Significance of “at your own risk”

NoHeat

NoHeat

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
5,026
Location
Iowa City, IA
Display Name
Display name:
17
I often hear a tower instruct helicopters to land at your own risk on the ramp.

Here’s what the FAA instructs controllers:

“If landing is requested to an area not visible, an area not authorized for helicopter use, an unlighted nonmovement area at night, or an area off the airport, and traffic is not a factor, use the following phraseology.

PHRASEOLOGY-

LANDING AT (requested location) WILL BE AT YOUR OWN RISK (reason and additional instructions, as necessary).”

That sounds like a legal disclaimer - is that that the intent? Or is the thought something other than legal liability?

I just think it’s curious that Tower instructions to airplanes don’t have a disclaimer. You’re told to taxi an airplane in a movement area, for example, and no disclaimer is said. Does that absence imply that the FAA is accepting some kind of legal liability for you on a taxiway?
 
A well trained RW pilot is a little different from a well-trained FW pilot. For example, a proficient RW pilot is trained in remote confined area ops, water landings, roof top/pinnacle and slope landings. Most FW pilots don't get this training. RW pilots don't like a lot of taxiing. Not unusual for a helicopter to get that reminder when landing on a hospital rooftop two miles from the tower. Yeh. Yeh. Yeh.
 
I think it’s simply added for helicopter ops because is could be misconstrued by the pilot that ATC is accepting responsibility for sanitizing the takeoff / landing environment. Putting the disclaimer in there makes it clear that the helicopter operator is own their own when operating in those areas. Kinda like asking the pilot if they can maintain their own terrain / obstruction clearance when asking for an IFR clearance below the MIA / MVA. Puts the responsibility on the pilot.

I suppose with airplanes and taxing it’s generally obvious what are movement areas vs non movement areas. Unfortunately I’ve heard far too many airplane pilots not understand the distinction in the two.
 
ATC will issue “at your own risk” in a variety of situations but generally when take off or landing is requested from/to a non-movement area or an area not under control by ATC. This is different from taxing in a non-movement area.

Maybe it has a liability component but I just see it as common sense. If you’re taking off or landing directly from a ramp, ATC isn’t controlling other aircraft taxing around or people who may be walking to/from aircraft so the pilot becomes responsible for determining if the takeoff or landing is safe.
 
You'll hear the same thing if an airplane lands or takes off on a non-runway.
 
NoHeat said:
I often hear a tower instruct helicopters to land at your own risk on the ramp.

Here’s what the FAA instructs controllers:

“If landing is requested to an area not visible, an area not authorized for helicopter use, an unlighted nonmovement area at night, or an area off the airport, and traffic is not a factor, use the following phraseology.

PHRASEOLOGY-

LANDING AT (requested location) WILL BE AT YOUR OWN RISK (reason and additional instructions, as necessary).”

That sounds like a legal disclaimer - is that that the intent? Or is the thought something other than legal liability?

I just think it’s curious that Tower instructions to airplanes don’t have a disclaimer. You’re told to taxi an airplane in a movement area, for example, and no disclaimer is said. Does that absence imply that the FAA is accepting some kind of legal liability for you on a taxiway?
Click to expand...
If someone ever sues because of an incident with a taxiing airplane in a non movement area and a Jury gets conned into thinking it's the Tower's fault and the FAA has to get out the checkbook, it'll probably go in the book for that also.
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
If someone ever sues because of an incident with a taxiing airplane in the movement area and a Jury gets conned into thinking it's the Tower's fault and the FAA has to get out the checkbook, it'll probably go in the book for that also.
Click to expand...

Yeah, at my last job I seem to remember FAT telling us to taxi at our own risk during low visibility situations.
 
kayoh190 said:
Yeah, at my last job I seem to remember FAT telling us to taxi at our own risk during low visibility situations.
Click to expand...
I had thought the OP was referencing non-movement areas about taxiing aircraft. I edited my post to non-movement. I don't think there is a requirement to say 'at your own risk' to taxiing aircraft on the movement area due to visibilty.
 
Lindberg said:
You'll hear the same thing if an airplane lands or takes off on a non-runway.
Click to expand...

I got a “land at your own risk” clearance once when I asked to land on a runway that intersected with another runway on which a disabled (gear up) aircraft was stuck and unmoving. There was plenty of room for a safe landing on my runway.

Edit to add: the guy had geared up right in front of me as I was cleared to land #2 on the original runway. When he had the mishap, they temporarily closed the airport and put me in a holding pattern for a while. After 10-15 minutes and with no progress on the mishap airplane, I suggested that I would like to land on the crossing runway and that's when I got the (mildly reluctant) "land at your own risk" clearance.
 
Last edited:
I’m guessing from the replies that “land at your own risk” isn’t intended to be a legal statement about liability, but rather advice about separation: the pilot is responsible for providing separation without help from the tower, when given that instruction, and it could be for a helicopter or airplane, and for a movement area or more often a non-movement area. Does that sound right?
 
Sometimes it just means, "I don't have the authority to ok a landing there, so you are on your own." I know if two examples in the ATC manual. Helicopters on non-movement areas and closed runways.
 
There is a seaplane base about two miles from the twr at KHUM. Twr issues that reminder along with "Report down and clear."
 
NoHeat said:
I’m guessing from the replies that “land at your own risk” isn’t intended to be a legal statement about liability, but rather advice about separation: the pilot is responsible for providing separation without help from the tower, when given that instruction, and it could be for a helicopter or airplane, and for a movement area or more often a non-movement area. Does that sound right?
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
I got a land at your own risk at an airport that had just repaved a runway but the markings hadn't been painted on it. The runway was "open" but landing was at your own risk. I ended up going around and not landing because it was a very wide and long runway and as I descended I lost all reference as to how high above the pavement I was due to the sun angle and black pavement--kind of like a glassy water landing for a seaplane. It was unexpected but uneventful.
 
Disclaimer, pure and simple. I’ve gotten it taxiiing in low vis as well. Basically let’s you know the controlling agency cant guarantee all that the regs say they can.

What else can it be? Just a poor choice of words, like calling controllers “controllers”, rather than “advisors”... Let’s face it, EVERYTHING you do in aviation is at YOUR OWN risk.
 
Probably legal disclaimer but I always treated it as a reminder I was alone in assessing the operation. While true that it’s always “just” the pic if I’m doing an ILS to a big piece of concrete and then following a wide yellow line all the way to a ramp then there is a lot of assessment already done for me.
 
At you own risk means if you walk on an icey sidewalk, it is your silly little *.

(asterisk)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top