Who's the PIC?

[201Driver]

Hi folks,
Had an interesting checkout ride today in a cessna 172 that belongs to the local flying club that I recently joined. I am a current instrument rated private pilot with over 600 logged hours. I asked the instructor who the PIC is since he did almost everything from preflight to takeoff including talking on the radio with the tower. He told me that he was because the club's insurance policy states that the cfi is PIC until the member pilot is signed off. We got this issue resolved when I finally told him to let me fly the plane and if he would just observe my flying to determine if I'm capable. My questions to the gang is: If the instructor is the pic, how would I ever get signed off?

 

[Inverted]

Insurance has absolutely zero to do with the FARs with regard to the legality of who can act as, and or log PIC. You can log and act as PIC since you are certificated and rated. The CFI can log PIC since he is giving Dual.

 

[201Driver]

Is the instructor deemed giving a lesson on a check out ride?

 

[flyingron]

There's no FAA principal as "check out" or "sign off." You'll have to fight that battle with the organization you are renting the aircraft from. We can't advise. It doesn't really matter if you were being instructed or not. INSTRUCTION (at least from the students point of view) doesn't preclude either BEING or LOGGING PIC.

You are PIC when you are performing that role (and presumably are legal to do so). It sounds like since you abdicated the vital responsibilities for the safety of flight, you were NOT PIC.

However, note that being PIC has nothing to do with logging PIC in most situations. If you were flying the aircraft (sole manipulator of the controls) and you are rated (that is you have the appropriate category and class and if a type rating is required the type rating) you can log it as PIC.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Is the instructor deemed giving a lesson on a check out ride?

There are a few cases where the Faa said a CFI had the responsibilities of pic when he was just riding along.

 

[201Driver]

Thanks for the explanation flying Ron. Guess the misunderstanding was that my cfi's goal was to show me how to fly a 172 and my goal was to demonstrate that I can fly a 172. It has nothing to with PIC!

 

[Henning]

Hi folks,
Had an interesting checkout ride today in a cessna 172 that belongs to the local flying club that I recently joined. I am a current instrument rated private pilot with over 600 logged hours. I asked the instructor who the PIC is since he did almost everything from preflight to takeoff including talking on the radio with the tower. He told me that he was because the club's insurance policy states that the cfi is PIC until the member pilot is signed off. We got this issue resolved when I finally told him to let me fly the plane and if he would just observe my flying to determine if I'm capable. My questions to the gang is: If the instructor is the pic, how would I ever get signed off?

The instructor is an idiot.

 

[DavidWhite]

The instructor is an idiot.

Yup.

I almost left an instructor at an airport the flight didn't initiate from because he told me he would take command in an emergency. (I've got 2, he has 0)

 

[PilotAlan]

I almost left an instructor at an airport the flight didn't initiate from because he told me he would take command in an emergency. (I've got 2, he has 0)

Yup.
My usual instructor was on vacation so I took someone else for a BFR that snuck up on me.
We agreed that I was PIC for the flight. During landing I felt resistance in the pedals. I full stopped and asked him if he was pressing on the pedals. He said yes, he didn't think I was putting in enough rudder.

I told him in no uncertain terms he was not to touch the controls in any way, shape, or form unless I:
1) was incapacitated, or
2) agreed to turn over the controls

He said if he thought necessary, he might take the controls.
I said if that was his position, he could get out of the airplane.
He agreed not to touch anything, except as stipulated above.

 

[poadeleted20]

There are a few cases where the Faa said a CFI had the responsibilities of pic when he was just riding along.

I'd like to see one.

The FAA position (which has been upheld by the NTSB on review) is stated in Administrator v. Hamre, 3 NTSB 28, 31 (1977)

Regardless of who is manipulating the controls of the aircraft during an instructional flight, or what degree of proficiency the student has attained, the flight instructor is always deemed to be the pilot-in-command.

This has been repeatedly upheld, including Administrator v. Strobel and Administrator v. Moeslein.

So, if it's flight training, the FAA holds the instructor to be the final authority responsible for the flight, i.e., the PIC. That said, I know of no case where the FAA held a CFI responsible for what happened when just riding along and not giving training merely because s/he held a CFI ticket.

 

[poadeleted20]

Thanks for the explanation flying Ron. Guess the misunderstanding was that my cfi's goal was to show me how to fly a 172 and my goal was to demonstrate that I can fly a 172. It has nothing to with PIC!

Only problem is his explanation is wrong. The fact that this instructor was giving training (you got a signature and training received time in your logbook, right?) brings the Hamre doctrine into play. If the instructor was just there to watch, and no training was logged, then Hamre would not apply.

BTW, the examples of bad instructor behavior listed above do not change the applicability of the Hamre doctrine -- an instructor giving training is still "always deemed to be the pilot-in-command." Only way to avoid that is for the instructor not to be giving training, and if you log training time over the instructor's signature, then there is documentary evidence that the instructor was giving training.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Hi folks,
Had an interesting checkout ride today in a cessna 172 that belongs to the local flying club that I recently joined. I am a current instrument rated private pilot with over 600 logged hours. I asked the instructor who the PIC is since he did almost everything from preflight to takeoff including talking on the radio with the tower. He told me that he was because the club's insurance policy states that the cfi is PIC until the member pilot is signed off. We got this issue resolved when I finally told him to let me fly the plane and if he would just observe my flying to determine if I'm capable. My questions to the gang is: If the instructor is the pic, how would I ever get signed off?

Something about this post confuses me (not difficult).

Who is acting as PIC on the flight is completely irrelevant to who can log PIC time.

Who is acting as PIC is equally irrelevant to whether you can be signed off.

A CFI is engaging in instructional activity whether CFI is actively demonstrating how to fly the airplane or simply evaluating your performance. A checkout may be instructional or it may not. Depends on how the FBO, CFI and pilot choose to treat it.

OTOH, if you're saying the CFI never let you fly the airplane, you have a legitimate gripe and I too wonder how a CFI can sign off someone he never sees flying.

 

[DavidWhite]

I'd like to see one.

The FAA position (which has been upheld by the NTSB on review) is stated in Administrator v. Hamre, 3 NTSB 28, 31 (1977)

This has been repeatedly upheld, including Administrator v. Strobel and Administrator v. Moeslein.

So, if it's flight training, the FAA holds the instructor to be the final authority responsible for the flight, i.e., the PIC. That said, I know of no case where the FAA held a CFI responsible for what happened when just riding along and not giving training merely because s/he held a CFI ticket.

What if its a non instructional flight with a CFI sleeping in the back? Basically is the CFI always liable if he is in the airplane?

 

[Skylane81E]

Yup.

I almost left an instructor at an airport the flight didn't initiate from because he told me he would take command in an emergency. (I've got 2, he has 0)

If I'm learning to fly the plane, by all means take over.


If its my plane that I know better than you, DO WHAT I TELL YOU

 

[Greg Bockelman]

What if its a non instructional flight with a CFI sleeping in the back? Basically is the CFI always liable if he is in the airplane?

Not according to the FAA. Civil courts on the other hand. . . No telling what they may do.

 

[midlifeflyer]

What if its a non instructional flight with a CFI sleeping in the back? Basically is the CFI always liable if he is in the airplane?

Of course not.

You're describing a somewhat famous urban legend, the "Legend of the Back-Seat CFI." The closest to it is this NTSB report where the CFI "passenger" (front seat) essentially talked a junior pilot into flying in marginal conditions with an inoperative artificial horizon and ended up being named as the probable cause for the unfortunately predictable result.

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20001208X05581&key=1

 

[201Driver]

Only problem is his explanation is wrong. The fact that this instructor was giving training (you got a signature and training received time in your logbook, right?)

My thoughts for his flight was for me to demonstrate to the CFI that I can safely and proficiently fly the club's plane. I was not expecting a lesson.
When the CFI finally agreed to this arrangement he reluctantly stopped instructing. What I have learned from this experience is to pick your CFI carefully and have a clear understanding at appointment time what the missions are. Ron, at the end, the CFI never asked for my logbook but did sign off on the club's paperwork.

 

[201Driver]

an instructor giving training is still "always deemed to be the pilot-in-command." Only way to avoid that is for the instructor not to be giving training, and if you log training time over the instructor's signature, then there is documentary evidence that the instructor was giving training.

My understanding is a CFI with no current medical can give logable instructions to a certificated pilot. Who is the PIC?

 

[midlifeflyer]

My understanding is a CFI with no current medical can give logable instructions to a certificated pilot. Who is the PIC?

Obviously not the instructor.

But that doesn't mean the CFI won't still be held to a PIC standard of conduct. The case Ron cites is "bad law" in the sense that as stated, it doesn't really make sense. But the underlying principle, that a CFI will be held to a certain standard of conduct when giving instruction, and that this standard of conduct is pretty much the same as PIC, depending on all the circumstances. If the case came up with the CFI who can't legally be PIC, that's my guess what the NTSB would say.

And, of course, the CFI as "deemed PIC" is not always 100% responsible. Even in the case Ron cites, the CFI, although "deemed to be PIC" was not held responsible for the accident.

 

[EdFred]

Of course not.

You're describing a somewhat famous urban legend, the "Legend of the Back-Seat CFI." The closest to it is this NTSB report where the CFI "passenger" (front seat) essentially talked a junior pilot into flying in marginal conditions with an inoperative artificial horizon and ended up being named as the probable cause for the unfortunately predictable result.

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20001208X05581&key=1

It was confusion between civil case and a backseat sleeping CFI. The FAA cleared the CFI, but the civil courts hit him (or his estate) pretty hard. People heard about the CFI getting hammered in civil court and relayed the story as the FAA hanging him.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

I'd like to see one.

The FAA position (which has been upheld by the NTSB on review) is stated in Administrator v. Hamre, 3 NTSB 28, 31 (1977)

This has been repeatedly upheld, including Administrator v. Strobel and Administrator v. Moeslein.

So, if it's flight training, the FAA holds the instructor to be the final authority responsible for the flight, i.e., the PIC. That said, I know of no case where the FAA held a CFI responsible for what happened when just riding along and not giving training merely because s/he held a CFI ticket.

Someone posted a few a couple months ago on here. Ether way if you're a CFI (current) and youre left seat when something goes caca something tells me the Feds are going to view it as flight instruction 9 times out of 10

 

[silver-eagle]

My thoughts for his flight was for me to demonstrate to the CFI that I can safely and proficiently fly the club's plane. I was not expecting a lesson.
When the CFI finally agreed to this arrangement he reluctantly stopped instructing. What I have learned from this experience is to pick your CFI carefully and have a clear understanding at appointment time what the missions are. Ron, at the end, the CFI never asked for my logbook but did sign off on the club's paperwork.

I pay for a CFI's time, I get to have him sign the logbook. I don't even care if HE doesn't deem it to be an instructional flight. I paid for his time AND his John H.
If I were you, I would head back there and get said sig. If you are in the WINGS program, the time should count for one of the steps.

 

[Palmpilot]

Insurance has absolutely zero to do with the FARs with regard to the legality of who can act as, and or log PIC. You can log and act as PIC since you are certificated and rated. The CFI can log PIC since he is giving Dual.

My understanding is that the owner or operator (in this case, the club) has the authority to decide who may act as pilot in command of its airplanes, as long as that person is qualified under FAA regulations. So if the insurance company puts limitations on who can act as PIC, the FAA won't care if you violate that, but the operator is likely to create and enforce rules that are consistent with the insurance company's dictates, because failure to do so runs the risk of invalidating the insurance.

And as you know, who can log PIC is a different issue from who can act as PIC.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Yup.
My usual instructor was on vacation so I took someone else for a BFR that snuck up on me.
We agreed that I was PIC for the flight. During landing I felt resistance in the pedals. I full stopped and asked him if he was pressing on the pedals. He said yes, he didn't think I was putting in enough rudder.

I told him in no uncertain terms he was not to touch the controls in any way, shape, or form unless I:
1) was incapacitated, or
2) agreed to turn over the controls

He said if he thought necessary, he might take the controls.
I said if that was his position, he could get out of the airplane.
He agreed not to touch anything, except as stipulated above.

I would have gotten out of the airplane

You got to understand if I get in a plane (especially with a low time non IFR PPL) and I let him loose directional control on landing ( as I can't touch his controls) that a 709 ride for me all day long!

If a student on a BFR starts to the edge of a runway during landing, you bet I'm going to take comtrol!

 

[PilotAlan]

I would have gotten out of the airplane
You got to understand if I get in a plane (especially with a low time non IFR PPL) and I let him loose directional control on landing ( as I can't touch his controls) that a 709 ride for me all day long!
If a student on a BFR starts to the edge of a runway during landing, you bet I'm going to take comtrol!

1st, there was no issue with loss of directional control. We were in the flare, and he apparently thought I needed more rudder than I had in. We ended up pushing against each other, which could have CAUSED a loss of control.
2nd, there was no call of "my airplane".
3rd, he was applying opposite controls to my inputs.
4th, there was no danger to the aircraft, I just wasn't doing it like he's do it.

I'm not a student, I am a 500hr PPL with 300 hours in the aircraft. And it is MY aircraft, and I am the PIC as agreed. But regardless of who's legally PIC, don't apply control inputs when someone else is flying.

If you want to call for the controls, fine. If you don't like my approach, call a go around. If you think I am off on something, call for a stop and we'll discuss is. But don't start pushing or pulling on anything without my knowledge and consent.

If that's unacceptable, then we won't be flying together.

EDIT: Let me clear on one thing. I look forward to instruction. We all develop bad habits, and can always do better. I WANT the input from an instructor to make me a better pilot.
But only one person can be flying the plane at a time. See AF447 for example.

 

[KA550]

I would have gotten out of the airplane

Me too

 

[NineThreeKilo]

1st, there was no issue with loss of directional control. We were in the flare, and he apparently thought I needed more rudder than I had in. We ended up pushing against each other, which could have CAUSED a loss of control.
2nd, there was no call of "my airplane".
3rd, he was applying opposite controls to my inputs.
4th, there was no danger to the aircraft, I just wasn't doing it like he's do it.

I'm not a student, I am a 500hr PPL with 300 hours in the aircraft. And it is MY aircraft, and I am the PIC as agreed. But regardless of who's legally PIC, don't apply control inputs when someone else is flying.

If you want to call for the controls, fine. If you don't like my approach, call a go around. If you think I am off on something, call for a stop and we'll discuss is. But don't start pushing or pulling on anything without my knowledge and consent.

If that's unacceptable, then we won't be flying together.

EDIT: Let me clear on one thing. I look forward to instruction. We all develop bad habits, and can always do better. I WANT the input from an instructor to make me a better pilot.
But only one person can be flying the plane at a time. See AF447 for example.

Ok, I thought you were saying you wouldn't allow the instructor to take over unless you approved.

I agree, it's BS to be making control inputs as a CFI without telling the student what you're doing.

 

[poadeleted20]

What if its a non instructional flight with a CFI sleeping in the back? Basically is the CFI always liable if he is in the airplane?

Liability for damages before a civil court is an entirely different story than how the FAA treats an instructor giving instruction in an enforcement action.

When you start talking about negligence, anything can happen when the jury starts considering what one's duty to others is. In the famous case of Newberger v. Pokrass, the jury found that the non-pilot passenger asleep in the right seat failed in his duty to be careful to make sure the pilot (whom the passenger knew was very tired) stayed awake during the flight, and found that the passenger was contributorily negligent for the accident that occurred when the pilot fell asleep -- that knowing the pilot was tired, the passenger had a duty to stay awake to keep an eye on the pilot. So, depending on what the CFI in your hypothetical knew about the challenges of the flight in comparison with the pilot's skill, proficiency, and condition, it's entirely possible that the CFI could be held liable for damages or injury that occurred if the pilot was unable to meet those challenges and failed to render appropriate assistance or advice to the pilot.

But that has nothing to do with the discussion about who is the PIC and whether the FAA will hold a CFI accountable for something that happens on an instructional flight.

 

[poadeleted20]

My thoughts for his flight was for me to demonstrate to the CFI that I can safely and proficiently fly the club's plane. I was not expecting a lesson.
When the CFI finally agreed to this arrangement he reluctantly stopped instructing. What I have learned from this experience is to pick your CFI carefully and have a clear understanding at appointment time what the missions are. Ron, at the end, the CFI never asked for my logbook but did sign off on the club's paperwork.

In that case it was not an instructional flight, and the question of who would be PIC was a subject for you and the CFI to discuss and agree upon before starting the engine. Once decided, the agreed PIC would remain PIC until you agreed otherwise.

That said, I've never given a "checkout" in which I was not giving logged training and the checkee agreed that I would be PIC. In fact, in most situations with FBO's and the like, that would be necessary since the aircraft owner's insurance would not allow the checkee to be PIC until the checkout was complete.

 

[poadeleted20]

My understanding is a CFI with no current medical can give logable instructions to a certificated pilot. Who is the PIC?

By what the FAA and NTSB have said, it is still the CFI who is "deemed" to be the PIC and will be held responsible for the outcome. And to answer the likely questions arising...

• Yes, this appears to contradict the 61.23 requirement that the PIC be medically qualified.
• No, the FAA has never discussed this further.
• No, I have no desire to open this can of worms with the FAA by writing to the Chief Counsel for clarification.

 

[poadeleted20]

And, of course, the CFI as "deemed PIC" is not always 100% responsible. Even in the case Ron cites, the CFI, although "deemed to be PIC" was not held responsible for the accident.

You're speaking of Strobel, not Moeslein, in which the NTSB said:

Despite respondent's status as flight instructor and pilot in command, we will not impose strict liability on him for all of his student's mistakes. Although flight instructors are expected to "do all things possible for the safety of the flight," they are not held strictly liable for its safe outcome.

So, there are limits to events for which the CFI "deemed" to be PIC may held for FAA enforcement action purposes -- in the Strobel case, the entirely unexpected and irreversible action of the pilot receiving training in a critical phase of flight.​

 

[poadeleted20]

Someone posted a few a couple months ago on here. Ether way if you're a CFI (current) and youre left seat when something goes caca something tells me the Feds are going to view it as flight instruction 9 times out of 10

If you're in the left seat of a 1-pilot airplane, unless you're receiving instruction from a CFI in the right seat (reverse the seats if you're a rotorhead), the FAA will always start with the assumption that you were PIC whether you're a CFI or not, and then investigate to see if there's any reason why that was not the case.

 

[poadeleted20]

You got to understand if I get in a plane (especially with a low time non IFR PPL) and I let him loose directional control on landing ( as I can't touch his controls) that a 709 ride for me all day long!

Not if you were not giving training.

If a student on a BFR starts to the edge of a runway during landing, you bet I'm going to take comtrol!

By regulatory definition, flight reviews are training, so there's no question in that situation that the CFI is giving training and thus "deemed" to be PIC. However, what the CFI is doing on a club "checkout" is not specified in the regulations, so whether the CFI is giving training or just observing, and who will be the PIC, has to be determined by the pilots involved (or by requirement of the FBO/club that owns the plane) before the flight starts.

 

[poadeleted20]

If you want to call for the controls, fine. If you don't like my approach, call a go around. If you think I am off on something, call for a stop and we'll discuss is. But don't start pushing or pulling on anything without my knowledge and consent.

Good advice for any instructor. Pushing or pulling on the controls without assuming control of the aircraft, and especially without the knowledge of the pilot flying, is counterproductive.

 

[GCA319]

I would have gotten out of the airplane

You got to undertakeoffstand if I get in a plane (especially with a low time non IFR PPL) and I let him loose directional control on landing ( a I can't touch his controls) that a 709 ride for me all day long!

a student on a BFR starts to the edge of a runway during landing, you bet I'm going to take comtrol!

Yep. I once had a commercial SEL student with 700 hours lose directional control during a soft field takeoff. Had I not come on the controls, we would have gone off the left side of the runway. I'm all about positive exchanges of flight controls, but when the old lizard brain tells me we're about to either die or create an accident/incident, I'm going to do whatever I have to do to keep that from happening. It's the number one responsibilty of my job. The number 2 responsibility is to make sure I don't let things get to the point where I have to come on the controls without a positive exchange (in the example I provided, I called for more right rudder atleast 4 times before I even touched the controls).

 

[denverpilot]

By what the FAA and NTSB have said, it is still the CFI who is "deemed" to be the PIC and will be held responsible for the outcome. And to answer the likely questions arising...

• Yes, this appears to contradict the 61.23 requirement that the PIC be medically qualified.
• No, the FAA has never discussed this further.
• No, I have no desire to open this can of worms with the FAA by writing to the Chief Counsel for clarification.

On come on. Let's ask and let the Chief Counsel completely screw up some more laws.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

If you're in the left seat of a 1-pilot airplane, unless you're receiving instruction from a CFI in the right seat (reverse the seats if you're a rotorhead), the FAA will always start with the assumption that you were PIC whether you're a CFI or not, and then investigate to see if there's any reason why that was not the case.

Ahh, by left I meant my other left


RIGHT SEAT is what I meant to type.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Not if you were not giving training.

By regulatory definition, flight reviews are training, so there's no question in that situation that the CFI is giving training and thus "deemed" to be PIC. However, what the CFI is doing on a club "checkout" is not specified in the regulations, so whether the CFI is giving training or just observing, and who will be the PIC, has to be determined by the pilots involved (or by requirement of the FBO/club that owns the plane) before the flight starts.

Are you that naive?

You really think the feds are not going to try to stick it to you as a front seat CFI with another pilot??

If you're a CFI with a licensed pilot on a checkout, or whatever, and something happens, I would wager you are going to get 709ed, if you die, theyll probably just hang the whole thing on you.

"Really Mr. Inspector I wasnt giving dual, I swear!"

 

[midlifeflyer]

It was confusion between civil case and a backseat sleeping CFI. The FAA cleared the CFI, but the civil courts hit him (or his estate) pretty hard. People heard about the CFI getting hammered in civil court and relayed the story as the FAA hanging him.

Got a citation to the case or a verifiable publication discussing it? I'd love to read it.

 

[EdFred]

Got a citation to the case or a verifiable publication discussing it? I'd love to read it.

It's been posted here or on the red board. I don't remember enough of the details to pull up the search, and as I'm not a lawyer I dont' really have the lawsuit database at my fingertips.