Were something to be damaged

[9 lives]

There has been a discussion elsewhere about some damage to the facility done by the pilot/aircraft. In a more broad sense, where is the line between "wear and tear" on the facility, or damage done by a pilot/aircraft for which the pilot should bear responsibility?

If a pilot fails to chock or brake a parked aircraft, and it rolls an does damage to something else, it would seem to be the responsibility of the pilot, and that pilot could expect a claim for damage to be made to them. If that same aircraft is chocked and suitably tied to concrete weights, and a strong wind still blows it into another aircraft, should the pilot still be liable?

If the facility itself is damaged, like a grass area being rutted by a heavy aircraft rolling on it, should the pilot be responsible for repair to the runway, if they did not confirm that the ground condition was suitable for that aircraft then? I prior arranged a few nights parking elsewhere. When I was told that tiedown would be on the grass, I stated that my aircraft was a 2000 pound taildragger, and asked if the ground would support it. "Sure, it'll be just fine" was the reply. When I taxied as directed, my plane sank to the axles in soft ground, and required a large truck and an hour to tow it out. When I inquired, it was determined that the airport staff member who replied to my inquiry had no idea about the suitability of the ground. Lesson learned - they were left to restore the ground, and I pried and scrubbed away the mud on my plane.

Where's the line between "the pilot should have known better" and "the facility should withstand the wear and tear"?

[Crash one]

I would reckon that if you were acting on information from a telephone or radio call prior to proceeding at an unfamiliar airfield then the airfield is responsible.
If you had just decided without asking and after landing that you would park on the grass for a picnic, then you would be responsible.
The grey area might be if you were advised that you can tie down on the grass, and you lashed a 500kg aircraft to a 5gallon drum of water, which then blew away taking an F16 with it then it may be your fault depending on who or where you got the 5gallon drum from.
Excuse my drivelling.

[mothminor]

I seem to remember overhearing a conversation between 2 aeroplane owners at a well known grass airfield north of luton.
They apparently had been told that if they "damaged" the airfield by operating when the surface was soft (winter) and caused ruts, they may be charged for any repairs needed.

[piperboy84]

I've had the strip rutted up a few times, once in soggy conditions on an emergency diversion due to a failing engine, other times when folks have landed the morning after a few days of hard rain. Either way it's bound to happen and it's just one of those things you accept, nothing else for it than to get the spades, rake and wheelbarrow out and fill in the ruts till the next time.