Plane for the kids

They aren't teens yet, no child of 14-18 really believes
that their parent knows anything.

My youngest is now 25 and starting to listen again.
--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
| Your kids will listen more carefully to another teacher
and can then come to you for clarification and support.
|
| I think that's true with the wife, I'm not worried about
that with the
| kids.
|
| -Robert
|

Robert M. Gary wrote:

3) Has anyone else on the list taught their kids to fly? I do know of
two other CFIs that have done this.

I've got to say...I would have NEVER let my parents teach me to fly
(moot point, since they aren't pilots).

And I don't think I'd want to teach my children, either. Too much
personal stuff gets in the way. Of course, another moot point, since I
don't want kids.

"Jim Macklin" wrote

They aren't teens yet, no child of 14-18 really believes
that their parent knows anything.

My youngest is now 25 and starting to listen again.

My observation of parent - child relations, is that nothing holds true for
all relationships.

Some kids will listen and learn from their parents, and some won't. You
just have to figure out what category you fall into.
--
Jim in NC

I have to disagree with that. My Dad taught my mom in 30 days how to
fly. How? I have no stinkin' clue. I was able to crank it out in 3
months flying 3+ times a week. I don't fault my Dad for my training
issues that I had as much as my own study habits and learning traits.
Where I do fault my Dad, and I can't fault him that much, is his lack of
recent flight training experience. I was his first student since my Mom
learned how to fly (from him) nearly 20 years ago.

While it was stressful, I can proudly say, "My Dad taught me how to fly."

Chris



Jim Macklin wrote:
Considering the stress of being in a family, dads and teens,
I would suggest that you lease a taildragger, maybe a tandem
cockpit and HIRE another instructor. Your kids will listen
more carefully to another teacher and can then come to you
for clarification and support. If you are the INSTRUCTOR
and the dad, they will have conflicts and slow progress
IMHO.

You can use the Mooney for some of the required training and
a simple VFR old or new (think light sport aircraft) to make
them look out the windows. California tax law is beyond
anybody's answer but you can put all your stuff in some big
trucks and go to Arizona.

You might as well scratch anything with a tailwheel off the list. If,
and that's a BIG IF, you could actually find an insurance company
willing to insure a tailweel plane for a student solo, you'd be paying
through the nose for it.

I'll second the "older 172" vote. Here's why:

1. Cheap to buy
2. Cheap to insure (although you'll be paying a premium for anything
with student pilots on the insurance)
3. Doesn't need a hanger
4. Cheap to pay taxes on
5. Called the "land-o-matic" for a good reason
6. Difficult to spin (a C150 spins easily)
7. Cheap to fuel - runs on mo-gas as well as 100ll
8. Easy to jump start (12v jumps off your car or Farmer Joe's tractor)
9. Versitile enough to let your kids hang on to it and grow into it.
They can pack camping gear and enjoy some fun trips. Or you the three
of you can go for a hop together.
10. Easy to get parts for
11. Easy to work on

The 50's 172 are great VFR trainers. The mid to late 60's planes can
also do IFR training if you are looking towards that.

Helen

"When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to
have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at
how much he had learned."
Mark Twain

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:09:57 -0600, "Jim Macklin"

My youngest is now 25 and starting to listen again.

George
If you request flight following, can you really "slip the surly bonds of earth"?

What Helen says!!
My brother and I have a '67 172H and my kids love it. I plan on teaching
them both to fly in it here in a few years after I get off my butt and get
my CFI.
Even my 13 year old daughter thinks "it's pretty cool"...You gotta know
that's priceless! My 9 year old son loves it, but only when he gets to sit
up front...


"Helen Woods" wrote in message
...
You might as well scratch anything with a tailwheel off the list. If, and
that's a BIG IF, you could actually find an insurance company willing to
insure a tailweel plane for a student solo, you'd be paying through the
nose for it.

I'll second the "older 172" vote. Here's why:

1. Cheap to buy
2. Cheap to insure (although you'll be paying a premium for anything with
student pilots on the insurance)
3. Doesn't need a hanger
4. Cheap to pay taxes on
5. Called the "land-o-matic" for a good reason
6. Difficult to spin (a C150 spins easily)
7. Cheap to fuel - runs on mo-gas as well as 100ll
8. Easy to jump start (12v jumps off your car or Farmer Joe's tractor)
9. Versitile enough to let your kids hang on to it and grow into it. They
can pack camping gear and enjoy some fun trips. Or you the three of you
can go for a hop together.
10. Easy to get parts for
11. Easy to work on

The 50's 172 are great VFR trainers. The mid to late 60's planes can also
do IFR training if you are looking towards that.

Helen

"Rachel" wrote in message
...
Of course, another moot point, since I
don't want kids.

Yeah, you say that now, but wait a few years until the biological clock
starts ticking and then it'll be, "Weeeelllll, I juuuuuussssttttt want
ooonnnnneee..."

Been there, done that, stuck with the result...

Helen Woods writes:
You might as well scratch anything with a tailwheel off the list. If,
and that's a BIG IF, you could actually find an insurance company
willing to insure a tailweel plane for a student solo, you'd be paying
through the nose for it.

Huh. I am coming up on my first solo in the Citabria I am training
in. The club I am with (West Valley Flying Club, wvfc.org) has a few
of them, all used for primary training.

I have heard that larger clubs have much less trouble insuring
taildraggers, since they tend to have more experienced taildragger
instructors to go with them. (But what do I know, I am just a
pre-solo newbie.)

Chris
--
Chris Colohan Email: PGP: finger
Web: www.colohan.com Phone: (412)268-4751

Robert,

My husband taught me to fly his Luscombe, and he's not a CFI. It wasn't a
big deal. I think it depends on the relationship.

Other folks have mentioned insurance as an issue. That wasn't a big deal
with us, either. Buy the airplane that you, as the CFI, have the most
time-in-type in. That will keep your costs down. Try
http://www.auaonline.com/ for the best vintage rates.

Folks on our Luscombe List use their airplanes for "personal" primary
training all the time. It has been our experience that the high costs come
into play when tailwheel aircraft are rented out for commercial use.

Have fun!
Deb
--
1946 Luscombe 8A (his)
1948 Luscombe 8E (hers)
1954 Cessna 195B, restoring (ours)