Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk me
into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or so,
ground time included.

I'm taking the second of three legs. Flying from Mobile to Vicksburg, MS,
picking up a single pax and dropping her off in Marianna, FL, then back to
BFM.

The forecast is for scattered t'storms over the route all day, so the Garmin
496 should earn its keep on the trip. A couple of cold ones will taste mighty
good after this one.

Any of you folks who have been thinking about volunteering, now's as good a
time as any to contact AF and get started. We need more pilots and I know you
will find it rewarding.

http://tinyurl.com/3dqtmv


--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:
> Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk me
> into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or so,
> ground time included.
>
> I'm taking the second of three legs. Flying from Mobile to Vicksburg, MS,
> picking up a single pax and dropping her off in Marianna, FL, then back to
> BFM.
>
> The forecast is for scattered t'storms over the route all day, so the Garmin
> 496 should earn its keep on the trip. A couple of cold ones will taste mighty
> good after this one.
>
> Any of you folks who have been thinking about volunteering, now's as good a
> time as any to contact AF and get started. We need more pilots and I know you
> will find it rewarding.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3dqtmv
>
>

What are you flying now? I believe you had your 172 for sale, right?

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote:

>
> What are you flying now? I believe you had your 172 for sale, right?

Still flying the Cutlass RG.

I've come close with a couple of buyers but, so far, no sale.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:
> Any of you folks who have been thinking about volunteering, now's as good a
> time as any to contact AF and get started. We need more pilots and I know you
> will find it rewarding.


You know, I wouldn't mind donating my time but I'm a renter. I can't afford to
just buy them trips.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> Dan Luke wrote:
>> Any of you folks who have been thinking about volunteering, now's as good a
>> time as any to contact AF and get started. We need more pilots and I know you
>> will find it rewarding.
>
>
> You know, I wouldn't mind donating my time but I'm a renter. I can't afford to
> just buy them trips.
>
>
>

You think owners have a less costly situation than renters? That is
truly funny! :-)

Matt

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:
>
> You know, I wouldn't mind donating my time but I'm a renter. I can't afford
> to just buy them trips.

How much of a tax deduction can you take for the rent you spend on your
regular trips?


--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

On Sat, 05 May 2007 12:21:27 GMT, Matt Whiting >
wrote:

>Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>> Dan Luke wrote:
>>> Any of you folks who have been thinking about volunteering, now's as good a
>>> time as any to contact AF and get started. We need more pilots and I know you
>>> will find it rewarding.
>>
>>
>> You know, I wouldn't mind donating my time but I'm a renter. I can't afford to
>> just buy them trips.
>>
>>
>>
>
>You think owners have a less costly situation than renters? That is
>truly funny! :-)

On a trip by trip basis we do.

The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.

On 5/4/2007 8:28:45 PM, "Dan Luke" wrote:

> Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk
> me into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or
> so, ground time included.

Dan, I thought you were selling your airplane?

Awesome of you to take a flight of this duration for Angel Flight, in any
regard.

--
Peter

>>You think owners have a less costly situation than renters? That is
>>truly funny! :-)
>
> On a trip by trip basis we do.
>
> The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
> fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
> than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.


BS!!! How about engine amorization and maintainence amorization. You can
add about 17 bucks per hour for the engine and about 30 smackers for the
maintainence amorization. With fuel at 4.40 a gallon and 9 gph on average
and through in another dollar for oil you have about 87 to 88 dollars per
hour true cost.

Kobra
>
>
>
>

Nathan Young wrote:
> On Sat, 05 May 2007 12:21:27 GMT, Matt Whiting >
> wrote:
>
>> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>>> Dan Luke wrote:
>>>> Any of you folks who have been thinking about volunteering, now's as good a
>>>> time as any to contact AF and get started. We need more pilots and I know you
>>>> will find it rewarding.
>>>
>>> You know, I wouldn't mind donating my time but I'm a renter. I can't afford to
>>> just buy them trips.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> You think owners have a less costly situation than renters? That is
>> truly funny! :-)
>
> On a trip by trip basis we do.
>
> The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
> fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
> than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.

Sunk cost doesn't matter. You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours
you fly somehow or you aren't calculating the true cost of flying. The
cost per hour of flying in a given year is total costs (fixed &
variable) divided by the number of hours flown that year.

Deciding to exclude a given flight from the equation is simply not
logical. Having an airplane is a prerequisite to even making the
flight, so saying that sunk costs aren't relevant is simply ludicrous.
If you hadn't paid those costs you would not be able to even make the
flight!

Matt

Peter R. wrote:
> On 5/4/2007 8:28:45 PM, "Dan Luke" wrote:
>
>> Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk
>> me into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or
>> so, ground time included.
>
> Dan, I thought you were selling your airplane?
>
> Awesome of you to take a flight of this duration for Angel Flight, in any
> regard.
>

I agree. I only made one flight of that duration when I was flying for
AirLifeLine many years ago. I was based at ELM and most of my pickups
weren't local, but typically weren't too far away (Harrisburg, Erie,
Williamsport, etc.). However, I flew one flight that required me to
pickup up the patient in Cincinnati and fly him to Philly. By the time
I flew from ELM to Cincy, to Philly and returned to ELM, I'd used the
major portion of a Saturday. It was a great flight, however.

Matt

> You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours you fly somehow or you aren't calculating the true cost of flying.

The issue isn't the cost of flying, it's the cost of flying more.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Nathan Young wrote:
>> On Sat, 05 May 2007 12:21:27 GMT, Matt Whiting >
>> wrote:
<...>>
> Sunk cost doesn't matter. You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours
> you fly somehow or you aren't calculating the true cost of flying. The
> cost per hour of flying in a given year is total costs (fixed & variable)
> divided by the number of hours flown that year.
>


So, the more you fly, the less it costs per hour (which is true even if you
don't include fixed costs like hangers, insurance, and stuff). He's saving
money by making this trip and, thus, reducing the cost per hour of the rest
of the flying he does, right?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Jose wrote:
>> You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours you fly somehow or you
>> aren't calculating the true cost of flying.
>
> The issue isn't the cost of flying, it's the cost of flying more.

exactly. It is called "incremental cost". It's the difference between flying
and leaving the airplane in the hangar. Assuming that the decision to own an
airplane was made independent from the decision to do angel flights, this
incremental cost is considerably lower for owners than for renters, true.

However, isn't it that the motivation for angel flights is largely "I want
to fly, and rather than just go for a 100$ Burger I could just as well help
somebody out while doing it". Viewed like this there isn't really much
difference whether you rent or own the plane you use for AF.

regards,
Friedrich

"Jose" > wrote in message
t...
>> You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours you fly somehow or you
>> aren't calculating the true cost of flying.
>
> The issue isn't the cost of flying, it's the cost of flying more.
>
> Jose
> --
> Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

For pilots who fly primariliy for enjoyment (ie: you don't fly mainly for
business
purposes or transportation, etc.) I'm sure that the number of hours you can
fly
is constrained by time or budgetary considerations whether you are an owner
or renter. So, I wouldn't think that donating some of your flying time to
such
causes should increase the overall cost of your flying habit. It would also
give
you an excuse to use up some of your self-allotted time and maybe bring
additional enjoyment or satisfaction. You still get to pursue your hobby and
since you are actually flying cross-country you could actually reduce the
overall
cost of flying since you are increasing the number of cruising hours with
respect
to the number of those pesky take-off and (shudder!) landing hours. You
don't
have to fly *more*. Like A Huffington says, "The plane was going somewhere
anyways".
TP

>
> I'm taking the second of three legs. Flying from Mobile to Vicksburg, MS,
> picking up a single pax and dropping her off in Marianna, FL, then back to
> BFM.
>
>

I thought that BF was in "E". I didn't know there was also one in "M" !?!

Sorry, TP :-)

"Kobra" > wrote in message
...
> BS!!! How about engine amorization and maintainence amorization. You can add
> about 17 bucks per hour for the engine and about 30 smackers for the
> maintainence amorization. With fuel at 4.40 a gallon and 9 gph on average and
> through in another dollar for oil you have about 87 to 88 dollars per hour
> true cost.

You just concisely explained to the world why I rent.

Vaughn

"muff528" > wrote in message
news:K74%h.674$wy2.278@trnddc03...
> For pilots who fly primariliy for enjoyment (ie: you don't fly mainly for
> business
> purposes or transportation, etc.) I'm sure that the number of hours you can
> fly
> is constrained by time or budgetary considerations whether you are an owner
> or renter. So, I wouldn't think that donating some of your flying time to such

Assuming that your Angel Flight expenses are deductible, a flight should be
considerably cheaper than an equivalent $100 burger flight.

That said, as a VFR pilot I would not want anyone's medical care to depend
on me actually getting to any particular destination on any particular schedule.
It seems like 30 to 50% of my burger flights are aborted or vastly modified due
to weather.

"Vaughn Simon" > wrote

> You just concisely explained to the world why I rent.

It depends on how much you fly.

Many people have said that it begins to be cheaper to own than rent at a
little under 200 hours per year.
--
Jim in NC

"Peter R." wrote:

>
>> Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk
>> me into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or
>> so, ground time included.
>
> Dan, I thought you were selling your airplane?

It's still for sale. In fact, the first leg pilot I met today is looking for
a nice Cutlass for his flight school, and might be a buyer.


> Awesome of you to take a flight of this duration for Angel Flight, in any
> regard.

I'm certainly no hero. I'm feeling pretty worn out right now, but it was a
lot of fun as usual.


--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"muff528" > wrote in message
news:Sm4%h.689$wy2.596@trnddc03...
> >
>> I'm taking the second of three legs. Flying from Mobile to Vicksburg, MS,
>> picking up a single pax and dropping her off in Marianna, FL, then back to
>> BFM.
>>
>>
>
> I thought that BF was in "E". I didn't know there was also one in "M" !?!
>
> Sorry, TP :-)

BFM *is* in BFE.

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "muff528" > wrote in message
> news:Sm4%h.689$wy2.596@trnddc03...
>> >
>>> I'm taking the second of three legs. Flying from Mobile to Vicksburg,
>>> MS, picking up a single pax and dropping her off in Marianna, FL, then
>>> back to BFM.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I thought that BF was in "E". I didn't know there was also one in "M" !?!
>>
>> Sorry, TP :-)
>
> BFM *is* in BFE.
>

Oh!....must be one of the suburbs..

Matt Whiting wrote:
>> You know, I wouldn't mind donating my time but I'm a renter. I can't afford
>> to just buy them trips.
>
> You think owners have a less costly situation than renters? That is
> truly funny! :-)



No, but I believe if you can afford to own your own, you probably can afford to
fly.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Friedrich Ostertag wrote:
> However, isn't it that the motivation for angel flights is largely "I want
> to fly, and rather than just go for a 100$ Burger I could just as well help
> somebody out while doing it". Viewed like this there isn't really much
> difference whether you rent or own the plane you use for AF.



The problem isn't the $100 hamburger, it's the $500-$1000 one. It runs me just
over $100 per hour to rent a C-172. $100 would allow me to fly somebody maybe
50 NM... not much of an angel flight.

Hell, I don't work Monday through Friday. Time isn't the issue at all. The 2
twelve hour shifts I put in every Saturday and Sunday only go so far. I could
always work more, but since I hate the work, I've made this choice. I work to
pay my bills and little beyond that motivates me any more.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

> Hell, I don't work Monday through Friday. Time isn't the issue at all.
> The 2 twelve hour shifts I put in every Saturday and Sunday only go so
> far. I could always work more, but since I hate the work, I've made this
> choice. I work to pay my bills and little beyond that motivates me any
> more.
>
>

Hey, sounds like you'd fit right into the skydiving community........except
for that
working on weekends part. :-)
BS, TP

In article >,
"Kobra" > wrote:

> > On a trip by trip basis we do.
> >
> > The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
> > fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
> > than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.
>
> BS!!! How about engine amorization and maintainence amorization. You can
> add about 17 bucks per hour for the engine and about 30 smackers for the
> maintainence amorization. With fuel at 4.40 a gallon and 9 gph on average
> and through in another dollar for oil you have about 87 to 88 dollars per
> hour true cost.

The first hour I fly my cherokee 140, it's about $3500. After that, my 140
is about $40/hour, including fuel and engine reserve (the annual is included
in the $3500).

ymmv

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Now if we can just figure out how to make that first hour a charitable
flight and then convince the IRS of our math.... man, we could almost fly
for free. (Please let me dream - don't burst my bubble yet...)

--
Jim Carter
Rogers, Arkansas
"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Kobra" > wrote:
>
>> > On a trip by trip basis we do.
>> >
>> > The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
>> > fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
>> > than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.
>>
>> BS!!! How about engine amorization and maintainence amorization. You
>> can
>> add about 17 bucks per hour for the engine and about 30 smackers for the
>> maintainence amorization. With fuel at 4.40 a gallon and 9 gph on
>> average
>> and through in another dollar for oil you have about 87 to 88 dollars per
>> hour true cost.
>
> The first hour I fly my cherokee 140, it's about $3500. After that, my
> 140
> is about $40/hour, including fuel and engine reserve (the annual is
> included
> in the $3500).
>
> ymmv
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> (goodness, please trim replies!!!)
>

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 05 May 2007 12:21:27 GMT, Matt Whiting >
>
> The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
> fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
> than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.
>

Hey! Don't do that analysis in public. I've got my spouse believing that the
more I fly, the less the hourly cost.

--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
...
>
> No, but I believe if you can afford to own your own, you probably can
> afford to fly.
>
> --
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN
> mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
>

I could afford to fly when I was renting too. If you fly at all, charity
flights are a pretty good excuse. If you go out to just fly for the fun of
it, then you can easily substitute one of those flights with a charity
flight.
--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> Friedrich Ostertag wrote:
>> However, isn't it that the motivation for angel flights is largely
>> "I want to fly, and rather than just go for a 100$ Burger I could
>> just as well help somebody out while doing it". Viewed like this
>> there isn't really much difference whether you rent or own the plane
>> you use for AF.
>
> The problem isn't the $100 hamburger, it's the $500-$1000 one. It
> runs me just over $100 per hour to rent a C-172. $100 would allow me
> to fly somebody maybe 50 NM... not much of an angel flight.

Yes, I can see that, fair enough. As I said my take was that angel flights
are mainly conducted by pilots who would have flown the respective time for
enjoyment anyway, and instead of just picking a random destinations turn it
into something useful. If somebody uses AF as an "excuse" to fly more than
he would have otherwise and can afford it - good for him, but nobody will
expect that.

regards,
Friedrich

Friedrich Ostertag wrote:
>> The problem isn't the $100 hamburger, it's the $500-$1000 one. It
>> runs me just over $100 per hour to rent a C-172. $100 would allow me
>> to fly somebody maybe 50 NM... not much of an angel flight.
>
> Yes, I can see that, fair enough. As I said my take was that angel flights
> are mainly conducted by pilots who would have flown the respective time for
> enjoyment anyway, and instead of just picking a random destinations turn it
> into something useful. If somebody uses AF as an "excuse" to fly more than
> he would have otherwise and can afford it - good for him, but nobody will
> expect that.


I don't disagree with a word you said. I was just lamenting my own situation,
where I have the time and the willingness, but not the wherewithall. It's one
of those things I'll do after I win the Powerball.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Travis Marlatte wrote:
> I could afford to fly when I was renting too. If you fly at all, charity
> flights are a pretty good excuse. If you go out to just fly for the fun of
> it, then you can easily substitute one of those flights with a charity
> flight.


I'll tell you another concern for me and it really bears down hard on my
thinking: I used to fly Monday through Friday as a courier pilot, in all kinds
of filthy weather. When I was doing it, I was a damned fine IFR pilot. I also
have managed to crash and suffered some pretty severe injuries.

I fly so little these days I know my IFR skills are as rough as a cob. I know I
do well enough for myself but I'm leery of taking somebody else along for the
ride. I used to take friends and family up without thought of consequence, as I
always assumed there would be none. Now I think about what would happen to my
friend's kids if he were to be with me when I had another accident.

And it's not the accident per se that bothers me as I flew as a courier pilot
afterwards... it's the rust. IFR flying used to be pretty effortless for me;
now it makes me uneasy. I know how to fix that, but I'm either going to have to
work more hours or win the Powerball to correct the problem. I just need to fly
more.

But I know I'm not on top of my game and subsequently I'm reluctant to bring
along anybody, much less a stranger in poor health.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

In article >,
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote:

>[snip] When I was doing it, I was a damned fine IFR pilot.
[snip]
> But I know I'm not on top of my game and subsequently I'm reluctant to bring
> along anybody, much less a stranger in poor health.

Here's a thought or two...

Once current again. even if you aren't as sharp as you could be, would
you still be able to fly safely, confidently in soft-IMC? And a well-equipped
aircraft could certainly help the workload.

Maybe you could connect with a (relatively) low-time pilot and mentor
him (or her) through these angel flights.

And remember that no angel flight pilot HAS to fly. If you can't do
the flight, then you cancel.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
...
> I'll tell you another concern for me and it really bears down hard on my
> thinking: I used to fly Monday through Friday as a courier pilot, in all
> kinds of filthy weather. When I was doing it, I was a damned fine IFR
> pilot. I also have managed to crash and suffered some pretty severe
> injuries.

I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sure that we have all had incidents that made us
think. The more severe the incident, the deeper we are caused to dig in our
emotions and self-assessment. I tend to be pretty conservative. If you don't
feel comfortable taking family, friends or Angel Flight passengers, then
don't do it. But it's not a personal failure. It's a reasonable decision
based on your current situation.

If you only feel comfortable in VFR conditions, that doesn't mean that you
can't fly Angel Flight. Pilots bail on Angel Flights all the time - because
of weather, because of mechanics, or just because. Don't let pride get in
your way of signing up for an Angel Flight.

> I fly so little these days I know my IFR skills are as rough as a cob. I
> know I do well enough for myself but I'm leery of taking somebody else
> along for the ride.

There are many non-IFR pilots flying Angel Flights every day. There are more
Angel Flights in VFR conditions than IFR.

-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> "Kobra" > wrote:
>
>>> On a trip by trip basis we do.
>>>
>>> The fixed costs are already sunk, so we get to fly for the cost of
>>> fuel, oil. In my Cherokee that's about $40/hr, substantially less
>>> than the ~$100/hr they want for renting the 172s at the local FBO.
>> BS!!! How about engine amorization and maintainence amorization. You can
>> add about 17 bucks per hour for the engine and about 30 smackers for the
>> maintainence amorization. With fuel at 4.40 a gallon and 9 gph on average
>> and through in another dollar for oil you have about 87 to 88 dollars per
>> hour true cost.
>
> The first hour I fly my cherokee 140, it's about $3500. After that, my 140
> is about $40/hour, including fuel and engine reserve (the annual is included
> in the $3500).
>
> ymmv
>

By that logic, if you don't fly it at all during the year then it is free.

Matt

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> Travis Marlatte wrote:
>> I could afford to fly when I was renting too. If you fly at all, charity
>> flights are a pretty good excuse. If you go out to just fly for the fun of
>> it, then you can easily substitute one of those flights with a charity
>> flight.
>
>
> I'll tell you another concern for me and it really bears down hard on my
> thinking: I used to fly Monday through Friday as a courier pilot, in all kinds
> of filthy weather. When I was doing it, I was a damned fine IFR pilot. I also
> have managed to crash and suffered some pretty severe injuries.
>
> I fly so little these days I know my IFR skills are as rough as a cob. I know I
> do well enough for myself but I'm leery of taking somebody else along for the
> ride. I used to take friends and family up without thought of consequence, as I
> always assumed there would be none. Now I think about what would happen to my
> friend's kids if he were to be with me when I had another accident.
>
> And it's not the accident per se that bothers me as I flew as a courier pilot
> afterwards... it's the rust. IFR flying used to be pretty effortless for me;
> now it makes me uneasy. I know how to fix that, but I'm either going to have to
> work more hours or win the Powerball to correct the problem. I just need to fly
> more.
>
> But I know I'm not on top of my game and subsequently I'm reluctant to bring
> along anybody, much less a stranger in poor health.

I'm in the same boat as you. I wouldn't fly an IFR flight in more than
"light" IMC with a patient if I was still flying these missions (it is
too variable without my own airplane). Heck, I won't fly myself in
serious IMC at the present. I only flew maybe 1 flight in 6 years that
was in lower than 500 and 1. Most flights were VFR or popping up
through a layer and back down again.


Matt

In article >,
Matt Whiting > wrote:

> > The first hour I fly my cherokee 140, it's about $3500. After that, my 140
> > is about $40/hour, including fuel and engine reserve (the annual is included
> > in the $3500).
> >
> > ymmv
>
> By that logic, if you don't fly it at all during the year then it is free.

well, I'll never know, since I won't fly less than 1 hour per year (I hope!)

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Bob Noel wrote:
> Once current again. even if you aren't as sharp as you could be, would
> you still be able to fly safely, confidently in soft-IMC? And a well-equipped
> aircraft could certainly help the workload.


Oh, yeah. I'm sure I could do that. I was just thinking about a trip I made
with a buddy not too long ago where we had a rough ride out to the coast, in and
out of the clouds and rain all the way. I dropped him off and flew back, only
to stumble into a cell and get the hell beat out of me. I'm here to tell the
tale but I'm eternally grateful I was alone when it happened. It's one thing to
kill me; entirely something else to take somebody with me... particularly a
father with preteens at home.


> Maybe you could connect with a (relatively) low-time pilot and mentor
> him (or her) through these angel flights.


Now that I would enjoy. It would be like starting an IV for another nurse. If
I can't get it, it wasn't my patient anyway. No pressure. <G>


> And remember that no angel flight pilot HAS to fly. If you can't do
> the flight, then you cancel.


I am familiar with the concept, though I did damned little of that when I was
flying for a living. Nowadays, I look at things a bit differently.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Travis Marlatte > wrote:

> There are many non-IFR pilots flying Angel Flights every day. There are more
> Angel Flights in VFR conditions than IFR.

Be sure to check with the particular group. Angel Flight Mid-Atlantic (or it's
nom de jour) requires all flights with patients to be made with an IFR flight
plan.

> -------------------------------
> Travis
> Lake N3094P
> PWK



--
Don Poitras

In article >,
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote:

> Now that I would enjoy. It would be like starting an IV for another nurse.
> If
> I can't get it, it wasn't my patient anyway. No pressure. <G>

OUCH!

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)