wrote:
On Apr 5, 11:27 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:

The question always remains concerning the exact point of transfer for
responsibility of the flight from the instructor to the student. There
is always some point where the instructor has to rely on the student to
do as trained to do. In my opinion that decision point for the
instructor must be up front, BEFORE the release takes place.
Extending the "conditions for the flight" to a cell phone call with the
student at a remote location to insure conditions have been met simply
extends the final release of this responsibility while at the same time
poses the question that if such a call is necessary at all, the student
wasn't prepared properly for the flight initially.

The bottom line is up front with the instructor. The instructor has to
decide up front whether or not the student will perform properly on all
levels before the sign off. This is a responsibility not to be taken
lightly.

Dudley Henriques

Makes sense -- I've always assumed the CFI need to be absolutely
certain the student will adhere to the rules/checklists/etc prior to
launch for the long XC.

But the endorsement has restrictions - does that imply a division of
responsibility?

These days of litigation makes me wonder...


Dan Mc

This is the "devil in the details" thing about instructing. Legally
there is a "certain", and instructors have to exist in this world of
legal definition that means existing with lawyers who make a career out
of twisting everything and anything that CAN be twisted into a settlement.
But the REALITY of it as things exist in the real world is that there
are no "certains". All the instructors can do is the best they can.
There are no guarantees; only the one on one of the instructor working
within the system with the student. You take a chance every time you
take on a student.

The bottom line could very well be that becoming a flight instructor
carries as much pure risk for as little reward as anything ever designed
by man as a means to make money.

--
Dudley Henriques