HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE
An operational scenario
A survey operator completes an aircraft mission without injury or aircraft damage, but the customer alleges that inaccurate data caused a project delay. A separate flight later exposes customer-owned sensors to physical damage.
Illustrative example only; this is not a Montridge client or reported claim.
The insurance distinction
An aircraft liability policy should not be assumed to cover the accuracy of a survey or other professional output. Onboard equipment ownership and physical damage interests also require specific scheduling and wording review.
What to examine
Identify manned or unmanned aircraft, terrain, flight patterns, customer equipment and use of subcontracted operators. Compare the project’s professional obligations and indemnities with the aviation and professional policies.
Evidence to gather
- Mission descriptions and operating areas
- Customer statement of work
- Equipment ownership and values
- Quality controls and professional liability wording
Questions for your review
- Who is responsible for the accuracy of the deliverable?
- Are sensors included in insured values?
- Does subcontracting the flight change contractual responsibility?
References and review status
- Global Aerospace non-owned aircraft application
Separate liability and aircraft damage questions; does not bind coverage
References support the indicated background topic. Review questions are educational analysis; no specific policy specimen has been supplied. Source checks: November 12, 2026.