Over the past couple of months, several flight instructors have asked me about their responsibility and accountability for operations conducted by a student after they have given that student an endorsement to conduct a flight.
For example, if the flight instructor endorses the student's pilot certificate and the student's logbook to perform solo flight, and then the student lands short of the runway causing minor damage to the aircraft and to the runway lights, is the flight instructor at fault? Any number of reasons could account for the mishap, including unanticipated wind shear, engine stoppage caused by carburetor ice, simple misjudgment of the runway location - or inadequate flight training. CFIs want to know whether the FAA may pursue them for a violation of the regulations because of their student's mishap.
I am reminded of a case from several years ago that involved a student who departed on a cross-country trip, only to find herself unable to complete the trip because of weather. The CFI and the student had been working together to get the student ready to make a lengthy solo cross-country flight. Having endorsed the student's logbook once before, the CFI again endorsed the student's logbook authorizing the flight on "any dates from 11/13/91-12/18/91." Together, the CFI and the student checked weather every day, but there was always some foggy weather along the planned route that prevented the flight. Finally, it was Thanksgiving, and the student wanted to conduct the flight over the weekend, but the CFI was going out of town. So, the CFI discussed weather forecasts with the student and left town. On her own, on the Saturday after Thanksgiving, the student determined that the weather was clear, and she took off. About halfway through her first flight leg, the student encountered clouds and had to turn back, and the weather on the return trip had turned worse.
The case is silent on how the FAA found out about the flight, but it nonetheless did and initiated an enforcement action against the CFI to suspend his flight instructor certificate. The action wasn't against the CFI for the student's actions, but it brought the CFI's endorsements to the attention of the FAA, and the FAA alleged that the CFI had improperly endorsed the student's logbook without supervising the student's review of weather information regarding the flight. Under FAR 61.195(d)(2), the holder of a flight instructor certificate may not endorse a student pilot's certificate and logbook for a solo cross-country flight unless that flight instructor has determined the student's flight preparation, planning, equipment, and proposed procedures are adequate for the proposed flight under the existing conditions and within any limitations listed in the logbook that the instructor considers necessary for the safety of the flight.
The language that the National Transportation Safety Board seized on in analyzing the CFI's responsibility is the same today. The NTSB held that a student's flight preparation necessarily includes weather checks for the actual day of the flight. In interpreting the scope and application of this regulation, the NTSB focused on the words "has reviewed" and "under existing circumstances." The NTSB also looked at the language of FAR 61.93(d)(2), which addresses student logbook endorsements and prevents the student from making a solo cross-country flight unless the instructor has endorsed the student's logbook "attesting that the student is prepared to make the flight safely under the known circumstances and subject to any conditions listed in the logbook by the instructor." The NTSB did not hold that the flight instructor must be personally present at the departure airport for the endorsement to be legal. However, the NTSB found "that the instructor must participate actively in the weather briefing at the time of the flight, not two days earlier."
According to the NTSB, "[The instructor] abdicated the important role the rules assign to him to supervise and assist [the student] in her analysis of the current and expected weather and her decision whether to fly her three-leg, solo cross-country that day. As pertinent to this case, FAR 61.195(d)(2) is designed to ensure that the student has the benefit of the flight instructor's analysis and interpretation of the weather data available.... The purpose of the flight instructor's endorsement is to ensure that he has taken responsibility for the flight's proper planning. [The instructor's] blanket endorsement, regarding weather at least, improperly transferred that responsibility entirely to the student, compromising aviation safety."
So, may a CFI be held responsible for the actions of your student? Maybe, especially if they reflect on the improper exercise of your flight instructor privileges.
�
Kathy Yodice is an attorney with Yodice Associates in Washington, D.C., which provides legal counsel to AOPA and administers AOPA's legal plan. She is an instrument-rated private pilot.
