Experience Question

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

I understand what you are saying Peter, I don't think you understood what
I
was saying.

I'm saying that if I didn't think it was safge enough for my family or
friends I wouldn't think it was safe enough for me.

Yes, I do understand what you are saying. My point is simply that every
pilot who was involved in a fatal accident (speaking of non-experimental
GA
and excluding those who set out to commit suicide) most likely believed
what you and I believe.

The challenge we all continually face is putting our "money where our
mouths and keyhboards are." In other words, translate this belief into
actions (proper weather briefing, proper go/no-go/go-and-then-turn-
around-or-land decisions, proper fuel planning, practice or fly enough to
maintain proficiency, etc). Looking at GA accident statistics, this
clearly does not happen with enough regularity.


Again I couldn't agree more but that wasn't what the OP was talking about.
He was asking a question related to piloting friends and family before he
has X hundred hours.

wrote in message ...
Fred Choate wrote:

My question to you folks is simply, how long did you
all wait before you decided it was safe to fly with your family?

My kids have flown "since before they were born". My wife quit flying
solo when she was too pregnant to pull the yoke all the way back on a
C152.

Since 5 years old, each of the kids have been able to hold straight
and level, on course, IFR, in the soup. After all, all they could see
in the front seat was the instruments, and to them it was just a large
video game.

But, they are spoiled. Neither of the kids has "taken to" aviation.
They think "everyone" has an SUV at the airport and can go
wherever/whenever. For my wife, after she soloed, and knew that she
could land the airplane if something happened to me, she sits in the
back and reads a book while the world goes by.

So, since my family is not interested beyond the travel time, I
volunteer for Civil Air Patrol flight academies... power and glider.

Yes, I love to fly and teach!

In the mean time, I keep myself busy teaching mountain flying ground
school (5 of them this year), and then doing the flight training in
the mountains. I no longer do "mountain checkouts". What I do is
"mountain training to proficiency". The typical "2-3 hour mountain
checkout" is just enough to get some killed by attempting to operate
beyond their and their aircraft's capabilities.

After a full day ground school (Colorado Pilots Association), I have
3.5 full days of flying scheduled to take a pilot all over Colorado
and help them with operational experience and a high level of
proficiency and comfort in the Colorado Rockys! Many of my customers
return in later years for a "brush up" on proficiency and techniques.

After flying with me in Colorado, I recommend "McCall Mountain and
Canyon Flying Seminars" in McCall, ID. After that... Alaska!

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 228 Young Eagles!

I went to the McCall school last week and had the most fun that I have ever
had flying!

Mike
MU-2

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Again I couldn't agree more but that wasn't what the OP was talking about.

I wasn't replying to the OP. I was replying to you. :-)




--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Again I couldn't agree more but that wasn't what the OP was talking
about.

I wasn't replying to the OP. I was replying to you. :-)



That's one of the big problems of USENET. You have to take what I said in
context to the thread or you can pretty much make it mean anything you want.

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
otoh - new drivers have not received much training nor have they been
tested to any meaningful standard. Pilots have (or should have).

Well, a) the comparison was at least 50% facetious (the following paragraph
should have illustrated that), and b) regardless of the training offered, a
new pilot or driver is at greater risk for certain kinds of accidents than a
more experienced one. You can't necessarily compare a new driver to a new
pilot, but you can easily compare a new driver to an experienced driver, and
a new pilot to an experienced pilot.

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
IMO, being humble about one's piloting skills is not a detriment. Having
too much confidence in the skills one doesn't have is arguably much worse.

You're reading things into my post that I didn't write. I'm not talking
about being humble. I'm talking about being needlessly paranoid.

Likewise, I'm not talking about being OVER-confident. I'm talking about
having an appropriate and correct assessment of one's own skills.

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...
[...]
When asked if flying with me is safe, I just answer "No, its not safe".

And in making that absolutely true statement, assuming by "I just answer"
you mean it stands alone, you're doing aviation a disservice.

The problem isn't so much that aviation is unsafe (it certainly can be
dangerous, and as the saying goes, is unforgiving of mistakes). It's that
people fail to recognize how many *other* things in their life are also
unsafe. Things that they are exposed to with much greater frequency than
most pilots are exposed to the risk of flying.

Acknowledging the hazards of aviation is well and good, but doing so without
putting those hazards into perspective just perpetuates the myth that flying
airplanes is only for daredevils.

Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:


You're reading things into my post that I didn't write. I'm not talking
about being humble. I'm talking about being needlessly paranoid.

Oh? When you typed "don't have enough confidence" you meant "needlessly
paranoid?" Ok, I'll take your word for it now that you explained it.

You have to admit that there was some wiggle room there.



--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

That's one of the big problems of USENET. You have to take what I said in
context to the thread or you can pretty much make it mean anything you want.

My comments were not outside the context of this thread.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

That's one of the big problems of USENET. You have to take what I said in
context to the thread or you can pretty much make it mean anything you
want.

My comments were not outside the context of this thread.



Peter R., two different people thought you took thier two different comments
out of context. You certainly took mine out of context.

RIF