I disagree, to save the child the flight must be successful
and on time. A professional flight, in a professional class
airplane is the only sure thing to save the child. The
personal involvement of the concerned pilot raises the risks
and reduces the chances of success.

The FAA has changed VFR rules for over the top and night
flights to try a regulatory means to preempt the choice of a
less safe option. If you're out just for fun, solo and you
kill yourself, aside from the bad PR and destruction of the
airplane, that is your choice. But an unsafe emergency
flight is risking more than your life.

I have run into a burning building and put the fire out
while it was still just in the electrical panel (it was a
motel and my wife and son were in the room less 50 feet from
the fire. I know what is involved in accepting a risk. I
had told my family to get dressed and outside while I was
grabbing the extinguisher.

If I needed a flight for a sick family member, I'd call a
detached professional.


--
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.


"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
| "A Lieberman" wrote in message
| .. .
| On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
|
| If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had
24 hours to live
| and flying to pick up the organ was the only option,
then I'd take that
| risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk,
but I'd do it
| without hesitation.
|
| However, such situations are extremely rare and thus
don't factor into
| normal decision making.
|
| Excuse me?
|
| What you describe above is the worst possible pilot
decision one could
| make.
|
| Hardly. It's true that the fatality risk is
enormous--perhaps even on the
| order of 1% or more. But in the (very unlikely)
hypothetical situation Matt
| describes--that the flight is the only way to save one of
his kids--a 1%
| fatality risk is well worth it. So Matt's risk-benefit
analysis is
| completely reasonable.
|
| --Gary
|
|
|