Responsible?

[Fly High]

Quick question here for you. If you have a single pilot airplane but you have 2 pilots flying it each time it flies. Let's say that the pilot flying today has his commercial and the pilot sitting in the right seat has his ATP but just runs that radios and slings the gear today. If something happens, who is responsible? I have heard a few different opinions. 1.)The pilot manipulating the controls is the PIC, thus the responsible one. 2.) The pilot with the highest rating is ultimately responsible for the airplane, even though that pilot is not flying.

Opinions? Any Legal or Regulatory reference?

Thanks!

 

[LegacyDriver]

They'll hang you both.

Bottom line for me is, if I sign the paperwork I'm the PIC, and ultimately responsible regardless. If your name is on the paperwork...

 

[mavrck]

agreed. Whoever is dispatched as the PIC, retains the responsibility as PIC.

 

[ultrarunner]

First off, forget about all this stuff about dispatch, paperwork, etc....that all deals with airlines that issue a dispatch release, or 135 operations that "assign" a PIC.

In the corporate world there isn't any of that.

If you've filed a flight plan the FAA will come looking for who's name is in box 14.

Regardless of who has "higher" ratings, etc....

 

[Captn]

Next scenario....

What if they are operating VFR ?

 

[JJET44]

I doesn't matter who the PF (pilot flying) is, it's who's in command. If the PF isn't typed he can never act as PIC 91/135/121 period. Therefore the PIC rated pilot has the ultimate authority and therefore the responsibility.

 

[Headwind]

About ten years back a private pilot, owner operator, in a Conquest had an ATP riding with him in the right seat. The pilot flying forgot to put the gear down. In the flair the PNF noticed just as the antenna scraped the runway. He took over, circled, and landed. The only damage was to the antenna.
A week later the owner pilot took the aircraft to an avionics shop to replace the antenna. They reported to the FAA who investigated the incident. The FAA violated the ATP, but not the owner pilot. His reply was that he was not the PIC, just a passenger, and he saved the aircraft. FAA said he was an ATP and should not have let the problem get as far as it did before taking over and saving the day.
This is a true story. I talked with the people.

 

[say again]

I doesn't matter who the PF (pilot flying) is, it's who's in command. If the PF isn't typed he can never act as PIC 91/135/121 period. Therefore the PIC rated pilot has the ultimate authority and therefore the responsibility.

What if its a King Air 200?? No type needed. But Im gonna have to agree with what others say- if youre nominated PIC, sign as the PIC, then you are ultimately responsible.

 

[ackattacker]

The problem as some people have pointed out is that if you are part 91 then nobody is "signing for" the aircraft. I have seen it fall both ways, depending on the FAA's mood that day. Refer to headwind's post, then consider this story that happened to people I know:

Owner pilot in a C421 has ATP rated, multiple type rated, CFI, Designated Examiner (!!) riding along right seat required for insurance purposes. Aircraft lands at night into a heavy rain shower and loses all visual reference as it touches down. At the very last minute on the ground the DE takes the controls but is unable to prevent the aircraft departing the runway, doing substantial damage.

FAA lets the DE slide but gives the owner pilot gets a 709 ride and a letter in his file.

Reason? FAA looks after their own.

 

[avbug]

The problem as some people have pointed out is that if you are part 91 then nobody is "signing for" the aircraft.

Someone is always pilot in command.

Being pilot in command doesn't necessarily mean one will experience the greatest burden in enforcement action; it's a little more complicated than that.

Who will suffer enforcement action? Get very, very specific, and we'll have a place to start.

 

[Fly High]

Someone is always pilot in command.

Being pilot in command doesn't necessarily mean one will experience the greatest burden in enforcement action; it's a little more complicated than that.

Who will suffer enforcement action? Get very, very specific, and we'll have a place to start.

There is no issue at hand to speak of. It is just a question. I have heard a few different versions of who will suffer enforcement action, as you can see from the comments mentioned above, and I am just curious as to what the black and white answer is. I do realize that there is always a PIC, but will the Person Manipulating the Controls be the one to take the brunt of the enforcement action in the event that something happens? Let's use the aircraft that was mentioned above-King Air 200. The 200 is a single pilot airplane but many P.91 companies operate it with a 2 pilot crew. Let's say that the pilot in the left seat/pilot flying is a 12,000 hour pilot that flies now days in the right seat of Citations and Hawkers for a living but once a week he fills in as a part time pilot for this company. He has all of the proper ratings-Commercial, Inst, Multi. The pilot in the right seat is a 13,000 hour pilot that flies full time for this company and he has his ATP. If there is an error during any phase of the flight, from engine start up to engine shut down, who would be the one responsible for the aircraft in the eyes of the FAA? As we all know, something can happen at any time, such as smack a fuel truck with a wing and bend the wing or hit a taxi light on a taxiway that is covered in ice in New England or even something major such as a crash where 1/2 of the people on board are killed. If the FAA FSDO is dispatched out to cover an accident, the FAA has to have some guidance as to which donkey to pin the tail on. I do not believe that the FAA has the pilots draw straws and whoever chooses the short straw loses. Is it all based off of who is listed on the company paperwork as PIC? Is it based off of the name of the PIC when the flight plan was filed on FLTPLAN.COM? Is it based off of experience or ratings? Is it based off of who had their hands on the controls when the issue happened? As you can see from above, there are many rumors and different beliefs out there as to what would happen. Why is there no black and white? I can not believe that the regs consist of 1,000 pages of fluff but this is not spelled out. I have searched the Internet from top to bottom and I have read a few stories as to Joe Blow said this or Tom John said this but I can not find THE ANSWER!

Hope this helps! I appreciate your time!

 

[nosehair]

I can not find THE ANSWER!

There is no black-and-white answer, Sir.

Each case is judged individually. The PIC is looked at first, but if the qualified judges of the situation determine that a qualified passenger/pilot could have, and should have taken action and didn't, or did an action that helped cause the violatable offense, then he will share in the punisment.

In effect, each flight is a verbal contract between the 2 pilots, and if you don't have the contract in specific detailed writing, then the Feds will decide that for you.

 

[avbug]

I have searched the Internet from top to bottom and I have read a few stories as to Joe Blow said this or Tom John said this but I can not find THE ANSWER!

Of course you can't find the answer, because you've provided no specifics.

Every single case will be determined individually; the details of every incident are critical to answering your question. There is no general rule of thumb here; first officers have been cited where the captain was not, even though the captain was flying and deviated and caused a violation...because the captain was responding to urgent incorrect and inappropriate input from the first officer. Flight instructors have been cited, even though not the PIC and not flyin the airplane, and in some cases pilots who were present but not flying in any capacity were cited.

The exact, detailed specifics are necessary to address any such question. You're asking in such general detail that no reply is possible, nor appropriate.

 

[midlifeflyer]

but I can not find THE ANSWER!

You have THE ANSWER. Both nosehair and avbug gave it to you.

Each case stands on it own. Whether one pilot or the other or both or neither face enforcement action depends on what happened, who was in charge, who had what duties, and how they executed them.

The PIC for the flight will always get looked at, because that person, by regulation, bears ultimate responsibility for a flight. But that doesn't mean others on the aircraft have no responsibility.

 

[LegacyDriver]

First off, forget about all this stuff about dispatch, paperwork, etc....that all deals with airlines that issue a dispatch release, or 135 operations that "assign" a PIC.

In the corporate world there isn't any of that.

If you've filed a flight plan the FAA will come looking for who's name is in box 14.

Regardless of who has "higher" ratings, etc....

I believe that's what we said...

 

[avbug]

If you've filed a flight plan the FAA will come looking for who's name is in box 14.

Regardless of who has "higher" ratings, etc....

It's not what we all said in the least. Who's name is in the PIC box in the flight plan has little to do with who ends up getting violated.

Again, the specific circumstances of the event are what needs to be considered. Generalities such as who's name is on the flight plan is far too general to be considered of value in attempting to determine who gets tagged for what.

 

[LegacyDriver]

Well, in this day and age I think the safe bet is to assume you'll both get nailed.