- 11,995
wjw0006
Expert
I agree, however, just because she got out of the plane on the runway/tarmac whatever does not mean that the pilot's duties stop there.
Don't get me wrong, I cannot understand how one can walk into a propeller, just from the case law that I've been reading the courts place the highest level of car on carriers even when it seems like someone does something really dumb
Don't get me wrong, I cannot understand how one can walk into a propeller, just from the case law that I've been reading the courts place the highest level of car on carriers even when it seems like someone does something really dumb
- 920
Props are virtually invisible while spinning. That is why the tips are painted yellow or red-- to give a visual to the spinning prop. It is VERY easy to lose one's orientation near airplanes, especially with nearby idling engines. When I took multi, #1 prop was chopped once the active runway was cleared to give it time to stop spinning. Turboprop's frequently take minutes to stop spinning as they are powered by the jet, not pistons. Never the less, once the ground crew chocks the wheels, it is their baby.
- 11,995
So if someone gets off a bus and walks in front of moving traffic, is the bus driver responsible?
I'm also not familiar enough to know if it's standard procedure to be turning the propellers off before letting your passengers exit, but absent the propeller sucking her in (which it doesn't sound like she did) it's the equivalent of me jumping in front of a bus and blaming the bus driver. I'm sure it's not as black and white in court, but I think a jury's BS meter would be off the charts on something like this.
I'm also not familiar enough to know if it's standard procedure to be turning the propellers off before letting your passengers exit, but absent the propeller sucking her in (which it doesn't sound like she did) it's the equivalent of me jumping in front of a bus and blaming the bus driver. I'm sure it's not as black and white in court, but I think a jury's BS meter would be off the charts on something like this.
- 920
Unfortunately, there are occasions when the props cannot be chopped-- such as an absence of electrical or quick turn around. This tragedy happens all too often-- and the carrier is ALWAYS at fault. If you intentionally lunged at the prop, or in front of traffic after leaving the bus, there would be an obvious degree of intent.
- 15,319
One of the first things I learned when starting my private pilot training is that you don't open the door of the plane until the prop stops spinning. Period.
In a "basic" Cessna single, you kill the engine by leaning it out until it stops due to no fuel in the cylinders. Then you turn the key turn off the master switch.
But, no matter what, the door remains shut until everything is off. It is the pilot's responsibility.
That being said, you must a moron to walk near a spinning prop.
Rick
In a "basic" Cessna single, you kill the engine by leaning it out until it stops due to no fuel in the cylinders. Then you turn the key turn off the master switch.
But, no matter what, the door remains shut until everything is off. It is the pilot's responsibility.
That being said, you must a moron to walk near a spinning prop.
Rick
- 15,041
I'd say it would be more the equivalent of showing up for your first day of work at the butcher shop and being told to operate the band saw. Sure, the average person is smart enough to know it is dangerous, but just how dangerous? Where do you put your hands, what do you need to watch out for, etc.
I can understand limiting the insurance company's liability to the limits in the policy, but that shouldn't let the pilot and company off the hook.
I remember seeing them load passengers into turboprops at the airport. The propeller on that side was always stopped. I also knew a guy who use to work ground crew at an airport, and if the propeller was running, a crew member had to stand between it and the passengers. It sounds to me like they knew it was a spinning blade of death and passengers shouldn't be expected to know just how dangerous.
Apples and oranges. In your scenario, a vehicle other than the bus hit you. In the actual event, it was the propeller of the plane which she was in that did the damage. A more equal comparison would be something like, the bus driver stops at a normal stop and as you are attempting to get off the bus, the driver closes the door and traps part of your body in the door as he/she drives off dragging you on the ground. The bus drivers responsibility is to make sure you have completely exited to bus and are out of harms way as he/she drives off.
As has already been stated, the pilots responsibility was to not open the plane door or let anyone off the plane until the propellers had stopped spinning.
wjw0006
Expert
In the bus scenario you stated above, I believe that the courts would place a greater duty of care on the pilot. When I use the word "carriers" I am referring to planes. Bus drivers for companies like greyhound for example due have to exhibit a greater duty of care than an average driver, but nothing compared to the level of a pilot.
As for how easy it is to walk into a propeller.....I've never been on a plane like that. It's a moot point though. As someone pointed out earlier, you are not to let people out until the prop stops. But not for the pilot's failure to do this and allowing people off of his/her plane before hand, this incident would not have occured.
rlubnau
Expert
- 31
The pilot is responsible for stopping the engine before the passenger exits. In this case it is by pulling the mixture knob back and starving the engine of fuel. Standard procedure for a normally aspirated engine. After prop stops turn the mags to an off position to avoid a hot start. The pilot did not do this and allowed a passenger to walk into a moving prop. A prop that was probably spinning at 800 to 1000 RPM and cannot be seen - even if the tips are painted red. If the pilot had electrical issues and didn't want to shut the engine down due to not being able to restart, that is conditions for even more negligent behavior.
What I don't understand is why the pilots insurance company paid out more for the sublimit of $100,000 (which was reported in the news) for Bodily Injury per passenger. Did the insurance company just set a precedent?? I wonder if other accidents where a passenger gets injured would the insurance companies now have to pay more for injuries due to this case of ignoring the sublimit?
What I don't understand is why the pilots insurance company paid out more for the sublimit of $100,000 (which was reported in the news) for Bodily Injury per passenger. Did the insurance company just set a precedent?? I wonder if other accidents where a passenger gets injured would the insurance companies now have to pay more for injuries due to this case of ignoring the sublimit?
Similar threads
