FAR 91.3 - Emergency Authority

elitehelipilot

elitehelipilot

Just another CFI
So I'm reading the FARs today, an exhilarating activity to be sure. I come across FAR 91.3 which I have read before and think of a question I'd like to pose to the community here.

91.3;

Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

So there you have it. In an emergency the PIC can exercise his authority, and deviate from ATC instruction and clearances. This seems pretty logical, and I know that the logbook rule could be cited here (don't log bic time, honor system) but what is to keep a pilot from abusing this authority to say, get around a clearance that he/she doesn't like? Subsection (c) says only on request does the pilot have to submit a report - how often are the requests made?

Just wondering what your take is on subsection (c). Should it be stated that a pilot MUST submit a report, or do you think that this rule is solid as is?
 
The rule is solid as is. If you abuse it you'll have a short-lived career. Generally if you have a deviation that screws up a controller's plans then he's going to forward the event to the FSDO for an inspector to review. If you claim you declared an emergency, fine... but realize the inspectors are pilots too, they're generally not stupid.
 
91.3;

Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.
 
but what is to keep a pilot from abusing this authority to say, get around a clearance that he/she doesn't like?
Click to expand...
Getting caught at it and getting your certificates suspended or revoked?

How about a hypothetical scenario - where one would actually want to do it, wouldn't be causing a problem that would lead to further questions* and have a back-story a story that would hold up. I'm betting that when ATC follows up with an informal questioning (typical) it would take about 2 minutes for them to figure out that a pilot is full of crap and prompt the request for a report.

(* I'm not even talking about a request for a report under (c) at this point. In my one IFR emergency, I was given a phone number to call once I got on the ground - to let them know I was ok - and received a FSDO inspector call to discuss the event. I was not asked to file a (c) report)
 
n57flyguy said:
Declaring an emergency because of bad routing is unethical and not an emergency, accepting a clearance that may put you in an emergency situation is stupid.
Click to expand...
I forget who it was, but one aviation writer used to tell a story about being routed pretty far out over the ocean in a single, something he was very concerned about. After failing to negotiate a better route, he finally declared an emergency. To the controller's "state the nature of your emergency," he replied (I'm loosely paraphrasing; wish I could find it), "The one I'll have if my engine so much as hiccoughs out there."
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
I forget who it was, but one aviation writer used to tell a story about being routed pretty far out over the ocean in a single, something he was very concerned about. After failing to negotiate a better route, he finally declared an emergency. To the controller's "state the nature of your emergency," he replied (I'm loosely paraphrasing; wish I could find it), "The one I'll have if my engine so much as hiccoughs out there."
Click to expand...

I should rephrase that statement a bit I made, something more to the effect of just because you don't like the routing you got that wont put you in weather, fuel emergency, over water etc. I guess that story you told reflects the in between. I refused to accept a routing over Wash because it was going to put me too far South and I would have had to start questioning fuel, and this is when the weather at my destination was around 900/1...nothing crazy but enough to make me check my personal minimums with a new IR (plus if I had to go missed for whatever reason I would then be illegal). This was after FOUR complete reroutes from ATC, due to me being persistent about my routing to avoid weather. The controller even stated "if you don't want it, I don't know what else to tell you." I very grudgingly accepted it, knowing that if I didn't get what I needed, I had options to divert. I was lucky that approach gave me direct my destination after, but I will never rely on hoping that ATC will give me the direct or vector needed.

Gotta love the Northeast.
 
elitehelipilot said:
So I'm reading the FARs today, an exhilarating activity to be sure. I come across FAR 91.3
Click to expand...
Ah, a kindred soul, reading the FARs for exhilaration, and 91.3 is my favorite.

I like to tie it to 91. 103, (get it, 91.3~91.103) which has the awesome statement, "Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight."

"All available information", isn't that awesome?

So, be sure you have complied with 91.103, before beginning the flight, when you exercise your 91.3 authority.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Nah. The story I related was more about not abdicating PIC responsibility. Your post was fine. Your response example was even better :)
Click to expand...

Thanks, it is something I approach very seriously.

Wouldn't happen to have been Jeff Van West would said that (in reference to your story)?
 
n57flyguy said:
Declaring an emergency because of bad routing is unethical and not an emergency, accepting a clearance that may put you in an emergency situation is stupid.
Click to expand...

Dislike.

If you need something in the interest of safety, even if you are in that situation purely and solely because of poor decisions you've already made, do it and declare. Period.

If you look into your crystal ball and see calling the Coast Guard 45 minutes down the road... "Unable" is a smart thing to start thinking.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Dislike.

If you need something in the interest of safety, even if you are in that situation purely and solely because of poor decisions you've already made, do it and declare. Period.

If you look into your crystal ball and see calling the Coast Guard 45 minutes down the road... "Unable" is a smart thing to start thinking.
Click to expand...

Either do I, read the story below that I posted.
 
What's to stop you for declaring an emergency every day? Nothing at all.

You can do anything you want in an airplane- once.
 
nosehair said:
"Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight."

"All available information", isn't that awesome? .
Click to expand...

I love broad and general rules like that. :D

On the topic, one of the biggest phrases I've seen abused at times is "minimum fuel." Problem is, too many guys don't realize that this phrase is (and is treated) as general and broad by ATC in the same way as the 91.103 statement is written.
 
Just to throw a wrench into your guys 91.3 discussion I'm just going to leave these here... :D


Avweb Article

Or how about this idiot? (Whatever happened to him btw?)



Edit: This article partially answers my question. "Welcome to New York." Bahahaha! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top