Tragity

Paul Stuart wrote:
From what I recall the accident in Colorado some years back involved a
young person that had got involved with his local EAA Chapter, and was
being rewarded with a flight after helping out at a Young Eagles event
- but it was not technically a Young Eagles flight i.e. the flight
wouldn't have been recorded in the Young Eagles logbook had it ended
safely.

Why wouldn't it? The only requirement is the kid be be within the
right ages and the pilot be an EAA member. You can issue the
certificate and forward the info to the EAA for the logbook and
your YE pilot credits.

EAA can't be held responsible for every single flight that might be
carried out by one of its members with any child on board.

A Young Eagles flight takes place when an official EAA form is filled
out prior to the flight. This form records the child's details and
makes sure that permission for the flight has been granted by a parent
or legal guardian. This is also the form that is sent to Oshkosh to be
entered in the Young Eagles database. If this form is completed, then
yes it's a Young Eagles flight, EAA takes responsibility for it, and -
provided the pilot has met requirements - the flight is covered under
the insurance program.



Ron Natalie wrote:
Paul Stuart wrote:
From what I recall the accident in Colorado some years back involved a
young person that had got involved with his local EAA Chapter, and was
being rewarded with a flight after helping out at a Young Eagles event
- but it was not technically a Young Eagles flight i.e. the flight
wouldn't have been recorded in the Young Eagles logbook had it ended
safely.

Why wouldn't it? The only requirement is the kid be be within the
right ages and the pilot be an EAA member. You can issue the
certificate and forward the info to the EAA for the logbook and
your YE pilot credits.

I fly Young Eagles through 2 different clubs.
Prior to this accident we had been discussing changing our rules to
prohibit 2 kids from the same family to fly in the same plane.

We should all look at this. Loss to the family, liability - let's split
them up - everyone wins!

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE


In article ,
".Blueskies." wrote:

Apparently at a Young Eagle event:

http://www.komonews.com/stories/39753.htm

I fly Young Eagles through 2 different clubs.
Prior to this accident we had been discussing changing our rules to
prohibit 2 kids from the same family to fly in the same plane.

We should all look at this. Loss to the family, liability - let's split
them up - everyone wins!

The alternative is losses to two families. Is this better?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
...
I fly Young Eagles through 2 different clubs.
Prior to this accident we had been discussing changing our rules to
prohibit 2 kids from the same family to fly in the same plane.

We should all look at this. Loss to the family, liability - let's split
them up - everyone wins!

The alternative is losses to two families. Is this better?

It certainly can be if a family has two kids and they are both in one plane.
Splitting up kids from the same family is a not uncommon YE rule.


Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

I fly Young Eagles through 2 different clubs.
Prior to this accident we had been discussing changing our rules to
prohibit 2 kids from the same family to fly in the same plane.

We should all look at this. Loss to the family, liability - let's
split them up - everyone wins!


The alternative is losses to two families. Is this better?

I don't think there is a better in this situation.

Matt

The alternative is losses to two families. Is this better?

Jose

I believe so - speaking from the position of someone who has already
lost a child.

Tony

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

The alternative is losses to two families. Is this better?

I believe so - speaking from the position of someone who has already
lost a child.

I am truly sorry about your loss. True, you might have lost two. But
you might have also lost none. That is the tradeoff for the other family.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Hi Jose

It really is a difficult decision.
My thoughts right now are leaning to not flying related kids in the same
flight, but I truly do take your point about two families grieving as
opposed to one.
This whole thread is such a tragedy - here we are trying to light a
spark under these kids to get them interested in flying, and then we
have this situation where they are killed on their first flight.
and of course we have to remember the pilot, who devoted his day to
giving kids this experience, and paid for it with his life.
There are no winners here - it is a very sad scenario.

Fly safe, and thanks for your post,

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE


In article ,
Jose wrote:

The alternative is losses to two families. Is this better?

I believe so - speaking from the position of someone who has already
lost a child.

I am truly sorry about your loss. True, you might have lost two. But
you might have also lost none. That is the tradeoff for the other family.

Jose

In article nospam-4015AC.19342216102005@shawnews,
tony roberts wrote:

I fly Young Eagles through 2 different clubs.
Prior to this accident we had been discussing changing our rules to
prohibit 2 kids from the same family to fly in the same plane.

We should all look at this. Loss to the family, liability - let's split
them up - everyone wins!


Knowing what I know as a certificated pilot, I would be very reluctant
to permit my child(ren) to fly with an unknown pilot. However, I would
much rather have my child(ren) in a single-engine airplane with a
competent pilot than in a car on the highway. There is no doubt in my
mind that there is much less risk in the former than in the latter. If
the competence and proficiency of the pilot is not known, then the risk
is considerably higher.



JKG