If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Safety Pilot restrictions by the Insurance Company?
On 02/24/07 23:46, tscottme wrote:
"Jose" wrote in message ... By allowing non-club members to act as safety pilot in club aircraft isn't that a big loophole to allow pilots of unknown qualification access to club aircraft? Uh... "access to club aircraft"? Like the kind of access my non-club-member passengers have? Or my non-club-member-but-licensed-pilot passengers have? The club member remains PIC and remains resposible for the safety of the flight. What kind of "access" are you talking about? Without the restriction being discussed how does the club/insurance company control which pilots are risking the airplane? If club members are required to use safety pilots that are approved by the club, by virtue of being club members, there is some minimum of safety pilot qualification assured. Without the rule a club member can designate any warm body sitting in the right seat as safety pilot. First, the safety pilot must meet the FAA requirements of a safety pilot or he's not a safety pilot - he's just a passenger. Second, the club member PIC is fully responsible for the flight. What is being risked by a qualified pilot acting as safety pilot? The rule may not prevent unauthorized use any more than a "no flight instructing in aircraft rented by ABC Aviation without prior approval" but the rule seems just as reasonable. The rule is a bright line which informs club members specifically about an acitivity of increased risk. While pilots and insurance companies have been arguing for years about "who's in control" and PIC, etc. The rule seems to head off the ambiguity by requiring both pilots to be approved by virtue of membership. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Safety Pilot restrictions by the Insurance Company?
On 02/24/07 20:15, Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Feb 24, 11:37 am, Mark Hansen wrote: I belong to a flying club. Of the many club rules, one is that the pilot acting as PIC must be a club member. I can certainly see where this is necessary. However, the Chief Pilot for the club claims that the insurance company is requiring that a safety pilot for IFR practice must also be a club member, even when the safety pilot will *not* be acting as PIC. Insurance companies don't seem to care much about PIC. They determine who is "pilot flying" (term used in most policies) mostly by what seat you are in. However, the Chief Pilot is free to add any rules he wants, he's kinda the boss. You certainly would never want to allow a non-club member on the controls because the insurance co will get you for that if there is an accident, regardless of PIC. -Robert Fair enough, Robert. However, what has that got to do with my specific case? As I've said, the club member is acting as PIC. The safety pilot is *not* flying the airplane. Also, the Chief Pilot claims this restriction comes from the insurance company, so (unless he's lying) this isn't a case of the Chief Pilot making additional restrictions. -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Safety Pilot restrictions by the Insurance Company?
Mark Hansen wrote:
Again ... the safety pilot is not acting as pilot in command. He is acting as safety pilot only. He is little more than a passenger. That's one way to look at it. Another perspective is that he's a required crew member. It's not entirely unreasonable for the insurance company (or the club) to mandate that all required crew are club members. Incidentally, the club requires that the pilot acting as PIC be a club member, so that rules out the ability for the safety pilot to act as PIC (even if they allowed non-club members to be safety pilot). From an insurance and a risk management perspective, that sounds to me like splitting hairs. It doesn't particularly make the flight safer for the pilot under the hood to always be PIC, does it? .... Alan -- Alan Gerber PP-ASEL gerber AT panix DOT com |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Safety Pilot restrictions by the Insurance Company?
whether it is the insurance company or the club that requires it, it sees to
make sense. "Mark Hansen" wrote in message ... I belong to a flying club. Of the many club rules, one is that the pilot acting as PIC must be a club member. I can certainly see where this is necessary. However, the Chief Pilot for the club claims that the insurance company is requiring that a safety pilot for IFR practice must also be a club member, even when the safety pilot will *not* be acting as PIC. I was told that the reason behind this is that in the event of an accident/incident, the insurance company doesn't want anyone who was acting as a required crew member to be a non club member. Is this normal for an insurance restriction like this? It seems to me that this is just making it harder for the IR pilot to practice. Thanks, |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Safety Pilot restrictions by the Insurance Company?
On Feb 25, 11:53 am, Mark Hansen wrote:
On 02/24/07 20:15, Robert M. Gary wrote: On Feb 24, 11:37 am, Mark Hansen wrote: I belong to a flying club. Of the many club rules, one is that the pilot acting as PIC must be a club member. I can certainly see where this is necessary. However, the Chief Pilot for the club claims that the insurance company is requiring that a safety pilot for IFR practice must also be a club member, even when the safety pilot will *not* be acting as PIC. Insurance companies don't seem to care much about PIC. They determine who is "pilot flying" (term used in most policies) mostly by what seat you are in. However, the Chief Pilot is free to add any rules he wants, he's kinda the boss. You certainly would never want to allow a non-club member on the controls because the insurance co will get you for that if there is an accident, regardless of PIC. -Robert Fair enough, Robert. However, what has that got to do with my specific case? As I've said, the club member is acting as PIC. The safety pilot is *not* flying the airplane. Also, the Chief Pilot claims this restriction comes from the insurance company, so (unless he's lying) this isn't a case of the Chief Pilot making additional restrictions. I think my point is that it doesn't make much difference if its an insurance rule or the belief of the chief pilot. Either case is just as binding. I know that some FBOs don't allow non-members to be safety pilots because they are concerned that the safety pilot may end up doing some flying. At least that is what they say, who knows. Maybe they want the dues from the other guy. In fact, FBOs always seem uncomfortable when a pilot, non-member is in their planes. -Robert |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Find a Safety Pilot in your area with Safety Pilot Club | Safety Pilot Club | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | December 29th 06 03:51 AM |
Insurance company recommendation? | John Doe | Owning | 7 | October 27th 05 08:07 PM |
Safety pilot in and out of IMC | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 43 | December 21st 04 07:58 PM |
Safety Pilot | Matt Young | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | July 8th 04 12:16 PM |
Getting around company insurance policy | Iain Wilson | Piloting | 19 | May 22nd 04 05:43 PM |