Prop strike to a dog....

[EricJ]

I grew up with all kinds of animals including lots of dogs.   As an adult I've come to the reluctant conclusion that most dog owners are not qualified to own dogs.

 

[jetdriven]

true story. but even better we have two...yippeee..

[chrisk]

I often see dogs at the airport.  I'll just make the observation that a number of people have also walked into propellers.  Most dogs are less aware than most people, but not all.   

Anyway, my dogs are always on a leash when out of the house, even though they are reasonably well trained. Unfortunately, they are not 100% with voice commands.

[Jim Peace]

The first thing an off leash dog owner will do after the prop strike is to blame the pilot....there is absolutely NO doubt about it.....

The second thing that will happen is the off leash owner will go out and do a few touch and go's

[Jsavage3]

It's been years ago, but this thread brings it back for me, unfortunately.  A nice fellow who enjoyed family time at his hangar had his beautiful lab get into his Bonanza's prop.  Killed the dog nearly instantly...got it in the neck.  Everyone at the airport was sick at heart.  That poor family, to say the least, they quit coming out to the airport...  I have to say I would certainly vote for pets to be restrained when anywhere near operating aircraft.

[chrisk]

2 minutes ago, Jim Peace said:

The first thing an off leash dog owner will do after the prop strike is to blame the pilot....there is absolutely NO doubt about it.....

Unless the pilot asks them for ID so they can pay for the $8000 teardown prop strike inspection that their animal caused.

[Jim Peace]

Just now, chrisk said:

Unless the pilot asks them for ID so they can pay for the $8000 teardown prop strike inspection that their animal caused.

I cannot see an off leash dog owner even understanding that it his or her responsibility to pay for the tear down....They will probably call in a favor to the Clinton foundation they donated to help them out.....

[RobertGary1]

No mater how much you tell yourself that your dog is well behaved it’s still a dog and dogs are prone to being distracted. They’re very impulsive by nature. Just like kids we can’t expect them to always make wise decisions 

-Robert

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, Jim Peace said:

I cannot see an off leash dog owner even understanding that it his or her responsibility to pay for the tear down....They will probably call in a favor to the Clinton foundation they donated to help them out.....

I think we've all learned that a far more effective method is to deny the facts, blame everyone else, and then double-down on the denial.  Works like a charm!

[Niko182]

3 hours ago, Jim Peace said:

I cannot see an off leash dog owner even understanding that it his or her responsibility to pay for the tear down....They will probably call in a favor to the Clinton foundation they donated to help them out.....

please don't get politics involved on this website. I get its a joke, but someone won't and this thread will go downhill very quickly, like all the other threads that involve politics.

[JohnB]

Having transported a number of dogs that I have never met from my plane to a building, a runaway is always a risk, even leashed and harnessed ones can escape even the strongest leash holder. Many volunteers who do transports have often dove for these dogs mostly successfully, some not, and unfortunately generally wind up getting  put down if they're not recaptured.  I've had 1 runaway even with all of my experience (fortunately he got loose after we got him off the tarmac and we got him with the help of a lot of people, would have been harder to not possible if his escape was on the ramp). Many animals have been unfortunately killed or put down because of this type of running around an airport (I don't think many airports carry tranquilizer guns, or can wait until animal control gets there if there's an airport safety issue)  Some dogs completely lose it when they get their feet on solid ground, with all of the noise from the airport, they may not even hear their owners. And with the wide open space they see, some dogs are absolute Houdini's at getting out of the best fitting collars and even harnesses, suddenly making their moves and they're loose.

A person who brings an animal on an airport needs to be responsible for that animal. I can see how a dog owner can think that their dog always obeys and will always stay right beside them no matter what, as some dogs will like the rare ones you see hanging out at airports. But with all of the noise at an airport, the fear, they may not even hear their owner, sometimes tough to predict what would happen when an animal gets put into that environment. I wouldn't trust any dog off a leash on airport grounds unless its done it many many times before on a leash successfully, but even with that, I think there's still some risk.

John

[kerry]

17 hours ago, PTK said:

Hypothetical scenario: Unleashed and unattended dog is allowed to run loose out on tarmac and into a spinning prop. Which party is responsible for prop strike inspection? The pilot in the cockpit tending to his airplane or the dog owner?

I've heard it many times. The dogs owner would be responsible for repairs.

[Hector]

I take my yellow lab to the hangar often. She likes to hang around and visit my hangar neighbors (specially those that give her treats). She does not leave my hangar without me and when someone taxis by I have a hand on her, not because she will run out (she will not) but just to let the Pilot taxing by that I have her under control.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dlthig]

Many years ago when I was flying out of a small airport in SE GA, the operator kept a dog around. I would expect that a dog that spends enough time at an airport will eventually get caught by a prop. One day I saw this particular dog walk between the prop and nose wheel, but cleared everything. I have no idea how she lived that long. Eventually, she got hit. It will happen if given enough opportunities. It's a risk reward decision. The owner's call, but be prepared to answer the mail when/if it happens. 

[RobertGary1]

10 hours ago, kerry said:

I've heard it many times. The dogs owner would be responsible for repairs.

Practically, just like with car insurance it really doesn't make much difference though. Your insurance company will repair the plane and at some point they may get reimbursed by the at-fault party, or not. When I had my accident in Mexico I had a $500 deductible at the time on my plane. About 6 months later I got a check from the insurance company returning my deductible because they apparently got reimbursed by the responsible party.

-Robert

[jasona900]

35 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

Practically, just like with car insurance it really doesn't make much difference though. Your insurance company will repair the plane and at some point they may get reimbursed by the at-fault party, or not. When I had my accident in Mexico I had a $500 deductible at the time on my plane. About 6 months later I got a check from the insurance company returning my deductible because they apparently got reimbursed by the responsible party.

-Robert

Out of curiosity..  when it was time to renew, did you have any issues getting coverage, or incur a increase in insurance rates? 

[RobertGary1]

18 minutes ago, jasona900 said:

Out of curiosity..  when it was time to renew, did you have any issues getting coverage, or incur a increase in insurance rates? 

Because they determined I was not at fault it didn't affect my rate at all. I have heard that if you have too many 'not-at-fault' incidence it eventually does start affecting rates.

 

-Robert

[jasona900]

5 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

Because they determined I was not at fault it didn't affect my rate at all. I have heard that if you have too many 'not-at-fault' incidence it eventually does start affecting rates.

 

-Robert

You are very lucky... I had one 'not-at-fault' which required over a $50k payout by the insurance company.  My rates have since doubled, and every other insurance company has denied coverage me except the one I had the previous policy with.  I'm told it will take about 5 years for my rates to return to normal!

[neilpilot]

2 minutes ago, jasona900 said:

You are very lucky... I had one 'not-at-fault' which required over a $50k payout by the insurance company.  My rates have since doubled, and every other insurance company has denied coverage me except the one I had the previous policy with.

Maybe you are very unlucky.  I totaled my 64E ($44 claim) but it didn't seem to effect the premiums on my replacement 65E 3 months later.

[RobertGary1]

4 minutes ago, jasona900 said:

You are very lucky... I had one 'not-at-fault' which required over a $50k payout by the insurance company.  My rates have since doubled, and every other insurance company has denied coverage me except the one I had the previous policy with.  I'm told it will take about 5 years for my rates to return to normal!

Did the insurance company actually consider you "not-at-fault"? 

-Robert

[jasona900]

8 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

Did the insurance company actually consider you "not-at-fault"? 

-Robert

I have told them that I was not at fault, but it does not seem that they care.  On the application I had to fill out, they simply ask if I had an incident within the last 5 years.. didn't ask if I was at fault or not. 

[jasona900]

12 minutes ago, neilpilot said:

Maybe you are very unlucky.  I totaled my 64E ($44 claim) but it didn't seem to effect the premiums on my replacement 65E 3 months later.

Possibly.  When you applied for your replacement policy, did they ask you about any prior incident/accidents?  If they did, and they didn't charge you extra, let me know who underwrites your policy... I'll give them a call!

[PTK]

17 hours ago, Jsavage3 said:

It's been years ago, but this thread brings it back for me, unfortunately.  A nice fellow who enjoyed family time at his hangar had his beautiful lab get into his Bonanza's prop.  Killed the dog nearly instantly...got it in the neck.  Everyone at the airport was sick at heart.  That poor family, to say the least, they quit coming out to the airport...  I have to say I would certainly vote for pets to be restrained when anywhere near operating aircraft.

Poor family? How about poor dog?! How unfortunate to be let down by such an uncaring owner! 

A caring owner doesn’t let their dog die such a horrific death!

[chrisk]

13 minutes ago, jasona900 said:

I have told them that I was not at fault, but it does not seem that they care.  On the application I had to fill out, they simply ask if I had an incident within the last 5 years.. didn't ask if I was at fault or not. 

I had some hail damage to my plane a few years ago.  My rates went up a little.  At renewal, there is a section on  prior claims.  I list the claim and  indicate the plane was not in motion and 100s of miles from the home airport.

[neilpilot]

37 minutes ago, jasona900 said:

Possibly.  When you applied for your replacement policy, did they ask you about any prior incident/accidents?  If they did, and they didn't charge you extra, let me know who underwrites your policy... I'll give them a call!

The 64E was totaled in July 2012, and the replacement 65C was purchased in Nov 2012.  Not only did I disclose the prior accident/claim on my application, but the insurance carrier I renewed with was the same carrier that covered my 64E, AIG.  I've worked thru the AOPAIA since before they were AOPA.  

I had a previous claim in 1992 that involved a nose gear, prop and engine tear-down on that same 64E.  Off hand I don't recall who the underwriter was, but I do recall that in that case my premium did increase the following year, but by only $50.