Question about CFI responsibilities

[\__[Ô]__/]

Here's the scenario:
Aircraft owner is a student pilot (not yet signed off for solo). Plane is in a shop in another state for upgrades. Owner can't fly it back alone so goes to the local FBO and hires one of their CFIs to go with him to get the plane. They fly back with the plane.

Upon later review, it turns out the plane is missing some paperwork from the upgrades: at least two logbook entries for work done, the revised weight and balance data from the upgrades, a required flight manual supplement for new equipment (I think this makes the plane not legally airworthy). It also turns out that one of the upgrades isn't configured properly so doesn't work as it should. Another upgrade doesn't work at all. Both of these issues are noticeable on the ground. The plane needs to go back to the shop to get the new upgrades fixed.

Owner is upset. I think most people would understand him being angry at the shop.

But does the owner also have a right to be angry at the CFI for not checking that the required paperwork was there and not confirming that the upgrades worked before flying the plane back??

Put another way, is it reasonable to expect that the CFI hired to pick up the plane should confirm that the upgrades appear to be working and are properly documented in the aircraft logs?

 

[gsengle]

Depends. Did he brief the CFI on the upgrades and ask him to review? Was he paying him for the time to do so?

If he just assumed the CFI would do all that, then it's not the CFIs issue. Imho


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brad Z]

Until they know everything they need to know to truly act as PIC, a student pilot is putting a lot of faith on the CFI to ensure they're legal to fly. That said, there are plenty of flight school CFIs who rely on the school to ensure the plane is legal and wouldn't know what paperwork to look for. Ultimately though, the CFI is the PIC and ultimately responsible.

 

[jordane93]

See above post

 

[gsengle]

This is one of the reasons I generally don't recommend people buy airplanes before they get their private... it's good to get some experience with airplanes before having to deal with owning/maintaining one.

There is a difference between checking if something is legal to fly, and evaluating whether avionics work was all completed to the owners satisfaction...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mondtster]

This is why the aircraft owner should consider hiring a mechanic who is also a CFI to go pick the plane up with them.

Far too many pilots of all ratings and experience level know relatively little about what makes the airplane they fly and/or own legal. It sounds like the owner and CFI in this story might both get an education.

Edit: Short answer, as PIC the CFI was responsible for making sure he flew an airworthy airplane. It doesn't sound like this one was, and it sounds like the CFI might not have even known what to check for to make the determination.

 

[MauleSkinner]

this...

Ultimately though, the CFI is the PIC and ultimately responsible.

There's an old adage that the most dangerous time to fly an airplane is when it comes out of maintenance.

This is also one of the most likely times to fly an illegal airplane. We're taught that stuff as student pilots for that reason, not just so we can pass a checkride.

Just a partial list of things I've found missing coming out of maintenance...

Airworthiness certificate, plus a couple of instances where the wrong N-number was on the certificate.
Registration certificate
Operating manuals/placards/supplements
Weight & Balance, plus several cases where the calculations were obviously wrong (CG moved over an inch due to almost negligible weight additions/subtractions) or where the documents weren't properly signed.
Logbook entries
Seats, interior components, Control surfaces (uh, you guys wanna finish putting the airplane together?)

Not to mention the nice SnapOn tools they tried to give me (unfortunately normally associated with the fact that the airplane wasn't assembled, so they were noticed before I left).

Oh...and I've never picked an airplane up out of upgrades where the upgrades worked 100%.

Learn to be picky, both for your own safety and certificate, as well as for the benefit of the guy paying the bills.

 

[Brad Z]

This is why the aircraft owner should consider hiring a mechanic who is also a CFI to go pick the plane up with them.

Yep, or at least a CFI who's an aircraft owner. There are far too many CFIs whose airworthiness evaluation is to make sure the plane has its AROW documents, since that's all they know really. That said, most of the discrepancies described by the OP above (W&B, non-functioning upgrade) should have been caught by a typical CFI. The flight manual supplement should have been caught too but I suspect that's a common one to overlook.

 

[Clark1961]

According to the FARs the owner is responsible. Anger is rarely appropriate.

 

[Sundancer]

If the owner paid the CFI for instruction, that's what he should have expected. Just a lesson learned. . .

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Depends. Did he brief the CFI on the upgrades and ask him to review? Was he paying him for the time to do so?

I have no idea. I wasn't there.

But I wrote the question assuming the CFI knew the plane was coming out of the shop but wasn't specifically asked to confirm that everything was OK. I was more wondering if it was reasonable to expect the CFI to chime in and say that before departing they ought to (a) check the logs to make sure everything is ok and (b) make an attempt to confirm that the new equipment seems to work.

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Learn to be picky, both for your own safety and certificate, as well as for the benefit of the guy paying the bills.

I agree and I try to do that. I've had the good fortune to work with people who appreciate that.

 

[SkyDog58]

The owner along with the shop is far more responsible and at fault in this story than the CFI. The owner should have done a complete records review and checked for the supplements before the airplane flew. The fact that he was a novice pilot and had an experienced pilot with him does not alleviate his owner responsibilities.

 

[Bobanna]

I'm picking-up a feeling of a responsibility shifting here; the CFI is being put in the position (after the fact) of being an AI. While I certainly understand that the CFI had command authority and responsibility for the flight home, I seriously doubt that he/she had any violations exposure in the absence of an untoward event. Frankly, I wonder if the owner is a remorseful buyer trying to be frugal (nothing wrong with that, per se) and used an out-of-town shop -- penny-wise but (sometimes) dollar-foolish. The owner should be after the shop for a remedy; I predict that his airport and flying community will become a lot less friendly if he tries to implicate the CFI.

 

[Salty]

Seems like it's not the cfi so much as the pic that was negligent. And the owner. That's assuming any of the issues made the plane not airworthy. If the plane was airworthy on paper and passed a preflight inspection, a cfi is not a mechanic, or the owner, not his responsibility. If the plane wasn't airworthy on paper, then both are at fault, but the cfi not because he is a cfi, but because he was pic.

 

[James331]

Not the CFI at all,

The owner has more $$ than neurons, paid to have upgrades done he doesn't even fully understand, got taken for a ride because he didn't know better, and now is throwing a tantrum and blaming others for his incompetence.

 

[dmspilot]

I don't think it's reasonable to assume the CFI is going to do an audit of the logbooks and paperwork, unless he or she has been asked to do so and is paid for it.

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Not the CFI at all,

The owner has more $$ than neurons, paid to have upgrades done he doesn't even fully understand, got taken for a ride because he didn't know better, and now is throwing a tantrum and blaming others for his incompetence.

That's not an unreasonable interpretation of the scenario.

Let me ask you this, putting aside whether or not the CFI had any responsibility to do anything...
If YOU were the CFI hired to go pick up the plane, would YOU have spent any time looking through the logs to see that everything was OK and/or trying out the new equipment prior to departing?

 

[brcase]

The CFI is going to do pretty much what he would have taught the student on about the 2nd or 3rd lesson (maybe even 1st, especially if the student is the owner), Check the AROW documents, if possible will check the Log Books for a current Annual, Transponder inspection, and ELT Battery life. Everything else is pretty much on the Owner and Maintenance Shop.

While not required, if I were doing this flight I would test as much of the new equipment as possible and report any issues to the Owner. As mentioned I usually find a few issues after significant upgrades have been done.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[MauleSkinner]

I don't think it's reasonable to assume the CFI is going to do an audit of the logbooks and paperwork, unless he or she has been asked to do so and is paid for it.

I think it's something that he CFI and owner should've done...but I don't think it's reasonable to assume the CFI would do it for free, either.

 

[MauleSkinner]

That's not an unreasonable interpretation of the scenario.

Let me ask you this, putting aside whether or not the CFI had any responsibility to do anything...
If YOU were the CFI hired to go pick up the plane, would YOU have spent any time looking through the logs to see that everything was OK and/or trying out the new equipment prior to departing?

Let me turn that question around...If YOU were the CFI, would YOU want to ensure that the airplane is legal to fly?

Just for curiosity sake, when it was determined that the paperwork was missing, who was looking at the paperwork and why?

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Just for curiosity sake, when it was determined that the paperwork was missing, who was looking at the paperwork and why?

I was looking at it, to confirm what was done and make sure everything was there before I flew it in the future.

 

[citizen5000]

Here's the scenario:
Aircraft owner is a student pilot (not yet signed off for solo). Owner can't fly it back alone so goes to the local FBO and hires one of their CFIs to go with him to get the plane. They fly back with the plane.

is it reasonable to expect that the CFI hired to pick up the plane should confirm that the upgrades appear to be working and are properly documented in the aircraft logs?

Ask youself the question: Who is responsible for the aircraft? The owner or the CFI? Even if the CFI were hired to ferry to plane back by himself the owner is still responsible for the plane and it's logbooks. http://avstop.com/technical/planesense/responsibilities.htm

 

[MauleSkinner]

Just to throw some regulatory references in here, since nobody has...

§91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

§91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.

(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

§91.9 Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may operate a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, markings, and placards, or as otherwise prescribed by the certificating authority of the country of registry.

(b) No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft—

(1) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is required by §21.5 of this chapter unless there is available in the aircraft a current, approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual or the manual provided for in §121.141(b); and

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof.

The appropriate supplements are part of the "Flight Manual", and they may specify additional pilot manuals that need to be on board.

§91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.
(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless—

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under §43.7 of this chapter; and

(2) The maintenance record entry required by §43.9 or §43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made.

And, of course, since the term "operate" was used...

Operate, with respect to aircraft, means use, cause to use or authorize to use aircraft, for the purpose (except as provided in §91.13 of this chapter) of air navigation including the piloting of aircraft, with or without the right of legal control (as owner, lessee, or otherwise).

 

[gkainz]

depends on how they "picked up the airplane" ... will this be on the next episode of "Airplane Repo"?

 

[RussR]

I have done this type of flight several times - however, it has always been for (or with) an owner with whom I had a previous relationship. As a result, it was truly in my best interest to act as the owner's "agent" (or if they were present, "consultant"). However, this was cleared up with the owner ahead of time. "Sure, I'll go ahead and pick your plane up for you - it'll be at my normal hourly rate. What are you having done? I'll go ahead and make sure the records are right and test things out on the way back and let you know if they work." That kind of thing - prior communication is important. Because let alone the legal requirements, that's the way to keep attracting return customers.

(For example, one owner ended up spending about $40k on avionics upgrades based primarily on my recommendation. And then I was the one to pick the plane up from the shop. You can bet I did some thorough checks, how would it look if the equipment I recommended didn't work right?)

However, if someone called me out of the blue asking if I could pick up his plane and fly it back with him, how much I did would depend on what I knew of this person, their experience level with ownership, and what was agreed on. Check the basic log entries? Sure, whether they wanted me to or not. Test the new equipment to make sure it's installed correctly? Maybe, it depends on what we had discussed. Dig deep into the details of the amended weight and balance sheet? Probably not, unless it was something major. I would offer to do various things of course, but so much depends on the actual interaction and what we talked about.

 

[James331]

That's not an unreasonable interpretation of the scenario.

Let me ask you this, putting aside whether or not the CFI had any responsibility to do anything...
If YOU were the CFI hired to go pick up the plane, would YOU have spent any time looking through the logs to see that everything was OK and/or trying out the new equipment prior to departing?

Sure, I could go through the logs, talk to the AP and the owner to see what was paid for, verify the papers, do a shake down flight, then fly you home, but that ain't hiring me as a "CFI", and that's going to be a lot more than just paying me flight time, that's also not just a job for any green horn or big brand school CFI.

Fact is the guy in question got what he paid for, a CFI to fly him and his plane home.

 

[mondtster]

That's not an unreasonable interpretation of the scenario.

Let me ask you this, putting aside whether or not the CFI had any responsibility to do anything...
If YOU were the CFI hired to go pick up the plane, would YOU have spent any time looking through the logs to see that everything was OK and/or trying out the new equipment prior to departing?

I would have looked through the logs to make sure the log entry was made and that the plane was legal. That also means I would be looking for the flight manual supplement and weight and balance information, assuming there should be updated information.

Would I have tried out the new equipment? Maybe or maybe not. Was I hired to fly an acceptance flight or just hired to pick the plane up?

 

[ChemGuy]

Not the CFI at all,

The owner has more $$ than neurons, paid to have upgrades done he doesn't even fully understand, got taken for a ride because he didn't know better, and now is throwing a tantrum and blaming others for his incompetence.

Sounds like a lot of Americans these days, pilots or not...

 

[James331]

Sounds like a lot of Americans these days, pilots or not...

Don't think that's anywhere near exclusive to Americans bud. But I do know it is a mighty trendy thing to say

 

[gsengle]

Don't think that's anywhere near exclusive to Americans bud. But I do know it is a mighty trendy thing to say

Well, we've done that to ourselves :-/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SkyDog58]

How many CFIs on here pour over the logs before flying one of your school or FBO planes that just came out of annual?

How many other pilots here do it for a plane you rent or a club plane?

 

[denverpilot]

According to the FARs the owner is responsible. Anger is rarely appropriate.

One of the local DPEs around here will flunk you for that half-answer.

Owner/Operator is responsible for the maintenance.
PIC is responsible to make sure the aircraft is airworthy before flying it.

Both can technically be violated...

 

[TommyG]

How many CFIs on here pour over the logs before flying one of your school or FBO planes that just came out of annual?

How many other pilots here do it for a plane you rent or a club plane?

You are 1000% correct.

I have been around the airports, FBOs, and schools for a good 25 years. Have never had anyone come in and ask for the logs before they rent a plane.

And as far as the airplane owner in this post, he has no right to be ****ed at anyone but himself. He should know to check for the proper entries.

And as far as the high court of the CFI should have known better, BS!! Are you all gonna sit here and say that you check the logs in every plane you have flown?

 

[gsengle]

You are 1000% correct.

I have been around the airports, FBOs, and schools for a good 25 years. Have never had anyone come in and ask for the logs before they rent a plane.

And as far as the airplane owner in this post, he has no right to be ****ed at anyone but himself. He should know to check for the proper entries.

And as far as the high court of the CFI should have known better, BS!! Are you all gonna sit here and say that you check the logs in every plane you have flown?

There is an argument that the CFI new it was being picked up from a shop doing major work tho... still, owners expectations were too high.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gsengle]

Avionics upgrades are major aren't we prob talking about a 337 form, new flight supplements ? (Major alteration or repair)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mondtster]

Avionics upgrades are major aren't we prob talking about a 337 form, new flight supplements ? (Major alteration or repair)

It's probably safe to assume it was avionics work but I didn't see mention to that effect. Also, for what it's worth, I also don't see mention validating that the work actually required a flight manual supplement or the missing logbook entries. It appears to just be the OP asserting that there is paperwork and logbook entries missing (although he's probably right).

I'll restate my original position at this point - it might have been best to send a mechanic who is also a CFI to fetch the plane, they would likely be the most familiar with what paperwork and entries should be there and have the ability to give the owner flight instruction on the trip home. A CFI who also owns an airplane might be a close second.

At this point, what the story sounds like to me is an owner who blew all his cash on airplane upgrades/work and then went looking for the cheapest CFI he could find to bring the plane home. He probably got what he paid for. This seems to be a common occurrence for some reason, despite the fact that even an overqualified CFI/Mechanic expecting to be compensated $1,000/day to retrieve the plane will ultimately fall into the noise when it comes to cost of ownership.

 

[gsengle]

My observation having done a number of avionics "upgrades" through the years is they all tend to require a 337 for equipment changing in the panel I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SkyDog58]

It's probably safe to assume it was avionics work but I didn't see mention to that effect. Also, for what it's worth, I also don't see mention validating that the work actually required a flight manual supplement or the missing logbook entries. It appears to just be the OP asserting that there is paperwork and logbook entries missing (although he's probably right).

I'll restate my original position at this point - it might have been best to send a mechanic who is also a CFI to fetch the plane, they would likely be the most familiar with what paperwork and entries should be there and have the ability to give the owner flight instruction on the trip home. A CFI who also owns an airplane might be a close second.

At this point, what the story sounds like to me is an owner who blew all his cash on airplane upgrades/work and then went looking for the cheapest CFI he could find to bring the plane home. He probably got what he paid for. This seems to be a common occurrence for some reason, despite the fact that even an overqualified CFI/Mechanic expecting to be compensated $1,000/day to retrieve the plane will ultimately fall into the noise when it comes to cost of ownership.

Why the requirement for a CFI? I agree an A&P who is a pilot would be a good candidate for picking up the airplane but why the need for a CFI? Besides, if someone wants to be an owner, they need to understand the requirements that go along with being one.

 

[mondtster]

Why the requirement for a CFI? I agree an A&P who is a pilot would be a good candidate for picking up the airplane but why the need for a CFI? Besides, if someone wants to be an owner, they need to understand the requirements that go along with being one.

Simply because it sounded like in the original post the student pilot owner wanted flight instruction on the trip home. Otherwise, you're 100% correct. I'd hire a mechanic pilot to go get the thing over a straight CFI any day. The training can commence once the plane is home.