Should pilots admit fault when given a PD?

ATC gives you a number. Do you admit fault over the radio?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 5.9%

  • No

    Votes: 36 52.9%

  • It depends

    Votes: 28 41.2%
  • Total voters
    68
Pi1otguy

Pi1otguy

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
2,477
Location
Fontana, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Fox McCloud
I watched a few videos by VASAviation. Some of these include possible pilot deviations. The thing is that a lot of the pilots apologize or outright admit to it over the radio. Heck, Harrison Ford freely admits to details of his possible PD.

Should pilots avoid admitting to PDs?

I thought the analogue would be traffic tickets. There, the standard advice is to avoid admitting to anything just in case you need to go to court.
 
Pi1otguy said:
I watched a few videos by VASAviation. Some of these include possible pilot deviations. The thing is that a lot of the pilots apologize or outright admit to it over the radio. Heck, Harrison Ford freely admits to details of his possible PD.

Should pilots avoid admitting to PDs?

I thought the analogue would be traffic tickets. There, the standard advice is to avoid admitting to anything just in case you need to go to court.
Click to expand...

What do you think the pilot would achieve by not acknowledging a pilot deviation on frequency? In the case of Mr. Ford (I assume you are referring to landing on a taxiway?) how would not saying anything have changed the pilot deviation?
 
You aren’t being given a citation, not comparable situations imo.

if nobody got hurt I’d be inclined to at least apologize, that’s not an admission to something specific. If somebody got hurt I’d certainly clam up without representation.
 
Today's "kinder and gentler" FAA is supposedly focused on correction rather than punishment. Being forthright about what happened demonstrates a compliance attitude. However, I certainly would not admit to something I was not guilty of or that might be subject to interpretation. So, I guess "it depends".

Good point by Salty above.
 
A. Don't lie or try to cover anything up. That can come back to bite you.
B. Accept without over explaining or talking yourself into a deeper hole. Often times PD can be a minor affair, ATC just wanted to make sure you knew you did something wrong and it doesn't go much further.
C. File a ASRS report!

PS, following A&B have helped me talk my way out of a few driver deviations over the years as well.
 
It depends on what happened. Obvious screw ups I would probably admit it. Something more subtle, I'd want to understand before I apologized.
 
PaulS said:
It depends on what happened. Obvious screw ups I would probably admit it. Something more subtle, I'd want to understand before I apologized.
Click to expand...

More or less this.

But I don't want my admission gleaned off liveatc and posted all over, so I'd wait 'til the phone call to tell them there was a controller deviation, and I was in the right. :D
 
DoubleD said:
Today's "kinder and gentler" FAA is supposedly focused on correction rather than punishment.
Click to expand...

Agree with this based on experience. I was flying with someone one day who started an early descent in the Bravo without being approved. They gave him a number to call. He put them on speakerphone when we landed so I could hear. All they did was give him a polite education as to policy and why he screwed up. No big deal. Just copy and call the number.
 
The most common pilot deviations are altitude busts IFR and airspace busts VFR. In most cases, they have the pilot deviation on the radar tracks.

my answer, as one who has represented pilots in deviations, usually without the FAA knowing I was involved is, it depends. In most cases the best course of action is, other than name, rank and serial number, to listen rather than talk, and get advice on how to handle the follow up.
 
Last edited:
Doc Holliday said:
What do you think the pilot would achieve by not acknowledging a pilot deviation on frequency? In the case of Mr. Ford (I assume you are referring to landing on a taxiway?) how would not saying anything have changed the pilot deviation?
Click to expand...
Mr. Ford also crossed an active runway while another plane was on final. I've never had a PD, so I have no idea if one argues in a court like process on every technicality possible.
 
Pi1otguy said:
Mr. Ford also crossed an active runway while another plane was on final. I've never had a PD, so I have no idea if one argues in a court like process on every technicality possible.
Click to expand...

The answer is no. The deviation is noted, there are usually audio and radar recordings. The ASI calls the pilot in question, sends him a Compliance Action and PBR Brochure, then explains the process to the pilot in which as long as the pilot cooperates the agency cannot bring an enforcement.

There is some paperwork to be filled out for ATC QA, and the CA portion is typically a counseling session, or it can be a request for the pilot to get some additional training which must be documented.
 
I don’t remember the guy who busted (Las Vegas?)bravo airspace without admitting fault....how did that turn out ?
 
Last edited:
Doc Holliday said:
The answer is no. The deviation is noted, there are usually audio and radar recordings. The ASI calls the pilot in question, sends him a Compliance Action and PBR Brochure, then explains the process to the pilot in which as long as the pilot cooperates the agency cannot bring an enforcement.

There is some paperwork to be filled out for ATC QA, and the CA portion is typically a counseling session, or it can be a request for the pilot to get some additional training which must be documented.
Click to expand...

Damn they make you drink PBR if you screw up ;-)
 
Doc Holliday said:
The answer is no. The deviation is noted, there are usually audio and radar recordings. The ASI calls the pilot in question, sends him a Compliance Action and PBR Brochure, then explains the process to the pilot in which as long as the pilot cooperates the agency cannot bring an enforcement.

There is some paperwork to be filled out for ATC QA, and the CA portion is typically a counseling session, or it can be a request for the pilot to get some additional training which must be documented.
Click to expand...
They can but usually don't.
 
No reason to discuss it over the radio. No reason to even admit guilt to ATC on the phone. ATC doesn’t care about you admitting anything. The Brasher is just a formality that a POSSIBLE pilot deviation has occurred not that you are guilty. The phone call is just to let you know that 1) this is the PD that they observed and 2) what action is being taken on their end.

Sometimes the phone call isn’t even to notify you of a possible PD. It’s just to make on on the spot correction. My brother was working CIC in the tower once and instructed a helo CFI to call when he was finished training. Basically the helo CFI was soloing a student but the CFI was getting out of the aircraft while on the runway. Once solo was done, the CFI walked onto the runway to get back in the aircraft. None of this communicated to ATC.My brother was just going to let the CFI know that per LOA, only certain field personnel are allowed to walk on the movement areas. Well, the CFI got an attitude on the phone, said “what is this? The rookie crew working today?” Those comments got back to not just facility management but the airport manger who insisted a PD being written up. A situation that got blown out of proportion when all that should have occurred was a learning moment.
 
Doc Holliday said:
What do you think the pilot would achieve by not acknowledging a pilot deviation on frequency? In the case of Mr. Ford (I assume you are referring to landing on a taxiway?) how would not saying anything have changed the pilot deviation?
Click to expand...
What would a pilot achieve by acknowledging a pilot deviation on frequency? It's already been noted; it's not going to go away because you say sorry on the radio, so save the contrition for when it's useful. What if the deviation the controller saw isn't the deviation you think you did, and now there's a recording of you fessing up to something you don't even know you did....
 
Lindberg said:
What would a pilot achieve by acknowledging a pilot deviation on frequency? It's already been noted; it's not going to go away because you say sorry on the radio, so save the contrition for when it's useful. What if the deviation the controller saw isn't the deviation you think you did, and now there's a recording of you fessing up to something you don't even know you did....
Click to expand...

What if......what if.......what if...... :rolleyes:
 
Pi1otguy said:
I thought the analogue would be traffic tickets. There, the standard advice is to avoid admitting to anything just in case you need to go to court.
Click to expand...

Not for that reason - but because the radio isn't the place to discuss what happened. I'll thank them for the number and call when I'm on the ground and we can have a conversation.

The only time I'm aware that I had a issue, I dialed in a wrong frequency and was out of radio comms for about 2-3 minutes. When I got back in touch, what I said was "my apology, I had a wrong frequency". Ok, I admitted what I did, but it took 2 seconds to do and we were moving forward.
 
PlasticCigar said:
So, you recommend spilling your guts? Go ahead. Every attorney I’ve ever spoken to about pretty much anything has advised me that the more I say, the harder it is for him to get me out of it. But you feel to do things your own way, buddy.
Click to expand...


So the discussion starts out discussing a pilot deviation and admitting to it. Now it’s being compared to a criminal matter. Unreal.

A pilot deviation is a violation of a regulation which is administrative. The vast majority of pilot deviations are being handled as a counseling session which focuses on what happened, why it happened and how to prevent further occurrences, in other words, a time for understanding and learning.

In other instances the Inspector may request the pilot to get some additional training from a CFI of his choice, and to send him the documentation to close it out.

The guidance is clear that as long as the airman is cooperative the FAA will not bring an enforcement. The mechanisms are in place to prevent that from being bypassed.

For a pilot caught in a deviation, the worse thing to do is to avoid the FAA. That is not cooperative, and the agency can proceed to use enforcement to gain compliance.

Want to lawyer up? Go right ahead. The outcome will be the same, and if the lawyer is smart he will advise his client to cooperate.
 
If you made an honest mistake and there weren't any lawsuit worthy consequences I think just tell the truth and get it over with. If you don't think you did anything wrong tell the truth still.

If there are potential lawsuit or career ending consequences yeah maybe lawyer up.
 
BTW, just realized the original question was about admitting over the radio. There's rarely a reason to. Ford's well-publicized initial responses on the ground are less about confession than a normal human reaction to being embarrassed by something we did and not thinking about consequences and legal self-preservation. For an in-air deviation, fixing it is far more important and natural (and creates its own admission) than wasting time with long confessions.
 
PlasticCigar said:
So, a picture of advice from a criminal lawyer (which echoes what someone else already said) and this turns into one of your typical diatribes on how everyone else is ignorant and you have all the answers? How unsurprising.

Apparently, not everyone at the FAA got your memo about “if you are cooperative the FAA will not bring enforcement.” Like my buddy who got hit with a 90 day suspension for busting a TFR. His attorney got it down to 30 days.

But I’m sure you’re more qualified than any attorney to advise people on these matters. Thanks for educating the rest of us.
Click to expand...
When?

Tim

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk
 
Velocity173 said:
No reason to discuss it over the radio. No reason to even admit guilt to ATC on the phone. ATC doesn’t care about you admitting anything. The Brasher is just a formality that a POSSIBLE pilot deviation has occurred not that you are guilty. The phone call is just to let you know that 1) this is the PD that they observed and 2) what action is being taken on their end.

Sometimes the phone call isn’t even to notify you of a possible PD. It’s just to make on on the spot correction. My brother was working CIC in the tower once and instructed a helo CFI to call when he was finished training. Basically the helo CFI was soloing a student but the CFI was getting out of the aircraft while on the runway. Once solo was done, the CFI walked onto the runway to get back in the aircraft. None of this communicated to ATC.My brother was just going to let the CFI know that per LOA, only certain field personnel are allowed to walk on the movement areas. Well, the CFI got an attitude on the phone, said “what is this? The rookie crew working today?” Those comments got back to not just facility management but the airport manger who insisted a PD being written up. A situation that got blown out of proportion when all that should have occurred was a learning moment.
Click to expand...

Humility and taking the chance to learn something go a long way.
 
PlasticCigar said:
So, a picture of advice from a criminal lawyer (which echoes what someone else already said) and this turns into one of your typical diatribes on how everyone else is ignorant and you have all the answers? How unsurprising.

Apparently, not everyone at the FAA got your memo about “if you are cooperative the FAA will not bring enforcement.” Like my buddy who got hit with a 90 day suspension for busting a TFR. His attorney got it down to 30 days.

But I’m sure you’re more qualified than any attorney to advise people on these matters. Thanks for educating the rest of us.
Click to expand...

There's more to your friends story than just a pilot deviation. Guarantee it.
 
To many variables. Much of the time there will be factual evidence left behind, transcripts, radar history, whatever.
 
Most lawyers seem to take the stance of “Just because you did it doesn’t mean you are guilty”. If I messed up, I don’t like admitting it—even to myself, but that’s what responsible people do. YMMV
 
sourdough44 said:
To many variables. Much of the time there will be factual evidence left behind, transcripts, radar history, whatever.
Click to expand...
I guess this is at the heart of it. Do you admit or apologize you lose the ability to challenge the evidence? When's the last time you calibrated that radar? Show me maintenance logs for your transmitter. Etc etc.

But seems kinda moot if it's as @Doc Holliday described it
 
Don’t you hate it when someone that sounds just like you steals your airplane, files a flight plan under your name, violates several FARs in the process, and returns your plane back to your home base? Someone should really do something about that.
 
Rick182 said:
Don’t you hate it when someone that sounds just like you steals your airplane, files a flight plan under your name, violates several FARs in the process, and returns your plane back to your home base? Someone should really do something about that.
Click to expand...

Right.

And don’t forget, when making that claim during a pilot deviation investigation, be prepared to supply the Inspector with the police report. :eek:
 
PlasticCigar said:
Please, tell me more about my friend’s story since you seem to have an almost supernatural level of knowledge about this subject which apparently even extends to knowledge about my friends episode that I don’t even know about (even though I read a detailed letter about the incident which we had to submit to the insurance company for him to be named on my policy).

Either you’re a brilliant clairvoyant attorney experienced in aviation law, or you’re pulling things out of a certain body cavity.

Please, just once, back up something you’re saying with an uncontested fact.

https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/busting-tfrs/
Click to expand...

No problem. See FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 14 and FAA Order 2150.3C.
 
PlasticCigar said:
This sets the basis for their “compliance philosophy” but it in no way eliminates enforcement actions and the people that I personally know who have experienced this “philosophy” have had mixed results.

But, obviously, you have extensive legal experience in these matters so you are qualified to advise people, predict what will happen to them, and tell my why my friend got his suspension.

Did you skip this part in your reading?


Matters involving qualifications or competence of certificate holders will be addressed appropriately by following FAA policy on retraining, reexamination, and/or enforcement. (Refer to Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 2; Volume 5, Chapter 7; and Order 2150.3, chapter 5, paragraph 8.)
Click to expand...

And do you know what that means?

Please read the guidance you highlighted.

Also, just in case you are interested, please also see US Code Title 49, subtitle VII for further reference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top