[N941WR]

For some reason my three year-old son has decided he loves aerobatics. (He met Sean Tucker at OSH this past summer and LOVES watching his videos on YouTube!)

This afternoon he asked me if I would take him flying and do aerobatics with him. I agreed to the first part and some steep turns solved the second part.

Here?s the question, if there was a parachute that would fit him, I guess I would be legal, assuming the plane I?m flying is also aerobatic. Is that true?

Ethical is another issue. Meaning we would meet the letter of the law but if something happened and we had to get out, the chances a three year-old would be able to pull his cord and land safely is very questionable.

Just putting this out there to spark a discussion. Since my -9 is not an acro bird, we won?t be doing any snap roles or loops.

 

[Ironflight]

My pure opinion is that as long as you stay within the limitations of the -9, and he enjoys it, what would be the harm?

I personally wouldn't do any aerobatics that required a chute with a passenger unless that passenger was FULLY capable of using it.

You wanted discussion.....

 

[WSBuilder]

Minor means Minor

I'm not against it, but I just watched 20/20 with the story about the 16 year old girls sailing around the world, solo. One didn't make it and had to be rescued after a huge wave capsized and swamped her boat. California is bringing child endagerment against the parents, who clearly advocated for the kid to take the risk. Bottom line, despite how "old" kids are these days, until they're 18 they are at the mercy of their parents' decisions. No matter how much they want to do something, make no mistake it is all on you as the adult. If you have the training and the experience and use good judgment, smoke 'em if you got 'em!

 

[GusBiz]

The Law

Unfortunatly the Law is what you need to adhear to. On an ethical basis, I am not sure that going to FL060 and doing a roll in an aerobatic aircraft really needs a parachute.

It might be law in the US but its not like planes ripe apart from that kind of behaviour on a regular basis.

In Australia there is no such law

I say if your following your local law, you have recovery altitude, your aircraft and you can do it well... then why not.

 

[Snowflake]

Is it legal, never mind ethical, to do aerobatics in an aircraft that wasn't designed for aerobatics by the kit manufacturer?

I think if something did go wrong, whether or not the passenger could open the chute may come out as secondary to the question of why you were doing aerobatics in a -9 in the first place. Insurance companies love loopholes...

 

[Kyle Boatright]

Is it legal, never mind ethical, to do aerobatics in an aircraft that wasn't designed for aerobatics by the kit manufacturer?

I think if something did go wrong, whether or not the passenger could open the chute may come out as secondary to the question of why you were doing aerobatics in a -9 in the first place. Insurance companies love loopholes...

First, I wouldn't do acro in a -9. It isn't designed for it.

Second, if you screw up an acro maneuver, whether the insurance pays or not is the least of your worries.

Third, I think the assertion that "Insurance won't pay" is a myth.

 

[terrykohler]

Ethical Isn't Quite the Word that Comes to Mind

Gotta admit that these forums are entertaining. Where else can you view impassioned messages regarding the need for Nomex, mixed right in with aeronautical decision making by a three year old. Something for everyone.
Terry, CFI
RV9A N323TP

 

[DCat22]

Is it legal, never mind ethical, to do aerobatics in an aircraft that wasn't designed for aerobatics by the kit manufacturer?

I think if something did go wrong, whether or not the passenger could open the chute may come out as secondary to the question of why you were doing aerobatics in a -9 in the first place.

First, I wouldn't do acro in a -9. It isn't designed for it.

The OP twice said he would not be doing acro in his 9 for these reasons, but that it was just a topic for discussion.

 

[jrs14855]

Acro

I find this subject very interesting and somewhat amusing. Question: how many can tell the difference between a 172 in utility category, a Citabria in aerobatic category and a Pitts as far as airframe G limit/strength. I had to look it up. From a practical standpoint the major difference is the negative g limit. I would be much more comfortable rolling any RV, including the 9, 10 and 12, than I would rolling a corroded, high time Cessna Aerobat.
In the early history of light airplanes, limited aerobatic flight was relatively common. Accidents were usually a result of flying into the ground-NOT breaking the airplane. I have know several people over the years that have done some pretty radical acro in stock J3 Cubs. The ones that crashed all hit the ground, they did not pull the wings off in flight.
Then there was Bevo Howard, who allegedly did outrside loops in a stock J2 Cub, Bob Hoover, who took the Shrike to Vne and maybe more, on virtually every airshow flight. Marion Cole allegedly did a low level airshow routine in a straight model 35 V tail Bonanza- the one with the "weak" center spar. And finally Harold Johnson, who did a low level airshow in a Ford Trimotor. Loops from ground level, rolls with one engine shut down, etc. Greg Herrick is making noises about recreating the Johnson routine with his "new" Trimotor. Google Harold Johnson Ford Trimotor and you can probably find a video.

 

[jrs14855]

Continued

I have this vague recollection many years ago of doing a couple of rolls in an RV4, two people, no chutes. The owner is relatively well known. Or maybe it was just a dream. I think the statute of limitations has expired.

 

[N941WR]

... assuming the plane I’m flying is also aerobatic...

Gang, what part of this line don't you understand?

Also, I don't plan on taking my three year-old son up and start doing acro with him. I was simply posing the hypothetical question.

The OP twice said he would not be doing acro in his 9 for these reasons, but that it was just a topic for discussion.

Thank you Rick!

 

[jrs14855]

acro

I completely understand the original post. I was hoping to draw someone into a discussion about the almost insignificant difference between utility category limits and aerobatic limits of a Citabria. My bet would be that the RV9 is stronger than the Citabria. Since no one bit, utility category 4.4 G Citabria 5.0. Most aerobatic category aircraft are certified to at least 6G, I guess the Citabria could be described as Aerobatic lite.

 

[apkp777]

Bill, you could just put him in the seat upside down. Then just go fly straight up. He could then say "I flew upside down with my dad".

 

[luddite42]

I completely understand the original post. I was hoping to draw someone into a discussion about the almost insignificant difference between utility category limits and aerobatic limits of a Citabria. My bet would be that the RV9 is stronger than the Citabria. Since no one bit, utility category 4.4 G Citabria 5.0. Most aerobatic category aircraft are certified to at least 6G, I guess the Citabria could be described as Aerobatic lite.

Perfectly legit discussion, but a non-starter, since the most that'll come from it is folks finger waving the regs. I've always felt that if somebody's going to bust their butt doing acro in a 4.4G utility plane, that the slight bit of extra strength of a 6G acro design is extremely unlikely to save them. Acro fatalities associated with structural failure are fairly rare. Mostly it's that the pilot's skill level and judgment were insufficient for their altitude. So like you say, if folks started doing acro in 4.4G utility birds, it wouldn't necessarily be "unsafe" because of the strength of the plane, but because of the idiot at the controls.

 

[GusBiz]

go for it!

Bill, you could just put him in the seat upside down. Then just go fly straight up. He could then say "I flew upside down with my dad".

After reading this myself, I am dying to try it with a friend.

I am going to say this and will probably get flamed but hey what the h.ell, I haven't had barbeque for a while.

I would have no issue at doing Aileron roles and even barrel roles with a -9.

Small decent, pick up some speed, enter fast, Idle at apex and down to max again. I would probably do it with less than full tanks, I would do it at 6000 ft minimum, and I would do it within range of a strip but honestly these plans are tough as nails.

I mean how are the aerodynamic forces that different from normal spin/stall tests anyway? (oh man.. after writing that, I am waiting for the roasting to begin)

 

[Subwaybob]

Perfectly legit discussion, but a non-starter, since the most that'll come from it is folks finger waving the regs. I've always felt that if somebody's going to bust their butt doing acro in a 4.4G utility plane, that the slight bit of extra strength of a 6G acro design is extremely unlikely to save them. Acro fatalities associated with structural failure are fairly rare. Mostly it's that the pilot's skill level and judgment were insufficient for their altitude. So like you say, if folks started doing acro in 4.4G utility birds, it wouldn't necessarily be "unsafe" because of the strength of the plane, but because of the idiot at the controls.

{ed. political rant (against the rules} removed}


With that siad, the SECOND my daughter is old enough to enjoy AERO I am taking her. You can stick your regs. She flys around 2 time a month now and has for the 7.5 MONTHS she has been on this earth. I guarantee you she already longs to see the earth upside down, and she will get to. I promise!

Thank you. I'm here all week.

 

[luddite42]

I would have no issue at doing Aileron roles and even barrel roles with a -9.

Small decent, pick up some speed, enter fast, Idle at apex and down to max again. I would probably do it with less than full tanks, I would do it at 6000 ft minimum, and I would do it within range of a strip but honestly these plans are tough as nails.

The description of your "technique" clearly indicates that you have no aerobatic experience. There must be somebody around that you can get some minimal acro dual with, even if it's with a buddy. That is just my recommendation.

 

[Snowflake]

Since my -9 is not an acro bird, we won?t be doing any snap roles or loops.

I missed the part where you said "assuming the plane is aerobatic", but I did see this one, which led me to think that you may try rolling your -9. Sorry if I started a flame war.

Many of the follow-up posters are correct... Bob Hoover and others regularly did aerobatic routines in aircraft only certified to the Utility (or Normal) category. They do so after extensive experience flying aerobatics in many kinds of aircraft. Not knowing what your background is, we have to assume the common denominator of Cessna-trained, no Aerobatic experience. I've heard a lot of people say "well, the -9 is just like a -7, really" and assume that it should be just as strong. It is, up to the Utility category limit. You can do a roll within the Utility limit, and even a loop. But your margin for error, when something goes sideways, is a lot smaller.

 

[WAM120RV]

Hmmm

What happens if the child vomits and starts to choke on the vomit?

I have had had two people do this on flights where there have been no sudden changes in flight path........its not good.

Isnt there a law in the US called reckless endangerment? I think with something like this you not only have to consider aviation law, but criminal law and child protection laws.

And another issue......Babies and children's heads are big (heavy) compared to the size of their bodies their neck muscles not fully developed, think of the effect a lot of G could have on them. Could they support their heads with the loads without injury

Lets face it a 3 year is a big baby!!! 7 and above well thats a different story but will depend on the individual child.

Ok I am retired from the police now but would still intervene to prevent anyone doing this as in the UK you would probably breach child protection las

Nothing wrong with taking a little one on 'normal' fights.............. but remember as parents/adults we have to consider the risks the kids dont understand.

 

[GusBiz]

The description of your "technique" clearly indicates that you have no aerobatic experience. There must be somebody around that you can get some minimal acro dual with, even if it's with a buddy. That is just my recommendation.

I take it you were refering to the down to max? I reaslied what I had written, I did not mean max throttle, I meant airspeed.

Idle up top and then make sure your not exceeding Vne on the way down, or exceeding 16 degrees angle of attack, either gives you a bad day.

I was surprised you gave that kind of response. Usually that kind of reply is given by teenagers on youtube

Back to a productive discussion

...What happens if the child vomits and starts to choke on the vomit?

I never experience motion sickness but this is a very serious point and not something anyone that had posted had mentioned.

I now think that it is unsafe to take a child of that age to do aeros.

 

[larosta]

Starting the Grin Early

We have close friends that owned a Citabria several years ago. They took the opportunity to take their young nephew flying when the was a young guy and rode on his aunts lap. I am sure he was belted in and no aerobatics were performed!!!

Jump forward about 25 +/- years. Next year this same young man will be flying slot in the US Navy flight demonstration team.

Light the fire, live the dream!!!!

 

[Jimboscr]

Interesting discussion

I would be cautious about doing Aerobatics with a child. I would be afraid of "putting them off" flying. I certainly would be very reticent to do them with anyone else?s kids.

I am a teacher and the paperwork required to take students to something as dangerous as the local pool is appalling. My head hurts to think about what would be required to take some flying, let alone Aero's! I would think that the insurance company would wriggle out of paying up, if heaven forbid an accident occurred.

I don't know if it applies in the states, but we have a little thing called "In Loco Parentis" which loosely means if you were, or acting as, the parent of the child. In other words what would the parent do if they were there. Also as a parent if you do something particularly dumb and your child is hurt or killed you can be held accountable as well. (But the definition of Dumb is not all that clear cut)

So:
1/ I would never do anything with my, or anyone else?s child that required a parachute.
2/ I would think carefully about instilling fear in a child by doing Aerobatics.
3/ I would check my insurance policy VERY carefully to see if I was covered when doing aerobatics with a minor.

AND:
4/ The vomit factor. Not in my nice clean Aeroplane thank you!

 

[N941WR]

What happens if the child vomits and starts to choke on the vomit?

Same thing as if I was straight and level and the kid tossed his cookies.

Isnt there a law in the US called reckless endangerment? I think with something like this you not only have to consider aviation law, but criminal law and child protection laws.

This has been to the courts and they have ruled that if the flight is legal, then there is no need for child protective services to get involved. (This ruling was the result of a lawsuit by an upset spouse who didn't want her Ex to give their kids a ride.) This is no different than giving your kid a ride on a motorcycle, boat, or whatever.

And another issue......Babies and children's heads are big (heavy) compared to the size of their bodies their neck muscles not fully developed, think of the effect a lot of G could have on them. Could they support their heads with the loads without injury

Not really an issue in a plane when doing positive G acro as their head will be pushed into the back of the seat. When I was doing the auto racing thing, the side to side G's were much worse than anything I have ever experienced in an airplane.

Gotta admit that these forums are entertaining. Where else can you view impassioned messages regarding the need for Nomex, mixed right in with aeronautical decision making by a three year old. Something for everyone.
Terry, CFI
RV9A N323TP

LOL Terry!

Is it legal, never mind ethical, to do aerobatics in an aircraft that wasn't designed for aerobatics by the kit manufacturer? I think if something did go wrong, whether or not the passenger could open the chute may come out as secondary to the question of why you were doing aerobatics in a -9 in the first place. Insurance companies love loopholes...

IIRC, I made it clear that the hypothetical question had to do with being legal, that includes the airplane, equipment (parachutes), etc.

But I digress.

The question was a hypothetical one regarding the legalities of giving young children an acro ride when the chances that they could parachute to safety are very close to zero, even if they had all the right equipment.

 

[luddite42]

I take it you were refering to the down to max? I reaslied what I had written, I did not mean max throttle, I meant airspeed.

I was surprised you gave that kind of response. Usually that kind of reply is given by teenagers on youtube

Sorry, didn't mean to come across like that. It was the "idle at apex" comment. I know why you think you need to do this, but it's not necessary and shows that you are unnecessarily worried about airspeed buildup. It sounded like you were describing your recipe for some "homegrown" aerobatics. All I'm saying is that it's not a good idea. My comment was based on the fact that if you had significant aerobatic experience you would already know how to perform the basic maneuvers without the need to pull any amount of power off. If you DO need idle at any point, then you seriously f'd up. You can do all the basic maneuvers perfectly safely from cruise power, without touching the throttle. If performed properly, the laws of physics don't allow your exit airspeed to be any higher than what you entered the maneuver with.

 

[SteinAir]

Entertaining indeed! I happened to have the joy of taking my 3 year old nephew with me for a flight in the citabria this weekend. As we're toodling along, I banked pretty hard a couple of times to see things and the little guy asks me from atop his cushion in the back seat: "are we going upside down"?? I asked him if he liked going upside down and he giggled a big "YES"! We didn't go upside down for a variety of reasons, but both my little nephews LOVE to fly.

Yes, I've had people puke in my plane in straight/level flight so I know about that as well. Typically experienced passengers (adults & children alike) do much better in all phases of flight and I'm fairly certain the OP's child is better acclimated to the sensations of flight (+ & - ) than most. I don't think anyone would advocate aerobatics on a childs first flight.

Anyway, I don't have much to add other than to say I think that given the right people in the right circumstances with the right precautions it shouldn't be cause for some of the extreme responses I've seen, but that's just my 2 cents as usual!

Cheers,

Stein

PS, all the RVs I've flown seem to do great 1G barrel rolls...

 

[szicree]

If you DO need idle at any point, then you seriously f'd up. You can do all the basic maneuvers perfectly safely from cruise power, without touching the throttle.

Is that true? I have limited aerobatic training (in a fixed pitch aircraft) but was taught to pull back the throttle at several places, for example on the down line of a Cuban. I'd also definitely throttle back for a split s.

 

[SteinAir]

Is that true? I have limited aerobatic training (in a fixed pitch aircraft) but was taught to pull back the throttle at several places, for example on the down line of a Cuban. I'd also definitely throttle back for a split s.

Not necessarily a true blanket statement pertinent to all RV's in all configurations for all maneuvers. FP RV's benefit from a throttle reduction in parts of certain maneuvers. While you can do loops/cubans with the power left in, it takes less G's on the downside if you get rid of some power and can just be more comfortable. A Split S from cruise is not something I'd recommend with power on in a FP RV either. Plus, some FP props are VERY critical to max RPM restrictions that can easily be busted by leaving the power in during parts of some wifferdoodles. That being said the previous statement was partly correct - no reason to touch the throttle in a roll of any RV; FP or CS. I've had RV's configured in many ways FP, CS, inverted, non inverted, etc... and they behave drastically different in regards to aerobatics.

Just my 2 cents as usual!
Cheers,
Stein

 

[GusBiz]

Aeros for kids....

snip...... it takes less G's on the downside if you get rid of some power and can just be more comfortable.

This was orignal point, with a child and a -9 was what my comment was directed to.

not everyone wants to do aerobatics to perfect levels all the time.

As long as you understamd the energy of the aircraft and the forces applied to the airframe you can do them the tame way

 

[WAM120RV]

Really

So there you are half way round a loop and the 3 year old in the back seat of your RV4 or 8 gets vomit stuck in his windpipe. You are going to do the same thing as if you were straight and level.

Well I guess thats about right, you would be seriously in trouble unable to help the child because you need to fly the aeroplane, you cant reach the child anyway, he or she is just turning blue.

This is exactly the reason why we get laws written restricting the actions of the sensible majority, because of the reckless actions of a few fools ho are incapable of thinking through the possible consequences of their actions.

At the age of 14 crossing the channel in rough seas a friend of mine got vomit stuck in his wind pipe. As I was first aid trained I knew what to do an fortunately it as dislodged after the second or third thump on the back after bending him over. I did not have to resort to fingers down his throat!!

The look in his eyes as I bent him over as he thought he as going to die will live with me forever!

Now up to that point I had not been sick, but when it dislodged he threw up all over me, then it as my turn!!

So, think of all this going on flying straight and level while trying to fly the aeroplane.


As the man said 'clever people do stupid things all the time, I know I have watched me do them'.

I think being a Cop/Soldier/Paramedic gives you an insight in life that others dont get as we have to pick up the pieces from other peoples mistakes and recklessness.

Yes I have taken really young kids flying I have organised and run hundreds of Young Eagles flights in the UK. Its great to be able to do this but alays have in mind the vomit factor!!


Best

Steve

 

[N941WR]

So there you are half way round a loop and the 3 year old in the back seat of your RV4 or 8 gets vomit stuck in his windpipe. You are going to do the same thing as if you were straight and level.
...
At the age of 14 crossing the channel in rough seas a friend of mine got vomit stuck in his wind pipe. As I was first aid trained I knew what to do an fortunately it as dislodged after the second or third thump on the back after bending him over. I did not have to resort to fingers down his throat!! ....

So, with that logic, then no one should ever ride in the back of an RV-4 or -8, regardless of their age, because they MIGHT puke and they MIGHT choke on it and you MIGHT NOT be able to do anything about it.

This reminds me of a situation I had this past spring. My son was happy flying with me and sound asleep when I noticed a wasp in the cockpit. (I had been deathly allergic to anything that stings and went through five years of venom therapy.) We do not know if my son is allergic to wasp venom so a number of scenarios ran through my mind. I was at 10.5 over the mountains and about five minutes from starting down. There was a rural airport directly below us, when we noticed the wasp. The options were to continue on to our destination in a large city or start a decent to the small airport directly below us. In thinking about how long it would take to get an EMT to the country airport vs. having medics waiting at the destination airport, I elected to wait. As it turned out, the wasp did not sting anyone and flew away as soon as I opened the canopy.

Had he been stung, there would have been very little I could have done, other than get him on the ground and have the medics waiting for us.

IF he had been stung and died, I suppose someone ?well meaning? prosecutor could probably bring charges against me because I didn?t make sure there were no wasps in the plane and by the mere fact that we were in the plane over the mountains, a long way from help showed negligence and a clear disregard for my son?s safety.

 

[Ironflight]

OK folks, this one's closed - several posts with members calling other members names. The whole point of these fourms is to be a place where people can ask questions without getting bludgeoned in public. If you don't know how to write civil comments, then you're in the wrong place.

Paul