if not all, personal injury attorneys are also top notch salesmen. They will convince most anyone that they are complete idiots if they do not file suit. "You are not suing your friend, your suing the insurance company."

If someone can glean money from an injury caused by your aircraft, or yourself, it will be gleaned, no matter how close a friend or relative they are.
Click to expand...
Per that logic, shouldn't I also refuse to ever carry passengers in my car?
 
Jim_R said:
Per that logic, shouldn't I also refuse to ever carry passengers in my car?
Click to expand...

Depends on your application of logic. It could also mean 'don't worry about pax in your plane either' depending on your thought process.
 
Jim_R said:
Per that logic, shouldn't I also refuse to ever carry passengers in my car?
Click to expand...

It depends on your willingness to risk a lawsuit, due to your car or airplane, even your home. This is why we have liability insurance on our planes, our cars, our homes, so our nations attorneys will have guaranteed income.

Remember, it is not your mother in law who twisted her ankle on your lawn that is suing you, it's her attorney. Anyway, she is not suing you, she is suing your insurance company.

-John
 
John Baker said:
It depends on your willingness to risk a lawsuit, due to your car or airplane, even your home. This is why we have liability insurance on our planes, our cars, our homes, so our nations attorneys will have guaranteed income.

Remember, it is not your mother in law who twisted her ankle on your lawn that is suing you, it's her attorney. Anyway, she is not suing you, she is suing your insurance company.

-John
Click to expand...

That's not correct either, it's her medical insurance provider suing for subrogation or it is her. Lawyers don't sue, they only processes their clients request to sue. They are only as the phrase goes, "Mouthpieces". Only the damaged party can sue, if you can't show damages, no go.
 
Henning said:
That's not correct either, it's her medical insurance provider suing for subrogation or it is her. Lawyers don't sue, they only processes their clients request to sue. They are only as the phrase goes, "Mouthpieces". Only the damaged party can sue, if you can't show damages, no go.
Click to expand...

An excellent observation, however, if an attorney is handling a lawsuit on a contingency basis where that attorney will "earn" one third or more of any successful litigation or settlement in that case, that lawyer is doing a whole lot more than simply processing a suit, the lawyer has become a major partner in the lawsuit.

If you had the opportunity to possibly attain one third of a ten million dollar award, it seems to me you would be selling your butt off in order to be the lawyer handling the case.

To suggest that a PI attorney working on a contingency basis is simply processing their clients request to sue is stretching it quite a bit, at least in my opinion.

-John
 
The lawyer needs a client in order to sue. A lawyer cannot sue without. The 'Intent' of suing is not that of the lawyer, it's of the injured party. A lawyer cannot force Aunt Marge into suing you for the fall.
 
Henning said:
The lawyer needs a client in order to sue. A lawyer cannot sue without. The 'Intent' of suing is not that of the lawyer, it's of the injured party. A lawyer cannot force Aunt Marge into suing you for the fall.
Click to expand...

Again, all very true, but if Aunt Marge was seriously injured enough to be life altering, and a potential lawsuit could bring well into the millions, that PI lawyer will be pushing ethics to the limits attempting to subtly convince Aunt Marge what would be best for her in the long term.

The lawyer wants to be her representative in the courts. Anyone who wants something from someone else, especially if we are talking the possibility of millions of dollars, will do all they can to sell them on the idea.

If Aunt Marge's injury was primarily to her dignity, and any possible settlement or award will only be in the low thousands, that attorney will not go to the same effort of convincing Marge to sue as he would were it as described above.

A lot of the attorney's actions and efforts will also be influenced by the size of the law firm, and how desperate they are for money.

Attorney's, usually, live at a much higher standard of living than most people. They need a larger monthly cash flow. Many do not always allow ethics to influence their behavior, especially during a cash squeeze.

-John
 
Granted, but the 'ethics' that count at the end are strictly those of Aunt Marge. Besides, if she had an injury life altering or not, there is liability and responsibility whether a relative or not, that's why there's insurance.
 
heh, look at all the lawyer's commercials begging for people who would like to file suit. did you slip, did you take this drug, were you born in this year at this hospital, etc. it's how they make their money.

if I take casual acquaintances up I have them sign a statement of understanding waiver. this is of your own free will, understand?
 
raider said:
heh, look at all the lawyer's commercials begging for people who would like to file suit. did you slip, did you take this drug, were you born in this year at this hospital, etc. it's how they make their money.

if I take casual acquaintances up I have them sign a statement of understanding waiver. this is of your own free will, understand?
Click to expand...


If you don't want to drink, will you go buy beer because of a commercial? I'm not really defending the practice of ambulance chasing, but lets put the blame of litigation where it belongs, with the litigants looking for a jackpot, not the lawyers. As I say over and over, the problem is with our entire cultural thinking, not one or two select components in the system.
 
raider said:
if I take casual acquaintances up I have them sign a statement of understanding waiver. this is of your own free will, understand?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that won't prevent your passenger's relatives from suing you for negligence or some such. They are not bound by your agreement.

-Skip
 
Well, the two fellow pilots I take flying also take me flying... We are going to Oshkosh as a group this year... One has a C180 and the other an R22 and I have the Apache... We swap time in each others machine.. Could the widows sue? Of course. but since there is the friend factor the risk is less - not zero, just less... Cory Lidle's widow proved that you can sue anyone no matter how remote the connection...

Written releases, etc. are worth less than the paper they are written on.. ATLA has made sure the courts have ruled that no one can sign away the trial bar's Constitutional right to gainful employment..

Young guys (and gals) are vastly less likely to draw the attention of a contingency lawyer... The perception of having a deep pocket is like waving raw meat on front of a slavering wolf (contingency fee attorney)... As you go along in life through the dint of hard work and savings you become raw meat... Best you not be too visible if you have anything that could be taken by the courts...
 
It is why some people own their airplane in an LLC. Don't know if this will shield negligence though. Maybe one of our attorneys will chime in.

Liability is certainly more of an issue now, but don't forget the greedy plaintiffs in the matter. No plaintiff, no lawyer, no law suit. I figure if I have to worry about being sued all the time, and stop doing things I enjoy, then its time to hang it up.
 
Anthony said:
It is why some people own their airplane in an LLC. Don't know if this will shield negligence though. Maybe one of our attorneys will chime in.

Liability is certainly more of an issue now, but don't forget the greedy plaintiffs in the matter. No plaintiff, no lawyer, no law suit. I figure if I have to worry about being sued all the time, and stop doing things I enjoy, then its time to hang it up.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty certain that you would have to operate it on behalf of the corporation to be shielded from negligence, just like for any other vehicle of piece of equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top