how responsible are pilots for the loss of their ac??

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:06 pm

how responsible are u.s. combat pilots for the loss of their aircraft?? military planes have been crashed / shot down etc since ww 1 to current. are there any liability issues to the pilot?? granted the govt can't garnish the wages of a 60 thousand dollar pilot against the loss of a multi million dollar weapon system, but are they held accountable to some degree?? is a combat loss handled different than a crash?? how was this issue handled in the past, other than disciplinary action??

n5151ts · **Posted:** Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:00 pm

tom d. friedman wrote:

how responsible are u.s. combat pilots for the loss of their aircraft?? military planes have been crashed / shot down etc since ww 1 to current. are there any liability issues to the pilot?? granted the govt can't garnish the wages of a 60 thousand dollar pilot against the loss of a multi million dollar weapon system, but are they held accountable to some degree?? is a combat loss handled different than a crash?? how was this issue handled in the past, other than disciplinary action??

$20.00 a month for 4000 years!

Flashonyrsix · **Posted:** Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:21 pm

Why do you think the Captain goes down with the ship. :lol:

Norm

T2 Ernie · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:11 am

The answer, like most things, is - it depends. Accountability is one thing, financial liability is another thing entirely.

In the USAF (like many other services & AFs) has two investigations; the safety investigation board (SIB) and the accident investigation board (AIB).

The purpose of the SIB is to find the cause of the accident in order to prevent future accidents. Statements made are largely subject to privilege and cannot be used in any sort of punitive manner.

The purpose of the AIB is to provide a public accounting of what we did with the taxpayer's dollars and determine accountability & culpability (if appropriate). Statements are not privileged and can be used in criminal/civil court. Lawyers are the rule of the day & folks tend to be less forthcoming with voluntary information.

At the conclusion of the AIB, discipline may be taken against the pilot. The discipline would, of course, vary with the accident, the causal findings of the AIB, damage (both civil and military), etc.

I don't think combat vs training is handled any differently, but it will obviously affect the rules in place at the time, the risks accepted at leadership levels, and the pressures (both real & perceived) on the pilot/crew.

I've never heard of a pilot having financial burdens (other than punitive) for liability purposes...but that doesn't mean it's never happened.

RickH · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:46 am

I would bet that you wouldn't have many guys volunteering to fly the B-2 if they knew that next 5 generations of his ancestors would be paying for an airplane that he broke in 2008 !

Oh wait, they will be paying for it, whether he breaks it or not !

This is not an opening to debate the cost, need or necessity for building or operating the B-2.

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:33 pm

Can the U S send Gunther Rall a bill at current market value for all those Mustangs, Spitfires and B-17s?

hsperdue · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:52 pm

YGBSM... risk my life flying and fighting the thing and you want me to pay for it if I damage it... yikes.

If folks thought like that you'd have a worthless Air Force where no one would make a decision or risk the aircraft... I could name a few like that... one thing is for sure you wouldn't have a world class Air Force.

My two cents...

gunny

T2 Ernie · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:01 pm

hsperdue wrote:

If folks thought like that you'd have a worthless Air Force where no one would make a decision or risk the aircraft... I could name a few like that... one thing is for sure you wouldn't have a world class Air Force.

Interestingly, that is one of the biggest problems - non-decision making by leadership & a view of risk management as risk elimination...

...but I digress as usual.

jetmech · **Joined:** Thu Nov 02, 2006 11:41 pm **Posts:** 6

I think it should be up to Maintenance. After all they are "our" jets. We just let these guys fly them every once in a while.

Jet Mech · **Posted:** Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:14 pm

I have seen pilots who have done documented stupid things to our aircraft during training flights (I was a mechanic too...

) and not even get yelled at :shock:

. On rare times (death of pilots or crew involved) were pilots formally repremanded on flying skills or demoted to desk jobs. To much time and training invested in fighter jocks to take them out of airplanes.

Combat losses, whole different matter. You don't have control of what happens to AC systems when they get blown out from under you.

hsperdue · **Posted:** Wed Jan 16, 2008 5:51 pm

Jet Mech wrote:

I have seen pilots who have done documented stupid things to our aircraft during training flights (I was a mechanic too...

) and not even get yelled at :shock:

. On rare times (death of pilots or crew involved) were pilots formally repremanded on flying skills or demoted to desk jobs. To much time and training invested in fighter jocks to take them out of airplanes.

Combat losses, whole different matter. You don't have control of what happens to AC systems when they get blown out from under you.

Yeah, I've seen them do stupid stuff too... we all do stupid stuff at times... how many pay for it with their lives?

gunny

jmkendall · **Posted:** Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:43 pm

Well, from my experiance the only way that they can assign any kind of major financial fine would be via Courts Martial. And; then you would have to have done something really dumb, criminally dumb, to get Court Martialed.

I have been involved with three aircraft crashs.

The first was an autorotation after the master caution came on. Unfortunately we were over water and the aircraft, and my flight suit, were total write offs. The cause turned out to be a shorted out Master Caution panel. No one was injured financially, but; the PIC was embarrased for a good long time!

The second was a weather related event and again no blame was assigned.

The third was an unfortunate conjunction of 12.7mm and T53. Obviously this one was deemed blameless as well.

At no time was anyone ever even remotely concerned about losing pay.

In fact the only Pilot I can think of that lost money was an ex-commander of mine that sold one of our units T53s to a firefighting company. The a/c subsequently crashed; through no fault of the engine. The investigation turned up the serial number of the engine and it was discovered that the engine was still on Army inventory. Said Major became a Private and had to pay a 200,000 fine; and 20 years in the Leavenworth Luxury Inn.

T2 Ernie · **Posted:** Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:28 pm

Jet Mech wrote:

I have seen pilots who have done documented stupid things to our aircraft during training flights (I was a mechanic too...

) and not even get yelled at :shock:

. On rare times (death of pilots or crew involved) were pilots formally repremanded on flying skills or demoted to desk jobs. To much time and training invested in fighter jocks to take them out of airplanes..

Something to consider...

As a pilot, I want to know I've got the best plane MX can provide. MX does a great job of fixing out planes, but they can only fix what they know is wrong. If you start punishing pilots/crews for breaking planes, they will quit writing it up. Most of the things I'm talking about fall into the "lots of labor to better be safe than sorry" category like:

Over-G
Hard Landings
Over-Speed
Over-Temp
Over-Torque

The overwhelming majority of these types of things are not readily visible to the naked eye when walking around, so if I over-G the plane by "just a little bit" and then have to worry about what kind of punishment I'm going to get when I land, I might be inclined to think, "well, there's an engineering fudge-factor built in - I'm sure the plane will be fine" - I'm doing nobody any favors & jeopardizing lives.

So even though I know that a .2 G over the book limit is well within the structural design limits of the plane and that by writing it up, I'm going to cause MX a lot of probably unnecesary work, I write it up. Metal has memory & it isn't going to fail the first time you "slightly" over-G it. Take a paperclip - you can bend it back & forth and it's fine. Do that a dozen times and it'll break. Fatigue & stress are cumulative.

That's why we write up even minor over-stress & that's why there's no real repurcussions to the pilots/crews.

That said, if you've got a pilot with a history of doing these types of pilot-induced MX errors, he will get disciplined - guaranteed (especially in today's USAF).

Some commanders have an interesting way to deal with these types of things. I've seen several pilots down at MX helping do the labor-intesive MX they've induced. Saw a guy have to work in the prop shop for a week because he overtorqued all four engines. Saw another guy have to work the line for a week because he had a hard landing. I really like this approach as it gives the pilots a little different perspective...

I digress as usual - the bottom line is you have to have free & open reporting w/o repercussions in order to facilitate & guarantee everything, even the small things, gets reported. Sad, but it's human nature...

hsperdue · **Posted:** Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:46 pm

I agree with T2 Erne

Embarrassment was also a good teaching tool... for Over-G's we used to make the miscreant buy a CD for the squadron lounge and donate it publicly at a aircrew meeting... sometimes with a verbal recounting of the story.

The thing about over-gs is you want a pilot to be aggressive... sometimes that causes over-gs... cost of doing business... I can say I've done a few over-gs... I even got the F-15 OWS to tell on my 9.0 G break turn... with a mass item of 0... dude you can't get closer than that<g>....

gunny

Warbird Information Exchange

how responsible are pilots for the loss of their ac??

Who is online