Flying Friends???

[Dana]

When I was 17 (I had my ppl) I was very safe and responsible when taking my parents or other adults up. Taking friends my own age, not so much. Fortunately I and they survived.

 

[Samuel Peight]

People only think that all teenagers are alike because it is so near to the truth. Don’t worry about proving them wrong. Just let them be wrong and work within their framework. Life is so much easier when you accept the things you can’t change. I wish someone had been able to convince me of that when I was 17.

I do agree that nearly every teen is like that. I generally don't worry too much about proving people wrong, although some times it's hard not to try.

 

[Samuel Peight]

In my state, a judgment is subject to execution for 20 years after entry. It doesn’t matter if you have assets today. It matters if you plan to have assets later. I’m 37 now. A judgment taken against me when I was 17 could still, today, be collected from my assets, like my airplanes or my house, although they would probably start with my retirement accounts and other investments while sending out annual garnishment papers to take most of my income.

A personal judgment can arise for many reasons. No insurance. Insurance denies coverage. Insurance limits inadequate for claim. With or without insurance, be safe out there. You are responsible for your mistakes and you can pay with your life, your nice things, and/or your ability to have nice things when you are your parents’ age.

Back to the OP’s issue, I stand behind what I said above. Go flying with your dad and your best friend or your girlfriend and her mom. Whatever works. Two reasons. First, teenagers generally act at the level of the least mature one present but there’s an exception for when a responsible parent is there. (Not all parents are responsible, mind you.) Nobody is immune to the teenager group stupidity phenomenon, and even if you are there is no reason for your parents or your friends’ parents to believe it until they see it in action. Second, when the other kid or the parent has a panic attack because the plane is falling from the sky and the wings are being shaken off by severe turbulence (or, as pilots would refer to it, a stabilized approach in smooth air), having a third person in the plane to either calm or physically restrain the panicked person could save your life.

I guess my first step would be to get a girlfriend On a more serious note, you mentioned they should see me in action(presumably being responsible). Not sure there is much I can do there. I'm mean I've never gotten a ticket, or been pulled over. I get up m-f at 4:30 to go to work. And paid for all my training myself. Is there anything I can do specifically?

 

[CharlieD3]

I guess my first step would be to get a girlfriend On a more serious note, you mentioned they should see me in action(presumably being responsible). Not sure there is much I can do there. I'm mean I've never gotten a ticket, or been pulled over. I get up m-f at 4:30 to go to work. And paid for all my training myself. Is there anything I can do specifically?

Keep doing what you're doing.

You do you. Always.

If you are seen by others as responsible, and you ask that same question periodically (in a reasonable tone), in re: your flying friends... You will eventually prevail.

In the meantime take a parent as a chaperone... If you're willing.

 

[RyanB]

I guess my first step would be to get a girlfriend On a more serious note, you mentioned they should see me in action(presumably being responsible). Not sure there is much I can do there. I'm mean I've never gotten a ticket, or been pulled over. I get up m-f at 4:30 to go to work. And paid for all my training myself. Is there anything I can do specifically?

Best thing that I’ve found, is that word of mouth gets around. Take one person for a ride, they tell someone else, then that person tells someone else etc., and before long you’ve made some rapport with a few different people.

 

[chemgeek]

The kid's 17. Maybe he doesn't have any assets. If not, there is minimal reason for him to worry about being sued.

Lawyers will not stop with the pilot's assets, but will also go after the parents, especially considering a 17 year old is still a minor.

A few years ago we had a 17-18 yo college student, newly certificated, involved in a fatality, with a friend on board, on a benign weather day, with no known mechanical cause. Inexperience likely played a role in the accident chain of events. Low time pilots often don't know what they don't know...it's not a fault, it's a feature. We've all been there. Most of us survived the low time experience.

 

[Cogito]

...kudos to being home schooled...

Why? This kid needs to get out from under the smothering of his parents. He obviously knows it. He (and his parents) should read Rinker Buck’s book, “Flight of Passage” about how he and his brother flew across the country in a Cub, the OLDEST of them was 17. Within a year, Samuel will be eligible to get his commercial ticket, I suggest he spend the rest of his 18th year getting his IFR and immediately get his commercial on reaching 18. Then up to Alaska loading planes until he has enough experience to fly passengers and freight. Or he can stay on the couch in his mommy’s home and play video games.

 

[CharlieD3]

Why? This kid needs to get out from under the smothering of his parents. He obviously knows it. He (and his parents) should read Rinker Buck’s book, “Flight of Passage” about how he and his brother flew across the country in a Cub, the OLDEST of them was 17. Within a year, Samuel will be eligible to get his commercial ticket, I suggest he spend the rest of his 18th year getting his IFR and immediately get his commercial on reaching 18. Then up to Alaska loading planes until he has enough experience to fly passengers and freight. Or he can stay on the couch in his mommy’s home and play video games.

Samuel, ignore this.^^^

You're working and paying your way.
You're still a minor.
You have reason to be proud of your accomplishments.

And that ain't a "participation trophy."

There are a gazillion teens that do stay on mommy's couch playing games... You ain't one of 'em...

 

[Cogito]

Samuel, ignore this.^^^

You're working and paying your way.
You're still a minor.
You have reason to be proud of your accomplishments.

And that ain't a "participation trophy."

There are a gazillion teens that do stay on mommy's couch playing games... You ain't one of 'em...

Samuel, Ignore this. ^^^^^
You obviously want to become a man. You’re old enough, it’s time to start. Charlie, can’t you read between the lines of the original post, and why is it you’re afraid of a different POV?

 

[TCABM]

I’m curious if the OPs limitation is solely related to the aircraft he has partial equity in. Could the OP sell his share in the current plane and go to sole ownership?

If so, would the same limitation be on the table?

What about a rental from the FBO; does the same limitation apply?

It might be the underlying issue is the other partners have a legitimate concern about non-family pax in their asset, and there would be no problem with somebody else’s asset being used for the desired activity.

 

[CharlieD3]

Samuel, Ignore this. ^^^^^
You obviously want to become a man. You’re old enough, it’s time to start. Charlie, can’t you read between the lines of the original post, and why is it you’re afraid of a different POV?

Cogito I'm not afraid of ANY POV.

I'm all about putting on big boy pants...

He paid his own way to his ppl, and even contributed to the purchase of an aircraft.

Now, at 17 he could probably be legally emancipated. If that's what he wants... But I don't see him as the type to be sitting on mommy's couch playing games.

 

[Salty]

His dad is majority owner of the plane, Emancipation isn't the issue. The owner of the aircraft said no.

 

[PPC1052]

Lawyers will not stop with the pilot's assets, but will also go after the parents, especially considering a 17 year old is still a minor.

I don't know the law in every state, but you can't stick the parents with much based on the kid's liability in tort except in limited circumstances that would generally not include operating an aircraft. Usually, there is a cap, and only applies for certain types of conduct. In my state, that max is $5000.00, and that's only if the conduct was intentional or reckless. Where you may see greater, or even unlimited liability of the parent would be based on specific statues for minors operating a motor vehicle. We have such a statute as well. But those parental liability for operation of a motor vehicle statutes that states have passed would almost certainly not apply to a minor operating an airplane. Here's a survey by state: https://www.mwl-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/parental-responsibility-in-all-50-states.pdf I can't tell you how accurate it is in each instance. But the point is, parental liability for liability in tort for conduct that is both not intentional and not arising from the operation of a motor vehicle isn't typically as big a deal as people think. And often the parents' homeowners policy will cover any vicarious liability of the parent for the child.

 

[PaulS]

Listen to your parents, you've got nothing to lose, your parents everything.

 

[DFH65]

At 17 living in your parents house I would say respect their decisions. I had a rule with my kids I am sure not always followed due to peer pressure that they were not to drive with anyone who didn't have their license for at least 2 years.

Also if Dad's name is on the plane and the insurance Dad has a whole lot more to lose than you do if someone gets hurt. At 17 you have no assets to go after.

Relax it will happen and just telling girls you are a pilot should be enough to have them chasing you.

 

[kep5niner]

At 19 years old, my grandfather was left seat in a B17 over Germany; HOWEVER, times have changed...

Listen to your folks. You don't know enough yet to recognize the danger and implications or your inexperience. They most certainly do. Good luck, and keep your head down until you have your IR, CFI, or even CFII. Then you can take all the kids up your want (students), and that indeed will be an eye-opener.

 

[RyanB]

You don't know enough yet to recognize the danger and implications or your inexperience. They most certainly do. Good luck, and keep your head down until you have your IR, CFI, or even CFII. Then you can take all the kids up your want (students), and that indeed will be an eye-opener.

Oh give me a break, that's just downright ridiculous!

 

[Warlock]

Sad this turned into an anti home school thread...

 

[PaulS]

Sad this turned into an anti home school thread...

The kid seems very intelligent to me. He's doing his research, looking for ammo to counter his parent's decision. Sounds like the parents have done a great job.

I've read articles that claim the male brain doesn't fully mature/develop until 26 years of age. Based on my personal experience of my own and my kids, I would say I agree.

 

[Brad Smith]

I have no problem flying with a 17 year old and neither did the CFI or DPE. It’s easy to maintain an adult aura when we have to. But with our peers, as a 17 year old it’s a different matter. True maturity takes a little more time and your innocent appearing parents were 17 at one time and KNOW what we’re capable at that age (better than you realize). A long as your under their roof you must obey the rules. Tempus fugit. Before you know it you’ll be on your own.

 

[iamtheari]

I guess my first step would be to get a girlfriend On a more serious note, you mentioned they should see me in action(presumably being responsible). Not sure there is much I can do there. I'm mean I've never gotten a ticket, or been pulled over. I get up m-f at 4:30 to go to work. And paid for all my training myself. Is there anything I can do specifically?

I grew up surrounded by farm and ranch kids, many of whom got up earlier than that from age 10 to 18 to chop ice so the cows could drink. That case-specific responsibility did not translate to general responsibility, as reflected in the arrest record many of them managed to run up by the time they turned 19.

My advice isn't to prove you are responsible in general, because the only adults who think any teenager is 100% responsible in every situation are delusional, enabling parents. My advice is to find parameters within which you can do what you are wanting to do. You want to take friends flying. Your parents will fly with you. Would one of your friends be allowed to fly with you if one of your parents was also on board the plane? Mission accomplished. You get to do what you wanted to do, and you get to demonstrate responsibility in a specific situation where it matters a lot to you.

 

[cowman]

In a year the OP will be 18 and he can do what he wants. Until then whatever we think on this board doesn't really matter, it's between him and his parents whatever we may think of it.

As to whether or not the parents are right, I have no idea. I don't know OP. In my experience there is no magical maturity change that happens between age 16 and 18. There are some people who make it all the way through life and never become what I'd call responsible and there are 12 year olds who are responsible. If you are one of the young responsible ones I know it sucks, you get limited because the actions of others in your age group. Laws are set and people set arbitrary ages where you can/can't make your own choices. Just hang in there, you'll be a free adult soon.

 

[Salty]

In a year the OP will be 18 and he can do what he wants.

I disagree. He can’t fly my plane with his friends, and he can’t fly his dads plane with his friends, unless one of us changes their mind. just to name two things that contradict your premise. Being under 18 isn’t the issue here at all.

 

[RyanB]

In a year the OP will be 18 and he can do what he wants. Until then whatever we think on this board doesn't really matter, it's between him and his parents whatever we may think of it.

As to whether or not the parents are right, I have no idea. I don't know OP. In my experience there is no magical maturity change that happens between age 16 and 18. There are some people who make it all the way through life and never become what I'd call responsible and there are 12 year olds who are responsible. If you are one of the young responsible ones I know it sucks, you get limited because the actions of others in your age group. Laws are set and people set arbitrary ages where you can/can't make your own choices. Just hang in there, you'll be a free adult soon.

I agree 100%.

I think it’s beyond ridiculous that people are telling him he isn’t ready to take friends flying because he’s 17 and therefore isn’t mature enough nor has enough experience. That’s ludicrous and needs to be stopped. Most of the people here wouldn’t say the same thing about someone asking this question who is in their 30’s or 40’s, even though they might have just passed their check ride and possess the same experience level as this young man. Bottom line? Don’t come to a forum full of old men and expect a rational answer.

 

[RyanB]

I disagree. He can’t fly my plane with his friends, and he can’t fly his dads plane with his friends, unless one of us changes their mind. just to name two things that contradict your premise. Being under 18 isn’t the issue here at all.

As if flying YOUR plane has anything to do with his premise.

 

[Salty]

As if flying YOUR plane has anything to do with his premise.

You missed the point again. He does not own the airplane. Turning 18 won’t change that fact. Having a PPL does not grant you license to fly any airplane you see without the owners permission, and under their conditions.

 

[RyanB]

You missed the point again. He does not own the airplane. Turning 18 won’t change that fact. Having a PPL does not grant you license to fly any airplane you see without the owners permission, and under their conditions.

Okay, that is a fair point I’d agree with.

 

[cowman]

Then he can rent one If he needs to.

like I said, without knowing OP I have no idea if it’s a good idea for him to do anything or not. I would just say that being 17 doesn’t automatically mean he’s not responsible enough to fly with his friends.

 

[Samuel Peight]

Why? This kid needs to get out from under the smothering of his parents. He obviously knows it. He (and his parents) should read Rinker Buck’s book, “Flight of Passage” about how he and his brother flew across the country in a Cub, the OLDEST of them was 17. Within a year, Samuel will be eligible to get his commercial ticket, I suggest he spend the rest of his 18th year getting his IFR and immediately get his commercial on reaching 18. Then up to Alaska loading planes until he has enough experience to fly passengers and freight. Or he can stay on the couch in his mommy’s home and play video games.

Well I wish I had the time to play video games You raised the point about being 18, and getting my commercial, which I plan to do. But probably not run off to Alaska... The thing is, I highly doubt I will be that much more mature by 18(Although I am always working towards improving myself), however I'm sure I will have vastly more flying experience. I may get my CFI or try and build 600 hrs or so and get a low time job. Is being only 18 going to hurt my chances towards a job?

 

[Samuel Peight]

I’m curious if the OPs limitation is solely related to the aircraft he has partial equity in. Could the OP sell his share in the current plane and go to sole ownership?

If so, would the same limitation be on the table?

What about a rental from the FBO; does the same limitation apply?

It might be the underlying issue is the other partners have a legitimate concern about non-family pax in their asset, and there would be no problem with somebody else’s asset being used for the desired activity.

The problem is not that the plane is in my dads name, I'm checked out to fly in a 172 that I did most of my training in, at the local airport. Same rule still applies to that, although not sure I would take passengers in that anyway, not that it's not airworthy, but it is not the type of plane that inspires a lot of confidence..

 

[TCABM]

The problem is not that the plane is in my dads name, I'm checked out to fly in a 172 that I did most of my training in, at the local airport. Same rule still applies to that, although not sure I would take passengers in that anyway, not that it's not airworthy, but it is not the type of plane that inspires a lot of confidence..

Fair enough.

Have you asked why yet? And not in the standard ‘but, why?’; instead ask to understand the thought behind the rule and what could lead to a change in the limitation.

Trust take a long time to build, but can be erased in an instant.

 

[Samuel Peight]

Fair enough.

Have you asked why yet? And not in the standard ‘but, why?’; instead ask to understand the thought behind the rule and what could lead to a change in the limitation.

Trust take a long time to build, but can be erased in an instant.

Yes, the thing that they have said, Is brain development, and my age. Although they do recognize I am mature, and responsible for 17. I really don't think there is much doubt on my actual flying ability, although there is a lot to learn yet, and I obviously don't have the knowledge or the skill of a CFI. But I do know my CFI told my mom I was one of his best students, which maybe helped my case. But the bottom line answer I'm looking for is not to prove my parents wrong. Instead I'm just asking is taking passengers at this age and experience level that much more dangerous. So far it seems the opinions are leaning pretty hard towards yes, and I appreciate the honest answers.

 

[Salty]

I don’t think taking passengers is dangerous in itself, but at any age, you have to consider the additional pressures those passengers are going to put on you as a pilot. Young kids can get sick or scared, teenagers can easily pressure you to succumb to anti authority or macho bad attitudes, all this is your responsibility as PIC, and the easiest place to deal with them is on the ground by not getting in the plane. Heck even flying old people presents scenarios you need to consider. How are they going to get in and out. Especially in an emergency. Their safety is your responsibility.

It’s part of the ADM every good pilot must do. Especially as a low hour pilot, you need to avoid distractions and pressures that might lead to bad decisions.

having someone onboard you can trust to make sure everyone acts mature is one way to mitigate that risk.

 

[smv]

Instead I'm just asking is taking passengers at this age and experience level that much more dangerous.

If your passengers were your parents or grandparents (or maybe even a brother or sister of comparable age), I would say, "No. Not really any more dangerous, beyond the typical distractions that can occur."

However, having been a "very responsible" 17 year old dude¹ hanging out with other 17 year old dudes, taking friends of your age is another animal entirely.

¹ At 16 I not only had a job, I had my own apartment, bills, and responsibilities of an adult. All while staying in High School to get my diploma. Even with all that, I would not want 17 year-old me taking other 17 year-olds for an unsupervised airplane ride.

 

[Cogito]

I wouldn’t put a lot of stake in the safety of CFI’s or people older than you, Sam. I personally knew two CFI’s, one was giving the other a BFR, who perished from some poor decisions including doing spins in a plane not rated for it and failing to arm the parachute before T.O. Their combined age was about 120.

Now that I think about it, they were friends. I change my opinion, Sam, don’t ever fly with friends.~

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

My son obtained his private at 17. The father of his girlfriend would not permit her to fly alone with him. He wanted an older chaperone in the plane and his stated concern was distractions amongst teenagers in general.

I think he agreed that once my son obtained his commercial, he would be ok with it, since a that point he would have more experience and would be trusted by the FAA to fly people for hire.

 

[N1120A]

It's An "in general" thing. There are exceptions. It kinda sucks for people to lose kids though, so I see their conundrum.

If most of you do not think a 17 year old should carry passengers then why not raise the minimum age for a PPL? Yes, it has been scientifically demonstrated that the human brain is not fully developed until age 25 (my source Scientific American) which I find vindicating since when I was 16 we had a debate in high school on lowering the voting age from 21 to 18. I wanted to raise it to 25.

So, did you want to raise the age to join the military and also see criminal liability changed?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Yes, the thing that they have said, Is brain development, and my age.

Yes, the frontal lobes are typically developing until about age 25, so there is typically a fair difference between the risk management decision made by 17 and 25 year olds.

 

[TCABM]

...Instead I'm just asking is taking passengers at this age and experience level that much more dangerous...

It’s not that it more dangerous, it’s that additional risk is involved. They are the ones who are ultimately accepting that risk financially. I would hazard to guess some random half-cousin wouldn’t be on your list of ‘approved pax’ if we took this example that far.

I’ll leave you a story Max Trescott told last fall on one of his podcasts last fall.

Nobody wakes up and says ‘today’s the day one of my pax is going to walk into the prop with the engine running’, but it happens. More often than you think.

Mostly with pax who aren’t familiar with the hazards of an airplane while on the ground, but sometimes with the pilot, who forgets to pull the nose chock, tells the pax to standby with engine running, sets the brake, hops out, and sticks their brain pan into the spinning prop. **** just happens sometimes.

He gave three or four recent examples in the podcast and it really made my non-pilot wife completely rethink the ground environment and the hazards associated.

 

[Snowmass]

It's An "in general" thing. There are exceptions. It kinda sucks for people to lose kids though, so I see their conundrum.



So, did you want to raise the age to join the military and also see criminal liability changed?

No, just the voting age where life experience as well as a more rational brain are positives Do you agree?

I would lower the driving and drinking age with restrictions. I started driving at 14 and never had an accident.

BTW some Danes I recently met said the socialists in Denmark are pushing for an age 15 voting age.

In fact the military wants young soldiers because they are more willing to take dangerous risks.