Insurance excess

[Red]

[spacesailor]

The new students,  will have to do what the wealthy have always done !.

Divest all personal assets .  So they can become ' bankrupt ' .

Then they  can pay  ' five cents on the dollar  ' .

Like one of my grandsons !, owns nothing , lives at his parents  ,

And can't be bothered to sign on the dole . 

He has his trade certificate,  but was threatened with court action when his

Labourer dropped something, causing damage somewhere. 

Never worked a day since .

what could they get out of him .

spacesailor

 

[facthunter]

The test for that is "How would it be IF everyone did it?  Nev

[spacesailor]

Those expensive lawyers , will be trading in their Bently sports cars for Toyota's. 

That will drop the price of their insurance. 

Novared lease companies will.  Drop their car values too .

spacesailor

 

[facthunter]

I really have NO idea what you are talking about. Nev

[BurnieM]

Any way we can lock this thread ?

 

Not going anywhere and not producing any useful information.

 

[facthunter]

IF we start doing that we might have a lot of locked threads. Nev

[RossK]

2 hours ago, BurnieM said:

Any way we can lock this thread ?

 

Not going anywhere and not producing any useful information.

 

But I just refilled my popcorn 

[skippydiesel]

I have had a further thought or two about the word Command.

 

In General

It is possible to be In Command of a vessel/aircraft/ machine however you can not Command (verb) a non sentient object ie you can not Command a machine, your utterances will have no disenable effect.

Command infers authority to control humans or other beings eg a working dog, by the use of words (verbal or writen).

 

In Aviation

A Pilot In Command (PIC) implies a great deal more than mechanical control (as in manipulate the machine so as to achieve flight). The PIC has legal standing & responsibility, must by convention & I suggest, law, be licenced ie not a student .

It is tempting to think of a solo (unlicensed/student) pilot as PIC, as they are the only person on board, so must if circumstances (safety of aircraft) dictate, make authoritative decisions. However this is to ignore the role of the students Instructor, who is in fact the only Commander (PIC) in this relationship/situation. Note; The Instructor need not be in the aircraft to maintain this relationship. By law & convention, there can not be two PICs for the same aircraft/time, ergo the student can never be PIC. 

 

CASA/RAA/FAAA and any other authority that uses the words Pilot In Command for an unlicensed pilot, are simple incorrect, inconsistent with other aviation rules, regulations & custom. Their intentions may be known/understood, even supported however the terminology does not accurately reflect the situation,  that the student is under the Command of the Instructor.

 

Just because a bureaucracy (staffed by fallible humans) draws up a regulation, this does not mean it is necessarily worded well (grey areas), correct (wrong) or consistent with (supports/contradicts) other regulations.

 

Those who blindly refer to/quote the regulations, without critical thought, undermine democracy and ultimately the rule of law.😈

Edited Friday at 06:42 AM by skippydiesel

[BrendAn]

4 hours ago, BurnieM said:

Any way we can lock this thread ?

 

Not going anywhere and not producing any useful information.

 

As skippy said . If you don't want to read his delusional ramblings you don't have to.😁

[skippydiesel]

2 hours ago, BrendAn said:

As skippy said . If you don't want to read his delusional ramblings you don't have to.😁

Why don't you try and attack my logic or are insults all you are capable of ? 😈

 

[skippydiesel]

Laugh all you wish BrendAn - the joke remains with you until you put up or shut up😈

[BrendAn]

2 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Laugh all you wish BrendAn - the joke remains with you until you put up or shut up😈

skip, how much do i have to put up.  we have gone around in circles for days. why don't you just admit you are wrong and apologise for wasting my time.

[skippydiesel]

Just now, BrendAn said:

skip, how much do i have to put up.  we have gone around in circles for days. why don't you just admit you are wrong and apologise for wasting my time.

Go on , lets see you logically take apart my statement (above)😈

[BrendAn]

14 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Go on , lets see you logically take apart my statement (above)😈

i have already told you the facts. which by the way are not invented me unlike yours.

you know better than the raa insurance broker. you know better than raaus and you know better than my aeroclub so how can i argue with you.

[skippydiesel]

18 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

i have already told you the facts. which by the way are not invented me unlike yours.

you know better than the raa insurance broker. you know better than raaus and you know better than my aeroclub so how can i argue with you.

So! In short you cant fault the logic of my statement, exploring the logic or lack of, in the current practise,  PIC & student. Is that what the tennis people call Game Set & Match?  

 

On the RAA - did you not see where I wrote of my conversation , on this matter, with no less than two RAA officials - not so supportive of your wild assertions.😈

Edited Friday at 10:27 AM by skippydiesel

[BrendAn]

11 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

So! In short you cant fault the logic of my statement, exploring the logic or lack of, in the current practise,  PIC & student. Is that what the tennis people call Game Set & Match?  

 

On the RAA - did you not see where I wrote of my conversation , on this matter, with no less than two RAA officials - not so supportive of your wild assertions.😈

do you need to talk to someone.      you seem troubled.

thanks for turning a thread i put up with good intentions into a 7 page joke.

 

Edited Friday at 10:36 AM by BrendAn

[skippydiesel]

12 hours ago, BrendAn said:

do you need to talk to someone.      you seem troubled.

thanks for turning a thread i put up with good intentions into a 7 page joke.

 

More attack, with no attempt to analyse. This has always been the strategy of the closed minded - The joke, my friend is on you😈

[BrendAn]

26 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

More attack, with no attempt to analyse. This has always been the strategy of the closed minded - The joke, my friend is on you😈

You're right. I apologise for my silly comments.   Can you stop now. Thanks 

[skippydiesel]

7 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

You're right. I apologise for my silly comments.   Can you stop now. Thanks 

Yes if you wish, however I would prefer a considered analysis, of the last significant post I entered on the word Command. It is the correct meaning/use of this word, that I consider key to your question on insurance, as it indicates the rights & responsibilities of the pilot.😈

[facthunter]

Everyone's entitled to Skippy's Opinion, over and over.  A Pilot's log Book has to be a TRUE and accurate record of the Pilot's Aeronautical experience . Mine are the DCA/ CASA ones and solo is not mentioned on the top headings. Only in Command  except by the Instructors annotation . and another column ICUS  and Co pilot Day/ Night and Multiple engines Instrument etc.That is the accepted way to record your flying . Endless debate of the significance intended to"In command". It's a waste of time. Instructors understand what it means. Casa knows what it means and most pilots realise that when there's no instructor with you The Buck stops with you  You are  it.. That doesn't mean you are all by Yourself. You can seek assistance from the ground Like any pilot would, IF it would help. People can tell you how to hook up the autopilot so you don't get fatigued and lose control/ get disorientated. Nev

 

[T510]

Unfortunately there is no provision for ICUS under RAAus. Seems to be a shortcoming in their regulations

[facthunter]

Any flight test you do could come under this but the way it's done in RAAus  you don't fail but do it again after some Instruction etc.  Nev

[skippydiesel]

38 minutes ago, T510 said:

Unfortunately there is no provision for ICUS under RAAus. Seems to be a shortcoming in their regulations

I don't think there is any under GA either. The RAA/GA rules/ regulations all come from CASA.

 

Going back to the original question on insurance & student liability. Its my contention that the student is, at all times, under the supervision of the Instructor ergo the Instructor is PIC. Therefor can not be liable for any incident while so supervised. If not liable, not responsible for insurance.

 

That at some time the student may go solo, only changes the degree of direct control, not the basic premise, that is they are still under supervision.

The loose /miss use of the phrase "Pilot In Command"  for a student going solo, muddies the waters. It misrepresents the actual legal situation, as it suggests that the student has moved from the Instructors supervision, thus making them liable for contribution to an insurance claim, should one occur.

 

While I agree that the student is on a journey of increasing aviation skill/knowledge and responsibility, I do not think they become fully responsible (PIC) until licensed/certified ie are no longer a student. Ergo they can not be held responsible for any part of an insurance claim (obviously wilful damage, straying from the agreed flight plan, etc may modify this in whole or part).

 

CASA has erred in the use of the phrase PIC, when applied to a student. A more correct phrase may be something like Student Pilot in Control ie continuing the reality, that the Instructor is the responsible party, the PIC.

 

Note; Command has never inferred that direct (hands on) control is a necessary condition of its use.

 

My pedantic focus on the word " Command" is because I feel that it is the miss use of this word, that is key to the debate on students being coerced into signing a document that commits them to pay the excess, on any insurance claim, for the aircraft they are using, that may occur.

 

It has been an interesting debate (thanks BrendAn) however I suspect that this matter (student/insurance/Command) can only be resolved in a court, assuming CASA and the Flying School(s) practising the coercive student insurance participation, do not read my threads😈