Originally Posted by
Styx75
I disagree with pretty much all of what you've written there. I'm not sure what the particular licensing was in this case; but generally if an instructor is sending an unlicensed pilot on a solo, they will bear the brunt of the responsibility for its outcome. More so if civil proceedings commence. An instructor can't just wipe their hands of responsibility when they exit the aircraft.
And there is a lot a supervising instructor can do, like I listed in previous post. There are ways to talk to a solo student in CTA: ask the tower to relay a msg, ask the twr if you can speak directly to the aircraft. If your the type worried about using a handheld radio, get yourself an AROC. But if your timely advice turns an accident into an incident, or incident into a non-event, nothing is going to happen. Now in a CTAF, where personalities try to dictate right of way, comms with your solo student can be essential.
And the biggest reason to be supervising a solo student: if something does happen, when the police come knocking, or the atsb, or the kids parents; you'll be able to give an account of what actually happened. As the authorising instructor, that'll be a lot better then saying "I was in the tea room when...". Same goes for your weird statement about minors. They are considered minors, and if you as an instructor arnt considering your elevated duty of care given your position of authority, you shouldn't be sending minors on a solo. Or instructing them at all. Be dammed if the regs don't say so specifically; they don't tell you not to call people of the internet idiots but I do that too.
While Operations manuals will vary, it will specify exactly what a supervising pilot will be required to do. What a supervising pilot has to do and what they should do will be specific, what you think they should do is not relevant.
The whole idea of competency based training was that when accidents happen the training file will show what has and has not been taught. The student is required to countersign completed lessons and this shows acceptance of the assessment of their standard. In this case there would be recognition of prior learning/experience, in line with the regulations allowing it and that training also accounted for. Generally above about 15 years of age is an acceptable age to accept responsibility for ones own life. Hence why employment, learning to drive and various other competency based adult activities are allowed.
As I said above the only difference for a person under the age of 18 would be possibly a letter from the parent or guardian approving the activity and signed that they and the participant are aware of the risks and dangers.
So in short once the instructor is satisfied that the student is ready (CBT completed and assessment done), and the student has accepted they are ready (training documents signed) the legalities are done. The supervising instructors only real responsibility then is to ensure that the flight takes place in conditions that the pilot is capable of handling. That is the supervising instructors duty of care.
This was covered in another thread. There have been cases where this has been tested, and the outcome found as above. The law permits a person of 14 years of age to hold a student certificate, you can go solo at 15 years of age and hold licences from 16 years of age. All this talk of duty of care, is taken care of within the required laws. Unless the instructor does something else that is illegal with a person under the age of 18 unrelated to aviation then there is no other duty of care issue in regard to flying training. In any case there are many other things of similar nature that you could get in trouble with persons over the age of 18, so if that is your worry, then don't instruct at all. There's a whole different problem if you were to offer some sort of accommodation aside from simple flight training.
PS the same ATSB/CASA/Police will come knocking for the same reasons if it was a partner, son, father, mother, etc etc over the age of 18 if there was any sniff of negligence.
BTW I have sent a lot of first solos, triple digits of them, if I ever thought that they would need assistance in the circuit then I would not send them. I have watched them all conduct the circuit, to completion, never once have I needed to contact them or intervene in any way. Some were between 16 and 18 years old, I was never worried or in doubt of their capabilities when I jumped out, much less worried about any legal complication.