Who does the preflight?

[Everskyward]

In our world the SIC does the preflight, inside and out. Of course the PIC is free to recheck everything but I don't think that is common unless the SIC is new. I know one person who would always recheck his own O2 though.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

My usual CFI will often visually check the fuel tanks and the oil himself, and if he doesn't he'll always ask me for the status of both. Completely understandable, and a very good idea. How would the conversation with the FSDO go after we put a plane in a field otherwise?

Just because someone else checks something, does not stop you from checking it as well. If someone decides to "help," you can simply ignore them and continue doing your thing. Also, I am not offended in the least bit if someone else wants to check something if they're going to be with me on the flight, provided everything is put back correctly.

This doesn't require an experimental aircraft. My preflights and checklists on my Aztec are mine, too.

Yep. I've made a checklist for every airplane I've flown.

Count me in on the "use my own checklists" group. I start from the factory checklists, but one of my favorite examples of checklist stupidity is:

MASTER....................ON
FUEL GAUGES............CHECK
MASTER....................OFF

I prefer "Fuel - Sump,Qty,Gauges" (where Qty is a look into the tank). If the tanks are full and the gauges read empty, turn on the master, ya idiot. The overly wordy manufacturer checklists tend to mean that they're printed in small print and Everything'sReallyCloseTogetherAndHardToRead, thus things that may be important are easy to miss. OTOH, on some (older) airplanes, the checklists may be inadequate, and on many airplanes the wordiness of the normal procedures is contrasted with the LACK of some important items in the emergency procedures! Making my own checklists helps me to make sure the important stuff will really get done.

 

[dmccormack]

Count me in on the "use my own checklists" group. I start from the factory checklists, but one of my favorite examples of checklist stupidity is:...

Wasn't there a long thread on here about "legal" vs "Illegal" checklists??

I'm searching...

But I'm remembering it was the dumbest insistence on form over function I'd seen argued in a long while.
Here are my thoughts:

• POH in the airplane? yes.
• You happen to have a piece of paper or a book you made to help you in same? Yes
• Good for you.

Also, I've been in older airplanes (my own included) with no POH or a simple pamphlet "Owners manual."

Smartest thing I heard one time in an older cockpit was "Checklist? Yeah -- it's right here in front of me..." while pointing to the panel and a few placards.

 

[poadeleted20]

In our world the SIC does the preflight, inside and out.

Your world being, of course, a Part 121 air carrier, right?

 

[Everskyward]

Your world being, of course, a Part 121 air carrier, right?

No, I work for a 135 air carrier/management company. All the airplanes I have flown in the past several years are true two-pilot airplanes, though.

 

[John Baker]

I had a flight instructor who emphasized that whatever check list you use, that is the one you should always use. For my Warrior, there are a multitude of checklists floating around. The main one being the POH, then there are store bought ones, there were several home made ones in my aircraft when I bought it, then flight schools will often have their own as well. He said there are less chances of skipping an item if you pick one and stick to it.

John

 

[dmccormack]

He said there are less chances of skipping an item if you pick one and stick to it.

John

As long as the home-made one you pick is complete!

 

[Richard]

If I'm a guest and could possible be held (by the FAA) as senior PIC, I at least check oil and sumps, AHEAD of the owner.

Please elaborate. I thought it was an old wive's tale that the FAA would hold responsible the senior certificate holder.

 

[poadeleted20]

Please elaborate. I thought it was an old wive's tale that the FAA would hold responsible the senior certificate holder.

It depends on the situation. The only case where the FAA has said unequivocally that certificate drives responsibility is a CFI giving instruction on a training flight. Any other time, they'll look at the whole picture.

OTOH, the insurance company and any injured third parties will probably sue everyone and let the jury sort it out, and even not having a pilot certificate may not save you from being found negligent and liable for the result. Look up Newberger v. Pokrass for more on that one.

 

[Richard]

It depends on the situation. The only case where the FAA has said unequivocally that certificate drives responsibility is a CFI giving instruction on a training flight. Any other time, they'll look at the whole picture.

OTOH, the insurance company and any injured third parties will probably sue everyone and let the jury sort it out, and even not having a pilot certificate may not save you from being found negligent and liable for the result. Look up Newberger v. Pokrass for more on that one.

Ron, while I thank you for your response I must say some of my confusion is based upon your earlier response (in another thread several months ago) where you pretty much said it was an OWT.

Since you now say, "It depends...", I surmise it would be up to the rated passenger to prove to the FAA that he was not in fact providing CFI instruction. (holder of CFI cert riding as passenger as example). The FAA would hold the opinion that since the CFI rated passenger was capable of providing instruction....

I have not yet read the Newberger case.

 

[poadeleted20]

Ron, while I thank you for your response I must say some of my confusion is based upon your earlier response (in another thread several months ago) where you pretty much said it was an OWT.

I did, and with the exception noted (CFI's giving training on an instructional flight), I stand by my statement that the FAA does not use pilot qualification and experience as the sole determinant of who was PIC. However, pilot qualification and experience remains one factor they may use in making the determination -- just not the sole determinant. So, "it depends" on other factors identified in the investigation.

Since you now say, "It depends...", I surmise it would be up to the rated passenger to prove to the FAA that he was not in fact providing CFI instruction. (holder of CFI cert riding as passenger as example).

Shouldn't be hard to do if you're really not providing instruction unless the pilot in the left seat lies about it and the FAA believes that pilot over you. In addition, there are a lot of ways a CFI can show that s/he wasn't contracted to provide training, and didn't agree to do so.

The FAA would hold the opinion that since the CFI rated passenger was capable of providing instruction....

"Capable of" isn't the same as "actually providing." And as I said, that only applies to CFI's, not regular pilots.

 

[Richard]

In addition, there are a lot of ways a CFI can show that s/he wasn't contracted to provide training, and didn't agree to do so.

Now I'm curious. Would you provide several examples of those ways?

"Capable of" isn't the same as "actually providing." And as I said, that only applies to CFI's, not regular pilots.

Thank you. Your finished my sentence. "Acutally providing" was the succint term I was looking for.

My anecdotal experience with the FAA is it depends upon the various FSDOs. Some are more approachable than others. Some strive to engage in dialog, some strive to enforce.

 

[poadeleted20]

Now I'm curious. Would you provide several examples of those ways?

Lack of contract or other written agreement to act as an instructor (I keep emails and the like for when I am engaged, not to mention the contract when working for PIC). Prior agreement on the ground to be something other than instructor.

 

[Richard]

Lack of contract or other written agreement to act as an instructor (I keep emails and the like for when I am engaged, not to mention the contract when working for PIC). Prior agreement on the ground to be something other than instructor.

Uh...written or verbal, there is a contract. Both you allude to in what I quoted. In absence of a written confirmation, a pre-flight verbal agreement still meets the requirements of what constitutes a contract. If the other pilot recants that verbal agreement after things went bad then what? Now it is still word against word. Do you suggest not clamboring aboard without a written agreement?

I'm not a gambler, I am still undecided that I would be nothing less than very picky about who I share a cockpit with. And it is sometimes quite difficult to determine the emotional/maturity quoient (KWo-SHUNT...****ing age makes my brain fade) of another pilot before a flight.


Now...what about shared duties on a personal flight with two pilots? I apologize for beating this to death. To me, this is such an issue that it is a deal breaker of sharing a cockpit with so many pilots/personality types. And I view that attitude as non-conducive or an obstacle to progression in the flight crew environment.