Originally Posted by
tdracer
When I paid to take a 30 minute flight on a B-17 several years back, I had to sign a release that basically said I understood this WWII vintage aircraft wasn't up to current safety standards. At least in the US, signing a similar release would be SOP before being allowed to fly on any vintage aircraft.
I know Switzerland isn't as lawyer obsessed as the US, but wouldn't there be a similar requirement for those who wanted to fly on the JU52?
They all do , but it is not an "out of jail card guarantee" if there is negligence , you'll end up in court , paper or no paper signed. Some vintage operations make you member of their association for one day, so that , as member , you are supposed to know the risks, That what we did with when my club had one ,
But all this is cosmetic if you get an accident. Hell will fall on you paper signed or not. and I would dare to say , even in the US.
As Hotel tango clearly sated , people will do ( and sign) anything to fly in those old aircraft, and basically they want the thrill and experience the perceived "danger" of flying like in the 1930's.
An Hybrid solution is what Lufthansa has done , kept the air frame but put more powerful P&W engines with modern instrumentation, and apply Lufthansa Technik maintenance standards., but that means the aircraft is very often AOG , for small things , like now...
The other big difference with Lufthansa is also they do not need to make money on theses operations..