problems

DutchessFlier said:
...if the $$$$ are high enough, then it is reported as an accident...
Click to expand...
Dollar value of the repairs is no longer a criterion for the NTSB definition of a reportable accident. While it was true a long time ago, that changed quite a while back. See the NTSB regulations (Part 830 in your FAR/AIM book) for the details of what does constitute a reportable accident.
 
I would not play the sexist, I am a poor woman, card with the examiner. Unless "everyone" knows that the instructor is a jerk. All that will do is make you look like you are looking for an excuse. Man up and take it like a Pilot. :)

If the 709 check is because you taxied into a bush, then you should be able to get by with a good oral discussion with the examiner and nothing more. Be sure to stress your personal minimums (weather, taxi speeds...) in your conversation. If the examiner sees, hears, and feels you are safe and walking the talk you will be fine.

Are you registered with faasafety.gov and the Wings Pilot Proficiency program? Your examiner will want to see and hear that you are proactive in your continuing education and commitment to flight safety.

You mentioned a stuck rudder pedal. Did you report this to maintenance? Did you check the rental aircraft log books before your flight, was it within inspection times?

What was the dollar amount of the damage and insurance claim? Was this on a renters policy or the school's policy? You mentioned the school is out of business. Is there perhaps more to the claim and investigation than a simple run of the mill claim? Maybe the insurance company is pushing it...

Lastly, if the instructor did throw you under the bus and was sexist to you ... then you owe the rest of the public his name and flight school.
 
We have that card being played here, locally, but a CFI who is bucking to be apointed DPE. It's truly saddening. I thought more of her before this occurred.
 
Just out of curiosity, what happens after you FAIL a 709 ride? What's the procedure to get flying again?
 
If you do not satisfactorily complete the reexamination, what Bruce said is one possibility. The other is less pleasant.

B. Airman’s Performance Unsatisfactory. The airman must be informed in detail of each deficiency. Additionally, if the airman’s certificate had been temporarily deposited at the FSDO and the temporary deposit term is nearing expiration, a decision must be made to suspend the certificate or to extend the temporary deposit period for another 30 days. If, in the opinion of the inspector, the airman could successfully complete another reexamination by obtaining additional instruction, every effort must be made to encourage the airman to do so.

1) When the inspector decides to allow the airman additional time, the inspector takes the airman's certificate for temporary deposit at the FSDO and issues a temporary certificate. The temporary certificate must have a limitation against carrying passengers and a 30-day expiration date. The airman has 30 days in which to practice or obtain additional dual instruction before being reexamined again.

2) If the inspector determines the airman is unable to establish qualification to hold the certificate or rating, legal enforcement action must be taken to revoke the airman’s certificate and/or ratings. (See FAA Order 2150.3, chapter 8.)
Click to expand...

See all the details on reexamination of a pilot certificate at http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=6B5517EC9C4A91258525734F00766681.
 
Ron Levy said:
If you do not satisfactorily complete the reexamination, what Bruce said is one possibility. The other is less pleasant.



See all the details on reexamination of a pilot certificate at http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=6B5517EC9C4A91258525734F00766681.
Click to expand...

Even if your tickets are revoked, you still own every hour you've ever flown.

All that is required to regain them should be passing knowledge tests and then having recent instruction and retaking checkrides..
 
DutchessFlier said:
Don't worry about the 709 ride....in one of the previous posts, that poster (not the OP I believe) mentioned those fateful words "prop strike" but you have not indicated that in your postings. So, was it a prop strike on the bush? If it was, then the incident has to be reported to the insurance company, with the pssibility of an engine teardown, and if the $$$$ are high enough, then it is reported as an accident...but for goodness sake don't sweat the ride!
Click to expand...

It was prop strike in a bush, although the airplane had no obvious damage. However, as a rental then an engine teardown was required. I was told it was an incident, not an accident. FAA inspector said this also. An accident involves injury or death.


ScottJ said:
I would not play the sexist, I am a poor woman, card with the examiner. Unless "everyone" knows that the instructor is a jerk. All that will do is make you look like you are looking for an excuse. Man up and take it like a Pilot. :)
Click to expand...

That kind of thing really ****es me off. It never occured to me to do that.

I don't want to get into specifics until it's over. Then I have every intention of asking him to his face if he reported me, and why. He ****ed off the wrong person.
 
Doggtyred said:
Even if your tickets are revoked, you still own every hour you've ever flown.

All that is required to regain them should be passing knowledge tests and then having recent instruction and retaking checkrides..
Click to expand...
While that's true, that can be a long and expensive process (depending on how many certificates and ratings you need to regain). Also, you will forever after have to check the "yes" box when they ask about suspensions or revocations, and that's something to be avoided. Best to ensure that you are absolutely prepared to pass a 709 ride on the first try.
 
Unregistered said:
It was prop strike in a bush, although the airplane had no obvious damage. However, as a rental then an engine teardown was required.
Click to expand...
If it was a Lycoming engine, it was probably the fact that it was a Lycoming engine, not that it was a rental aircraft, which made the teardown mandatory. There is an AD out on Lycoming engines making a teardown inspection mandatory for continued airworthiness after certain "prop strike" events. You can read a summary of that in FAA SAIB NE-06-32R1, and that's good stuff for anyone flying behind a Lycoming piston engine to know.

I was told it was an incident, not an accident. FAA inspector said this also. An accident involves injury or death.
Click to expand...
Beware of telling the inspector that on your ride, lest you get 709'd on rules and regs as well as taxiing. The NTSB Part 830 section of your FAR/AIM book will tell you that "substantial damage" triggers the NTSB accident report requirement as well as death or "serious injury." The definitions of all those terms are in that reg. And yes, those are testable items in the Private Pilot PTS.

That said, what you describe having happened was probably not an "accident," as what you describe did not involve death, serious injury, or substantial damage as the NTSB defines those terms. Of course, some "incidents" are also reportable, but if you review that part of the NTSB rules, too, I believe you'll find that what happened isn't an NTSB-reportable "incident," either.
 
We're only hearing one side of this story. Is there any chance that the instructor thought you were a menace to rental planes in general and was looking out for the other FBO you fled to after they got persnickety about their landscaping and their engine teardown expenses?
 
PittsDriver said:
We're only hearing one side of this story. Is there any chance that the instructor thought you were a menace to rental planes in general and was looking out for the other FBO you fled to after they got persnickety about their landscaping and their engine teardown expenses?
Click to expand...

Although that's always a possibility, the timing makes it seem like that's not likely. Instructor was not working there at the time of the incident, and has never flown with the OP.
 
Steve Foley said:
Although that's always a possibility, the timing makes it seem like that's not likely. Instructor was not working there at the time of the incident, and has never flown with the OP.
Click to expand...

I disagree:

So anyway, over the summer, the flight school changed hands, my instructor left, new instructor came. New instructor and I did not hit it off, he gives me the creeps, and I think he's sexist. He doesn't want to let me rent there anymore because six months ago I hit a bush.
Click to expand...
It is a bit hard to follow WRT the multiple new instructors but it sure sounds like the suspect in the whining to FSDO issue was instructing the OP albeit briefly.
 
Last edited:
gismo said:
I disagree:


It is a bit hard to follow WRT the multiple new instructors but it sure sounds like the suspect in the whining to FSDO issue was instructing the OP albeit briefly.
Click to expand...

No, I have never flown with that instructor. Never. What I meant by not hitting it off, is that when I met him I did not like him, and did not want to fly with him.
 
Unregistered said:
No, I have never flown with that instructor. Never. What I meant by not hitting it off, is that when I met him I did not like him, and did not want to fly with him.
Click to expand...

Yep - You don't have to fly with someone to "not hit it off." The guy that replaced my primary instructor was one such person. He kept talking about how he "couldn't wait to get out of here and fly jets." At that point, I knew I'd never fly with him. He was fired a short time later.
 
gismo said:
I disagree:


It is a bit hard to follow WRT the multiple new instructors but it sure sounds like the suspect in the whining to FSDO issue was instructing the OP albeit briefly.
Click to expand...

See post #29
This person was never my instructor, nor have I ever flown with him. He does not know my flying ability.
Click to expand...
 
Update:
I met the FAA inspector and completed the required ride. It was windy and gusty, I did a few takeoffs and landings, and he said we were done. I think he gave me some bonus points for the wind, he said I did well. I talked to him again today, and he said he enjoyed it and it gave him an excuse to get out of the office, and he saw it as a learning experience for me to become a safer pilot. I liked the guy, I liked him much more than the examiner I went to for my checkride. I learned alot from the FAA inspector, so it wasn't a bad experience. He also said that from the FAA point of view, a good letter now goes in my file, I shouldn't worry about it anymore.

I dont know who reported me, and I don't think I care anymore. It doesn't matter. I have a new instructor now and plan to move forward.
 
Unregistered said:
Update:
I met the FAA inspector and completed the required ride. It was windy and gusty, I did a few takeoffs and landings, and he said we were done. I think he gave me some bonus points for the wind, he said I did well. I talked to him again today, and he said he enjoyed it and it gave him an excuse to get out of the office, and he saw it as a learning experience for me to become a safer pilot. I liked the guy, I liked him much more than the examiner I went to for my checkride. I learned alot from the FAA inspector, so it wasn't a bad experience. He also said that from the FAA point of view, a good letter now goes in my file, I shouldn't worry about it anymore.

I dont know who reported me, and I don't think I care anymore. It doesn't matter. I have a new instructor now and plan to move forward.
Click to expand...

Congratulations! That's one monkey off your back, and it's good that you aren't inviting another one up there!
 
Unregistered said:
Update:
I met the FAA inspector and completed the required ride. It was windy and gusty, I did a few takeoffs and landings, and he said we were done. I think he gave me some bonus points for the wind, he said I did well. I talked to him again today, and he said he enjoyed it and it gave him an excuse to get out of the office, and he saw it as a learning experience for me to become a safer pilot. I liked the guy, I liked him much more than the examiner I went to for my checkride. I learned alot from the FAA inspector, so it wasn't a bad experience. He also said that from the FAA point of view, a good letter now goes in my file, I shouldn't worry about it anymore.

I dont know who reported me, and I don't think I care anymore. It doesn't matter. I have a new instructor now and plan to move forward.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a positive experience and a positive attitude. Good on ya!
 
Unregistered said:
Update:
I met the FAA inspector and completed the required ride. It was windy and gusty, I did a few takeoffs and landings, and he said we were done. I think he gave me some bonus points for the wind, he said I did well. I talked to him again today, and he said he enjoyed it and it gave him an excuse to get out of the office, and he saw it as a learning experience for me to become a safer pilot. I liked the guy, I liked him much more than the examiner I went to for my checkride. I learned alot from the FAA inspector, so it wasn't a bad experience. He also said that from the FAA point of view, a good letter now goes in my file, I shouldn't worry about it anymore.

I dont know who reported me, and I don't think I care anymore. It doesn't matter. I have a new instructor now and plan to move forward.
Click to expand...
If you have a good attitude and good skills, they are just filling a square. Nothing more. :)
 
Unregistered said:
I dont know who reported me, and I don't think I care anymore. It doesn't matter. I have a new instructor now and plan to move forward.
Click to expand...

I know some people will defend the the person who reported the OP, but the bottom line is when she moved to the new FBO, they gave her a checkout ride to satisfy their requirements for safe rental. The fact that the original FBO didn't report the incident to the local FSDO also testifies to their assessment of the situation.

My question is this: why did the reporting CFI care about the accident? He didn't have a horse in the race. To me, it does sound like sexism or some other axe to grind that most likely doesn't have anything to do with the OP pilot. I'll guarantee he has mother issues.
 
One of my favorite little tricks to do to someone: Make a small, 7" Oxy-Acetylene balloon (use a cutting torch, tune it in to a nice lean cutting flame then turn the tanks off without touching anything else. When the tip cools, turn the tanks back on and fill the balloon). Tape a model rocket starter to it. Get some single strand copper winding wire. Wire one leg of the model rocket starter to the hot lead on their starter motor to their car, or the "s" terminal of the solenoid and ground the other leg to the engine, and leave it all hidden under the hood of their car. Park down the street with a view. When they hop in and start the car, there will be a very loud bang with no damage (nothing to hold back the force of expansion) and no discernible evidence to lead to you (same as he did). When he gets out of his car shaking and with a big pee stain on the front of his pants, just drive past slowly, smile and wave. Works on every form of bully....
 
Unregistered said:
Update:
I met the FAA inspector and completed the required ride. It was windy and gusty, I did a few takeoffs and landings, and he said we were done. I think he gave me some bonus points for the wind, he said I did well. I talked to him again today, and he said he enjoyed it and it gave him an excuse to get out of the office, and he saw it as a learning experience for me to become a safer pilot. I liked the guy, I liked him much more than the examiner I went to for my checkride. I learned alot from the FAA inspector, so it wasn't a bad experience. He also said that from the FAA point of view, a good letter now goes in my file, I shouldn't worry about it anymore.

I dont know who reported me, and I don't think I care anymore. It doesn't matter. I have a new instructor now and plan to move forward.
Click to expand...
That's good news, and a good attitude.

The inspector sounds like a good'un too. Nice to hear positive stories.
 
Steve Foley said:
And if said bully has a leaking fuel line under the hood, you get to watch him burn alive.
Click to expand...

If he had a leaking fuel line under his hood, the car would have already burned. But thanks for trying to kill the fun (even though you failed). :thumbsup:
 
JesseD said:
Physical violence is boring and mundane. One of the best epigrams in Foundation:

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
Click to expand...

Remind me never to have you with me if I end up in a dark alley some night.

There's a reason that quote is from a fictional series.
 
gismo said:
I guess ending up in a dark alley must be a sign of incompetence.:D
Click to expand...
Or alcohol...and you're in Vegas...and you get confused in the mess that is all the casinos. Suddenly you find yourself alone in a dark alley with a bunch of cash in your pocket.
 
Unregistered said:
I am a new private pilot. Several months ago I had a minor mishap, I accidentally hit a bush while taxiing. I thought something stuck on the rudder pedal, because the airplane stopped turning.
Click to expand...

I didn't notice anywhere what type of airplane this was. Single engine Cessna, by any chance? These airplanes have a centering cam on the nosewheel that prevents any steering action of the wheel when the oleo is extended. There are two spring bungee rods that steer while on the ground and they allow the rudder to move (and they also act as the rudder centering device) in flight.

Now, if that nose oleo is overinflated it can cause the steering to be unresponsive on the ground. Or if the airplane is loaded CG aft, sometimes, if there's just a little too much oleo pressure. Or if the pilot is taxiing into a good wind and is holding the elevator up.

There's also a Canadian SDR on a problem that probably isn't involved here but the owners of high-time Cessnas need to know about it. As the fleet ages we'll see some more failures and then an AD:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/certification/continuing-advisory-2007-04-424.htm

Nosewheel shimmy shouldn't be tolerated. I could see shimmy contributing to such wear.

Sure would be nice to blame this bushstrike on a badly-maintained airplane. Vindicate a good student.

Dan
 
EdFred said:
Remind me never to have you with me if I end up in a dark alley some night.

There's a reason that quote is from a fictional series.
Click to expand...
Or when approached by two armed young men after leaving an ATM... been there, done that, spent the night with the cops explaining what happened.

Violence, particularly deadly force, is a last resort, not because it's ineffective, but because it's often permanent and irrevocable.

But my original post was sarcastic. I don't really recommend violence for the sake of violence. I only recommend it when it is the last or the best way to achieve the desired results.
 
Last edited:
Update from original poster.

The joy just keeps coming. To recap: a year ago while taxiing an airplane, I struck a bush next to the taxiway. I scratched a wingtip. After that, and unbeknownst to me because no one told me anything, the owner opted for an engine inspection, even though there was no damage to the airplane beyond a few scratches, and according to the aviation attorney I have since hired, according to the engine manufacturer and the FAA, what I did was not a prop strike. But anyway, inspection happened (no one told me), the mechanic who pulled it out said the engine was so riddled with corrosion that the airplane should not have been flying. So now they're calling it a prop strike so insurance will pay for a new engine. Insurance paid. Now insurance company is threatening to sue me for entire costs (let me remind you, the airplane has only superficial scratches). I have since learned from my attorney that my worst mistake was admitting I hit a bush. It never occurred to me to lie, but apparently I should have made something up, like maybe a small animal ran in front of me, and I swerved. So, I have also been legally advised that it is much easier for the insurance company to prove I was negligent (since I admitted hitting a bush), than for me to prove that I was not. I have also learned to never admit anything without consulting an attorney first.

I have new utter loathing of insurance companies. I've been told there is no way to get out of this without paying many thousands. And the industry wonders why pilots quit, when a scratched wingtip ends up costing $10,000.
 
Unregistered said:
the mechanic who pulled it out said the engine was so riddled with corrosion that the airplane should not have been flying. So now they're calling it a prop strike so insurance will pay for a new engine. Insurance paid.
...
I have new utter loathing of insurance companies
Click to expand...

So the FBO scammed the insurance company, blamed you, and it is the insurance companies fault?
 
Yeah, the beef is with the FBO. The OP, I would think, has a case against the FBO.

At the very least, this is why one should have renter's insurance. That way the renter's insurance can fight with the FBO insurance and neither party has to be directly involved.
 
So I am confused, did you hit the bush with the prop or the wing? But I also advise you not to answer that question.
 
If you never hit anything with the prop during your incident (and the documentation of the FAA investigation that led to your 709 ride doesn't contradict this), then your lawyer should be talking to the FBO, it would appear that they committed insurance fraud.
 
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