denverpilot
Tied Down
Some people live life. Some hang out at the mall.
And "acceptable level" is personal - no one can really answer the question for someone else.I've made my compromise. Anyone who asks these questions has done themselves a good deal. Many on this site will advance the idea that you can minimize the risks to an acceptable level.
And "acceptable level" is personal - no one can really answer the question for someone else.
It does the OP a disservice to imply that reaching any decision other than continuing to fly amounts to deciding to sit life out "at the mall". With no disrespect to non-parents, I anticipate that parenting will be a more significant challenge (and accomplishment) than flying.
I'm in my old age. I have flown for over fifty years. Stopped at times but always went back. I never got an instrument ticket but learned enough instrument flying to get out of a jam. Never flew a twin alone but have flown a lot in shrike commanders ( a buddy was a demo pilot for a distributor) and in an MU2 in the right seats. As I look back , I knew a lot of people who flew instruments, were really adept, professional and many of them were seriously injured or died flying. One badly injured in his own trophy twin commanche in February, in northern virgina. Water in fuel,iced up, engines quit, landed in a field but snow made him slide, gear was up, into a bank, rear passenger, seat belt unbuckled came forward, used him as an airbag. He never flew again. He had high time, had owned several aircraft including a shrike commander and a beech 90, a turbine. Another, an instructor, tried to land at Martin state airport, 1979, no ILS back then, in a twin turbine Cheyenne, clipped a high tension wire on approach which ripped off cowling on right engine and 200 feet of wire was dragging behind the airplane. He called BWI and declared an emergency (heavy fog) and was vectored for a straight in. He missed the first approach, on the second, the wire caught in some trees at the far end of the runway, pulled them down. Plane exploded, pilot and person in right seat died. Identified by dental records. Person in back thrown clear, lived. He attempted to land at Martin state as that's where their cars were. Not good. Bad decision. Another, in a mooney, dropped off passenger in Bozeman Montana, headed for Baltimore. Snowing. Going into Omaha neb. For gas, had maybe 800 hours total, 200 instrument, misread markers, got low, crashed the mooney. Bad facial injuries, broken leg, very cold. Crawled out of plane, collapsed. By luck deputy sheriff decided to check other side of river for missing plane and found him near death. A year later, double vision gone, face repaired, new false teeth, he went on to fly commercially for many years. Lucky! I could go on as there's much more but I'm sure others have had friends who have gone this way too. The above pilots were all CFI's , the mooney pilot later retired with over 15000 hours, most in commanders a lot in mooneys's and aerostars or super stars. Fate is the hunter.
I waited til my 3 daughters where through college, now it's my time to play.
Ditto, me and the wife don't fly together unless we are all 4 there. Sort of a morbid compact, but a good working compromise. The rule stays till the two girls get out of college.
Just because the whole family is in the plane doesn't mean everyone will die in the crash. Seriously faulty logic on that one.
And "acceptable level" is personal - no one can really answer the question for someone else.
It does the OP a disservice to imply that reaching any decision other than continuing to fly amounts to deciding to sit life out "at the mall". With no disrespect to non-parents, I anticipate that parenting will be a more significant challenge (and accomplishment) than flying.
Ditto, me and the wife don't fly together unless we are all 4 there. Sort of a morbid compact, but a good working compromise. The rule stays till the two girls get out of college.
Not at all uncommon either. I have several pilot friends with families that will fly either with any of the kids, or with the whole family, but not with 'mom and dad alone', "Don't want to leave orphans." While the position is arguable on several fronts, it's not nonsensical either.
I have only one child. My wife would not fly unless my son was also on-board. He and I could fly together for some unknown reason without her. This was for about the first 2-3 years and 250 hours. Since then, she now asks if I can take her on a sunset flight several times a year. My son is now preparing for college and I guess the "pressure" is off.
Have her read my wife's section in this article:She is going to take some lessons to make sure she can land safely in the event I become incapacitated.
It is unimaginable to think about what could possibly happen while flying with family, but I wouldn't trade this for anything.
Ditto, me and the wife don't fly together unless we are all 4 there. Sort of a morbid compact, but a good working compromise. The rule stays till the two girls get out of college.
A side note, last christmas all of us were home, so we had a great fly-in vacation to Asheville, NC. No booking tickets, no taking off shoes... just get in a plane and drive... well sorta![]()
Have her read my wife's section in this article:
http://www.avweb.com/news/safety/181598-1.html?redirected=1#Anchor-Catherin-33201
Rather than consider not flying, I think the better choice is to simply decide to be as conservative as possible in the interest of safety. Looking at the accident statistics it seem pretty clear that if you always land with at least an hour's fuel, don't buzz your friend's houses, resist the temptation to push on when the weather makes you uncomfortable, the risks in flying are reduced to a level comparable to driving a car on public roads.
Ken -- completely off topic -- but is the dog in your avatar a Samoyed or a Eskimo? I can't tell from the picture how big he is.
Samoyed. Legally she's "El-Al's A Touch of Destiny", aka Tia. Currently a champion and only a couple points from grand champion. With puppies on the way.Ken -- completely off topic -- but is the dog in your avatar a Samoyed or a Eskimo? I can't tell from the picture how big he is.
Rather than consider not flying, I think the better choice is to simply decide to be as conservative as possible in the interest of safety. Looking at the accident statistics it seem pretty clear that if you always land with at least an hour's fuel, don't buzz your friend's houses, resist the temptation to push on when the weather makes you uncomfortable, the risks in flying are reduced to a level comparable to driving a car on public roads.
Looking at the accident statistics it seems pretty clear normal rational nonrisk taking types just can't resist being stupid on a consistent basis.
Looking at the accident statistics it seems pretty clear normal rational nonrisk taking types just can't resist being stupid on a consistent basis.
I've never seen accident statistics for "normal rational nonrisk taking types." If you're trying to make a point that everyone thinks that describes them, I'm not even sure that's true. There are folks who live on the edge, and they know it. There are folks who take irresponsible risks, but don't care. And there are those who are sloppy but don't know it. It's the last group that we all need to make sure we're not in, but I doubt that it classifies the majority of pilots.
JKG
Getting my certificate is something I've wanted to do for my entire life. I'm to the point in my mid 30s where I make a decent living and could afford to start the training. My wife is on-board with it, but she asked me this: If we have a baby by this time next year, would I want to continue to fly?
It's a great question I am struggling with. My dad passed away when I was young, so I know what it's like to grow up without a father. Insurance will take care of their needs, but you can't replace a parent. I also realize you can't eliminate all risk from life.
Curious...what some of you guys with young families have thought on this topic? How do you balance the risk over your passion for aviation?
Having a small child and also having grown up without a father, I understand the concern.
In my case, by the time our son was born, my wife and I had accumulated over 8,000 hours, all 91/135. His first flight was around 1 month and he's accumulated something near 50 hours since he was born (he had 50 hours before he was born - all twin engine, some helicopter, and mostly turbine). So he'll be around it and we've never thought twice about it.
If I had 0 hours, it would probably be a different story since then I'd be trying to learn something from new and really not know what I was doing. So you have to make that decision for yourself.
I did stop riding my motorcycle to work, though.
Getting my certificate is something I've wanted to do for my entire life. I'm to the point in my mid 30s where I make a decent living and could afford to start the training. My wife is on-board with it, but she asked me this: If we have a baby by this time next year, would I want to continue to fly?
It's a great question I am struggling with. My dad passed away when I was young, so I know what it's like to grow up without a father. Insurance will take care of their needs, but you can't replace a parent. I also realize you can't eliminate all risk from life.
Curious...what some of you guys with young families have thought on this topic? How do you balance the risk over your passion for aviation?