Flying Risk & Your Young Family

I've crashed a GA plane, with my teen son onboard. We both walked away, and if the plane hadn't broke on takeoff I would likely have a different perspective.

First objective: Family welfare. I no longer fly with any of my kids. Wife and I and our dog only. Maybe it's just me, and there's no rationale behind it but my level of risk aversion makes it such that I won't put my kids at the risk of GA anymore. I considered a twin, but with the limitations on my flying hours each year, I would likely only be a greater risk due to lack of skill in a twin, and not reduce the overall risk to them enough to make it worth while(100-120 hour/year).

Second objective: Being there for the family as they grow. I stopped flying for financial reasons before my kids were born. I didn't get back into it until both were over 10, because I absolutely wanted to be there for the first 10 years min. After 10, it's up to the individual. The financial decisions are separate, and have been covered well enough with the insurance discussion.

I've done a lot of interesting stuff in my life. I surf, scuba, I've jumped out a plane, and I have a lot of other interests that present challenges for serious injury, or death. I enjoy them. One of my best weekends was a four dive trip in Australia with the family where we saw amazing things, and experienced the wonders of the ocean like few do. It's been a great ride, and I wouldn't change anything, but you have to weigh the decision to fly a GA plane with the risk(even mitigated, they are still serious) of a bad outcome. I love flying, but I put it on hold for 15 years while I sorted out my family situation. When I got back in, it was just as sweet, and gratifying. Right up until I smashed up a plane with my son next to me, then it required a serious amount of rational reflection.

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. Maybe so, or maybe not. You won't know until you're put to the test.
 
When people ask how I can do dangerous stuff as a parent I shrug and say kid is old enough to remember me now.:D Kinda funny, harsh, and true.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
tiger said:
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.
Click to expand...

Good parenting is hard. Mediocre parenting isn't as hard and is the norm, much as people won't like to hear that. Bell curve says only 20% or so of you are great parents. Let that one sink in for a while. Heh.

Bell curve also says only 20% of us are outstanding pilots too. ;)
 
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.
 
Last edited:
I read this with interested, but got to the end and felt unfulfilled. :D

So after all you've seen, what are your thoughts re: the subject of this thread? Don't fly instruments? Flying too risky? Etc.

Jimmy cooper said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
I only have a little over 4000 hours and all of this is VFR. I am not a professional by any means as I flew to amaze myself and have fun. The mooney man, or fearless Fred, gone now always said " jimmy, unless you fly instruments a lot, like twice a week, don't do it as there is no forgiveness. I should have died in Omaha" I took that to heart . If I had injured or killed my wife or others I could not have coped with it. These are only my thoughts along with the knowledge that all the airplanes I flew were getting progressively older, lots of hours on them , costs skyrocketing including insurance, many flying buddy's gone west. I have to fly light sport now and a rans is nice but it's not a 180 Cessna or a nice mooney. I think old age has a lot to do with it. It's a lot different now. The airplanes I liked so much haven't even been made for years!
 
Last edited:
Just watched this. Much of the movie is an amped up version of this discussion.
 
Yes! .......and every time I see the 310 Cessna I think of the one I flew a little with owner in right seat advising. What a sweet nice airplane to fly. Also getting old like me. Never could afford twin time instruction back then. My other favorite was the shrike. Very stable, easy to fly, land, but I never soloed one.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
I waited til my 3 daughters where through college, now it's my time to play.
Click to expand...

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 :yesnod:
 
Manoj said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Just because the whole family is in the plane doesn't mean everyone will die in the crash. Seriously faulty logic on that one.
 
I just made sure the family flew with me as often as possible. If we were going to go, we'd go together. In the end, we just enjoyed countless trips all over the country as a family. Now my son is a pilot attending college to be an air traffic controller.
 
I could not imagine having lived the past twelve years without being able to travel on our family's many flying adventures. We've been able to do so much more with extended family, as well.

Be careful, be safe, don't do nuthin' stoopid... and it's a blessing!
 
tiger said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is the guy you quoted. But - you conveniently left off the part where I basically agree with you because you want to start an argument. Here's the balance of what I said:

"Maybe so, or maybe not. You won't know until you're put to the test."

If you think this does the OP a disservice, then you stopped reading my post before the end, and you are doing a disservice to all of us by not paying attention. Also, if you bothered to read the part above, you can step off with your "deciding to sit at the mall" comment. I've done, and lived more than you can imagine, and I'm not done yet.
 
I'm not sure why you think I want to start an argument - I don't, or not with you, anyway. :)

I quoted you to agree with you and then expanded on one part of it.

Then I started a new paragraph, with respect to the "at the mall" comment (which I did take mild exception to). I was not attributing that to you - the remark was from DenverPilot. DenverPilot apparently understood that, since he replied (in considerably better spirit than you, I might add).

DenverPilot's original post is the one immediately above yours. If more attention needs to be paid, it might not be by me. But I apologize if it isn't clear - I genuinely thought it was.
 
I have four young ones, I was afraid, my wife wouldn't allow me but surprisingly she told me "the time and place for death and life is already decided and it is not gonna change no matter you fly or not"...... Just got my PPL last month after two years of irregular flying. My first passenger was my 9 yo daughter who loved to help me with preflight.

I think it is just a matter of how we look at things. People who die in commercial plane crashes are not necessarily pilots. Just keep faith and go for what you really want to do but do not ignore the safety that is the least we owe to our families.

Just a thought!!!!!!!!
 
My old boss used to joke, "my kids deserve every penny of mental health treatment for trauma that they can sue out of me." LOL.
 
I only got my PPL recently for now the rule is 2 adults in the plane when the kids are in it.

My wife can do straight & Level, and Turns. She knows how to use the radios and how to switch to 121.5

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.

FamilyFly2.jpg
 
I've heard good things about the pinch hitter course. I read an article in the Twin Cessna magazine last month about a man whose wife took the course and then decided she wanted to get her pilot cert. :)
 
Manoj said:
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.
Click to expand...

Henning said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
danhagan said:
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.
Click to expand...

It is kind of morbid, but the deal is that it is either only myself, or we are all on board. I am replaceable, loosing both of us wouldn't be fair to the kids. A friend of ours who is a retired judge sat us down early in my flying. He was the trustee for 3 kids that lost their parents in a plane crash (romantic weekend getaway kind of deal). We dont drive together without the kids if we can help it either.
 
Manoj said:
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 :yesnod:
Click to expand...

I understand this for general aviation where the risk is higher, but I've met some couples who will not fly together on the same commercial flight if traveling without their children. I always ask why they drive together to the airport, since that is way more dangerous than the commercial flight they're about to get on.
 
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.
gismo said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
ColoPilot said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
gismo said:
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.
Click to expand...

Very true.

ClimbnSink said:
Looking at the accident statistics it seems pretty clear normal rational nonrisk taking types just can't resist being stupid on a consistent basis.
Click to expand...

Also true.
 
There's only two things you can do:

Be the best pilot you can be.

Insure for the worse.


It's what I've done since my first son was born in 1997.

For what it's worth, the second happiest day in my life was when my oldest said he wanted to fly. The happiest day came very shortly after that when he told me he didn't want to do it for a living, like his dad. :rofl:
 
ClimbnSink said:
Looking at the accident statistics it seems pretty clear normal rational nonrisk taking types just can't resist being stupid on a consistent basis.
Click to expand...

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
 
You are trying to fool yourself into believing you are an exception to the risk pool that you belong to. You ain't. Saying that guy was reckless, that guy was a drunk, that guy was lazy, is self delusion. That pilot that died is you and me. Or it will be next time or the time after.
JGoodish said:
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
Click to expand...
 
Unregistered said:
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?
Click to expand...

Don't over think about it. If it's your passion then do it. If it's your time to go then so be it, besides even if you're just inside your house if it's your time then that's it.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
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.
Click to expand...

You have 8,000hrs, flew 135 and are only a CPL??

Most 135ops that Ive seen hiring seem to want a ATP, even if not required by the regs.
 
Unregistered said:
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?
Click to expand...

Did your Dad die from an airplane crash?

If not then I don't see the relevance. I know of many more parents that were killed in a car wreck or by too many donuts than have been killed in airplane crashes. Will you give up driving and donuts too?
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top