Record-seeking teen pilot lands in Albany

[RJM62]

http://www.timesunion.com/local/art...ot-lands-in-Albany-8352283.php#photo-10516861

There are two things about this article that aren't mentioned but that stand out nonetheless: Firstly, Isaiah is not actually flying solo; and secondly, the flight would seem to me to violate the Child Pilot Safety Act that was enacted after the Jessica Dubroff tragedy.

I did speak to the reporter, Tim O'Brien (who is not a pilot) by phone. His answer to the solo question was that "solo" refers to Isaiah's planned flight around the world when he turns 18, not to the current flight. Apparently the word "solo" in the tag line was an error by a copy editor. (Reporters generally don't write their own headlines and tag lines.)

With regard to the questionable legality of the flight, Tim was not aware of the Child Pilot Safety Act and said he'd look into it.

Rich

 

[James331]

What's this child act?

 

[RJM62]

What's this child act?

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ264/pdf/PLAW-104publ264.pdf

Scroll down to page 51.

Rich

 

[Jimmy cooper]

This kid has an instructor with him so what's the big story? It's a big yawn as is the girl who has flown with an experienced well rated co pilot. Must have been a slow news day.

 

[flyingron]

The actual reference to the code is 49 USC 44724

§44724. Manipulation of flight controls
(a) Prohibition.—No pilot in command of an aircraft may allow an individual who does not hold—

(1) a valid private pilots certificate issued by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration under part 61 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and

(2) the appropriate medical certificate issued by the Administrator under part 67 of such title,


to manipulate the controls of an aircraft if the pilot knows or should have known that the individual is attempting to set a record or engage in an aeronautical competition or aeronautical feat, as defined by the Administrator.

(b) Revocation of Airmen Certificates.—The Administrator shall issue an order revoking a certificate issued to an airman under section 44703 of this title if the Administrator finds that while acting as a pilot in command of an aircraft, the airman has permitted another individual to manipulate the controls of the aircraft in violation of subsection (a).

(c) Pilot in Command Defined.—In this section, the term “pilot in command” has the meaning given such term by section 1.1 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
​

 

[James331]

Meh, whatever.

That's not a "child"

We draw our childhood WAAAAY too long in this country anyways, one of the reasons we have adults acting like children.

 

[RJM62]

Meh, whatever.

That's not a "child"

We draw our childhood WAAAAY too long in this country anyways, one of the reasons we have adults acting like children.

Well, I agree with that. But it is what it is. We've become a nation of hand-wringing ninnies and sissies. Be that as it may, it still seems to me that the CFI is violating the law and putting his own ticket at risk by taking part in what clearly is a record-seeking attempt.

Rich

 

[silver-eagle]

I did not see a definition for a "child". Is that so it is subject to interpretation? At 16, you can get an auto learner's permit. What's the big deal then?

 

[flyingron]

It doesn't need a definition of a child. The law applies to any "individual is attempting to set a record or engage in an aeronautical competition or aeronautical feat." It matters not how old they are. If you're activity is classified in this realm "as defined by the administrator" you better have a pilot and medical certificate.

 

[RJM62]

I did not see a definition for a "child". Is that so it is subject to interpretation? At 16, you can get an auto learner's permit. What's the big deal then?

At 16, you can also solo an airplane. You just can't attempt to set any records, at any age, unless you have a pilot certificate and a medical. For all intents and purposes, however, the law sets the minimum age at 17 -- the minimum age at which a PPL can be obtained for powered flight.

Interestingly, the law would also appear to make illegal any record-setting attempts by glider and balloon pilots, who aren't required to have medicals (unless a case could be made for the "appropriate medical certificate" for those activities being defined as "none"). Ultralight pilots would be okay, however, because ultralights are technically "vehicles," not "aircraft."

Rich