Recommended Posts

+1. I had a student when I first started doing tandems, that as soon as we exited, appeared to be trying to grab his toes! I let him be the bottom weight and threw the drogue. He did it 3-4 times before I leg locked him and made him stop. After opening I asked him what was he trying to do and whether he remembered any of the "arch" briefing I had given him. (I did use some of the words I learned in Boot Camp though!). He told me he was trying to "go head down real fast" like he had seen in the James Bond movies! Did wonders for my confidence.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

*********dumb. The TM should never have let that happen.

Yes because we let our students take cellphones on jumps for this exact purpose.

More likely the student was a douche nozzle, and despite being told to empty their pockets fully they snuck their phone on to the jump and pulled it out unannounced and unplanned.

Would the pilot be in jeopardy of an enforcement action/lawsuit if the phone was dropped and caused injury/damage?

"It Depends." (stock answer to just about any legal question, thanks Prof Schaefer)

If the DZ has a policy of "empty your pockets, no phones or cameras on the jump", and this "douche nozzle" student violated that policy and snuck the phone on the jump, then probably not.

Most lawyers would probably answer: Would the pilot, as well as the TM, the DZO, the S&TA, and the airport owner all be at risk of a lawsuit or enforcement action - even with the best "policy" possible in place? Absolutely yes, because, as the saying goes, "In the US, you can sue anyone for anything. But that doesn't mean you'll necessarily win."

Now then: Might they have viable defenses that might eventually get them off the hook? Maybe, maybe not, but even if so, only after a long, aggravating process (maybe multiple processes), and only after spending many thousands of dollars in (often un-recoverable) legal fees.
Are the pilot, TM, DZO, etc guaranteed to win based on that defense? No. Why not? Well, if such an incident did occur it arguably means that they failed to search the student well enough pre-jump to effectively enforce their strict policy. (Unless it's stuck up the student's asshole. Or worse.)
And for the DZO, even if he wins the case(s), it might still give him future trouble obtaining affordable insurance, and/or it might provoke hostile airport access opposition.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.