Well, what the insurance company says or requires isn't necessarily the same as what the FARs require or allow. If you're rated and qualified for passenger-carrying in the class of airplane, the FARs allow you to act as and log PIC when flying around with your father or with other people. But, other than that often discussed (on this website) safety pilot/simulated instrument stuff, there is no SIC on a Part 91 Aztec, i.e., the type certificate does not require an SIC nor would the operation. Now, if you are asking what happens if there's a claim made under the policy and you were flying the airplane at the time---the language of the policy would be a good place to start the analysis. Based on your remarks, sounds as if no coverage. So, legally, if rated and qualified: yes to PIC, no to SIC (except for the saftey pilot stuff). Insurance-wise: No, at least if a claim is made under the policy. There is something called an open pilot clause in some policies, sometimes for the occasional user or under specified conditions and with certain certificates, ratings, hours. You might look into that. (Also, since we're really talking about the policy and coverage here, check the policy to see if it speaks to the simulated instrument/safety pilot stuff. It might require the safety pilot, i.e., the "SIC" to meet certain conditions.) If the insurance company is not taking you on as part of the insured risk, then you might consider rather carefully how you log (if you log) even those uneventful flights. (Hopefully, all your flights will be uneventful.) It could be possible that if a claim is made as the result of a particular flight, and you are on board, the insurance company, if the matter ended up in litigation, might be able to obtain your logbooks and assert that you were in fact flying the aircraft and deny coverage (if you have consistently been logging time in the plane). It would be a credibility issue. Not saying it would happen. Just a thought.
Last edited:
