.....

Youre thinking exactly as I am. But here's the issue. He already told me he wont sue me for Loss of Revenue. If I go tell him all this ya'll good men are saying about this incident being unreportable to NTSB, he might ****** me over and sue me for LOR. If, that's IF he reports it to FAA/NTSB, will they follow through with it? Or will they interpret Part 830 and dismiss the case?

.....

And if he does not file, will Insurance will on his behalf?

JamesNoBrakes

The FAA WILL investigate an occurrence, incident or accident to see if there are any violations of 14 CFR, even if they are not related at all to the original occurrence/situation (like airplane had an invalid registration). That's not due to over-staffing or bloated FSDOs, it's just the responsibility as the regulating and certificating entity. A pilot doesn't need to go "telling the FAA" about everything they do, the reporting requirements are in 49 CFR 830 for the NTSB, but the FAA retains the ability to look at records and documents and has a responsibility to ensure people are out there operating safe and by the regulations. Obviously the FAA "wants" to know of anything that happens to determine whether the certificate holder should continue to hold that certificate, whether or not there are safety concerns with the aircraft being used or how it was used, and whether or not the operations being conducted were "safe". These are responsibilities of the FAA. Keep in mind there are "eyes" out there in many places. Not looking to "catch" anyone, just looking to ensure the above.

That "6 suits" part of the article is pure conjecture/fiction. There is usually only one person assigned to an accident or incident, and most of the time they do it alone, sometimes all from the office and just using an inspector out in the field to collect some data if they are already there. Two is the most I've ever seen at one site at one time, unless it was a big passenger aircraft, like 20 seats or more. It's rare for inspectors to travel to a site unless it's very significant or they are very close, again, much is done from the office. Photos are often shared from the insurance company or NTSB. There's usually so much other work going on that tasking 6 people to gather data that can be done by one or two people just doesn't happen.

Now, there is a potential issue here, it sounds like the pilot has learned that the wing spars were damaged. This is reportable to the NTSB under 830.5 and 830.2 (which defines substantial damage). Most of the time the NTSB will just want to collect some statements and information over the phone. Sometimes after contacting them they will tell you they are not interested in the incident/accident at all and will not classify it as such, even though it meets the technical definition of an "accident". The FAA doesn't have any powers or enforcement authority regarding the reporting of accidents, that lies with the NTSB. It does sound like this may be reportable, which to me means it is until you are told otherwise by the NTSB.

I hope I can make as much money as the article says I make! It's way, way off. The "salary" quoted is for GS-14 (not 13 or 12) step 7 or 8 or so...I've read this article before of course, but these kind of obvious liberties with facts and the exaggerations don't help anyone. I will readily admit that pilots should know a LOT more about how the FAA works, it's responsibilities, how to ensure a fair outcome when anything happens, and so on. Very few people are usually interested in this or teach this unfortunately. Hopefully as with other industries and subjects, the internet and other medias will help to encourage and enable pilots to do this in the future.

ackattacker

You are way overthinking this and letting yourself think that you need to wheel and deal to get the best outcome. You need to relax. He wants to report it? Fine. He may have a legal obligation to do so. And trust me, you want to approach this by the book.

By the book means not cutting some short of shady "deal" trying to protect your record. NOT worth it. Having a bungled landing on your record as a PPL is not going to make a dent in your employability down the road.

Edit: keep in mind the mandatory reporting elements of 830.5 fall upon the *operator* of the aircraft. Which has a specific legal meaning and is not you, Joe Rental Pilot. It's the guy who has operational control, in this case the fellow renting you the aircraft. He's the one who knows specifically what damage was done and it's his responsibility to report if it meets the definition. Not really your concern or even something you should be asking too many questions about.

Your job is to say, sorry I screwed up. Take your lumps, if any. Let the owner and insurance company deal with it. It's their problem now, not yours. If the FAA or NTSB wants to talk to you about it, be honest but no need to volunteer information not requested.

Hawker Driver

I was you back in 1983. 80 total hours. Porpoised. Flat nose tire. Broken runway light. Towered airport. Certified letter some time later from the FAA advising me of a 609, now 709 review. Bummer!!!! Appointment at a FSDO with an inspector later that summer. With my ticket on the line, was it scary? Yeah. I passed.

Go up with a seasoned instructor, like I did, to critique your landings. Like me, that was where the incident occurred so that is what they will be checking. Sorry to hear.

USMCFLYR

'GS-12s and 13s an an AVERGAE salary of $130,000'


Hardly.
Is it that hard to Google GS salaries/pay rates?

The article contains some important points and much flair.
And Martha should know better.

tcaphou1

Sorry to hear you having to go thru this situation. The most important thing you did was file an ASRS report. The majority of the info above is mostly correct and excellent advise. I personally would retain counsel (aviation experience) to better inform you so that you are not going thru this alone and with out proper information. I do wish you the best of luck and don't let it get you down. We all have "challenges" to our aviation careers that we have to overcome. You will come out of this a better pilot and, more importantly, a better person.

.....

Thanks everyone. What are the chances the flight schools insurance will subrogate me? The owner said it was not likely due because this is pilot error, not negligence. My Non Owned Ins is $5K to cover their deductible of 5K, and their Ins will take care of everything from there.

PerfInit

KF5OVP- Is your name Eric? Is KF5OVP a ham radio Callsign issued to you by the FCC? If so, it's not an anonymous screen name.

Recommend that you heed the advice given by several other posters and at least consider reporting this to the NTSB. Failure to report ( if it is required per NTSB 830,) is definitely not recommended.

Playing the "what if" game with the aircraft owner/flight school is not a good use of your time. You have no control over what the other parties will or will not do.

You paid a lot of money to earn your certificate. Think about what you need to do to keep your pilot certificate in your pocket!

I would also recommend spending some time this weekend writing a written statement about the event. Include details such as final approach speed, descent rate, wind speed, anything you remember. Keep it to yourself, but have it available just in case it is requested by either an investigative agency OR insurance company. The more time passes since the incident, the less you will remember.

Highly recommend you sign up with AOPA Legal plan. Well worth the extra piece of mind.

Lastly, I am glad that nobody got hurt. That is what is most important here.

V/R

JamesNoBrakes

This is good advice. There are plenty of things (accidents, violations, etc) that are investigated where a 709 is not asked for. One of the biggest reasons in these cases is that the information above is provided and no one is left wondering "well, did this person just mess up because they don't know how to fly/don't understand what happened/have no control"? Try to turn this into a positive. Sure, it won't be a very "positive" in the sense that you have to pay a deductible and there's a ****ed-off FBO owner, but use it as a reason and a means to get better at landing and make it one of your strongest points. I started out weak with landings, with my private pilot instructor giving me great advice such as "pull the power when it 'looks good'", so throughout my private and instrument I really didn't understand landings or do them all that well. When one did go well, I had no idea why. So I made it my goal to analyze landings and understand what happened and why they worked, none of the pitch-for-airspeed stuff that results in wildly variable approach paths or pretending that you "stall" when you land, just really getting into it and understanding the aerodynamics and why it works when it works and why it doesn't when it doesn't.

If you approach a reexamination like this, own up to it, have the mindset that you want to improve this aspect of your flying and understanding, you will impress the inspector and a 709 will be a trivial thing. You only have to "meet the standard" in the 709 and the landings don't have to be perfect of course. If you explain it like this to anyone in the future, they will probably be impressed, rather than think negatively of you. A 709 ride, assuming you pass, is not likely to affect your career in any way. The 8710 form gets sent to OKC and says you passed a reexamination. It's not a violation or anything like that, which is what the airlines look for via the PRIA requests.

From the Pilot's Record Improvement Act Advisory Circular:

and from another part of the same document:

So the short answer is no, a 709, assuming you pass, will not be included in a PRIA search, unless you fail and your certificate is downgraded/taken away, which constitutes a failed check and a notice of disapproval is issued. In that case, according to the note, if the procedures are followed, an employer could find out about it. Failing a 709 is statistically very rare. Again, if you turn this into a strength, it would be a good story to share at any pilot job interview, and that would "get it out of the way" too.