Hi,
I'm 14 years old and I am taking flying lessons at Glendale Mun. Airport (KGEU). I have logged in 5 hours and my 6th being tomorrow, the 6th of December. I am currently taking one lesson a month because of costs and that I cannot recieve my PPL until I am 17 years of age. Should I be taking lessons more frequently or not? My mom said when I near the age of 16, when I can solo, I could possiblily take a lesson every week or two. Is this good advice? Thanks.
bartdude420
All Comments
bartdude,
To be honest, what you are doing now really won't help you at all.
I don't mean to burst your bubble, because that is exactly what I did when I was your age. However, when you are 16 and 1/2 or so it will be the perfect time to fly 2 times a week. Your retention will be great at 2 times/week, while right now you may not remember anything from your last lesson.
My advice: continue having fun as you are now, but realize that when the time comes to really train, you should fly much more often.
And to build on what the above guy said, you might want to look at the possibility of taking out a loan to cover the cost of the flight training. It will be worth it and you will SAVE money in the long run, because your retention will be higher, your lessons will consequently be shorter, and you'll have fewer "re-training" flights.
You can go for upwards of a week and have pretty good retention IF you are practicing "visualization" and studying your proceedures(manuvers, etc), and SOMETIMES it helps to take a short break from flight training if you've just gone though a fairly intensive run, so you can look back and reflect on what you just did. I must agree though that about 2x per week is the magical number. Maybe 3x if you want to fly during the weekends(then you can fly about every other day), but due to weather, mechanical, and other problems even if you are scheduled to fly every other day, it probably won't happen quite a few times.
1x a week wouldn't be too bad either, there's a lot of weeks that I don't get 2 flights in, and a good number that I get none in(but most of the time i'll get them in the proceeding week), there's just those enviromental factors along with others, and if you are really hitting the books and taking the groundschool, then 1x may not be terrible at all.
2x is probably the best all-around number per week though :)
The worst time for me(which is right now) is waiting for checkrides. We have to wait up to 2 weeks for them, and that really messes us up because as soon as we stop flying, we start to loose what we just learned, and around 2 weeks you can start to get fairly unconfident, and it ends up costing you more money because you may have to retrain with your instructor if you dont pass the checkride.
I have to agree with you guys. I started at the age of 14 as well. Some times it would be four months between my lessons. My advice would be to do your ground school early in your training so you have a base knoledge of flying. That is what I did and I found it helpful in my training. Other that that, what the other guys have said is right on the money.
Matthew
"§ 61.83 Eligibility requirements for student
pilots.
To be eligible for a student pilot certificate,
an applicant must:
(a) Be at least 16 years of age for
other than the operation of a glider or
balloon.
(b) Be at least 14 years of age for the
operation of a glider or balloon.
(c) Be able to read, speak, write, and
understand the English language. If the
applicant is unable to meet one of
these requirements due to medical reasons,
then the Administrator may
place such operating limitations on
that applicant’s pilot certificate as are
necessary for the safe operation of the
aircraft."
Excuse me...does any of this MEAN anything????
I'm also 14 and have 5 hours logged. I'm taking lessons once a month and plan on taking them more often when I get closer to 16. My flight school agrees that that's the best plan because of my age. It's working out fine for me. I'm retaining all the information and my CFI says I fly like I've had 20 lessons and not just 5. Good luck with your training!
Reply to robert - It means you can solo a powered aircraft on your 16th birthday and get your certificate in same on your 17th.
While we're at it, if you get your medical on the last day of your 39th year on this planet, you can exercise your third class privileges for 36 calander months, but if you miss the appointment at the AME you can only go 24 calander months.
Guess everything's arbitrary at some point, and that's where judgement comes in...
Reply to bartdude - see my post about young pilots (sorry, I can't remember my password, so I'm stuck being anonymous for the moment). Had one that started at 13 and she flew every other week until she turned 15. She then started to fly once to 1.5 (average) per week as school work and jobs permitted. She's about to solo (missed her birthday because we both agreed she need a bit more polish), and she's a darn fine pilot.
Hey I'm currently 15 and a half. I completed my ground school in may with an 83%. I am starting my training on Sunday hoping to get in an hour a week. In Canada, I can get my rec permit at the age of 16 and hope to move on to a private at 17. Keep training Bart. if you want to get to the airlines these hours will help.
Just a sugestion, but why don't you look at getting your glider license ?
I started with a glider scholarship and kept going. Glider time is a cheap and effective way to gain valuable flight time while getting a license sooner.
When your 16/17 and you decide to continue with your power license, things will breeze right along. Let's face it, a stall in a 150 is the same as a grobe, except the recovery with the 150 includes the addition of power.
Whatever you choose, good luck to you. Stick with it, there's nothing better in the world.
-=0=LiR=0=-
The FAA Regulations are written as exclusionary. That means that unless they say something is NOT permitted, then it is assumed to be permitted. Those things that are spelled out with specifics have explicit requirements, but the FAA rules do not prohibit an individual under a given age from being given instruction. Again, remembering that it is the rated pilot in the aircraft that is the Pilot In Command.
Having said that, it is quite legal to go out and do something stupid, and those sorts of things happen to people... even rated pilots. As the saying goes... "You can be legally dead!" That said in reference to still being technically following the FAA Rules and Regs and still being allowed to do something stupid due to the aforementioned exclusionary principal of the regs.
In my opinion, unless you have a youth that is not physically or mentally up to the task of piloting an aircraft, there is nothing wrong with them taking instruction.
Even if a youth doesn't go on to get their license, the experience of flight instruction teaches many skills that transfer to everyday life. Those being, planning, organization, caution, thoroughness, and safety awareness, among others.
RobertD903 -
I'm just curious - after reviewing the posts on this topic, why, specifically, do you have a problem with this? My young student, the one who started when she was 13, was recently accepted, as a junior in high school, to Embry-Riddle after she graduates. Further, she's going to some sort of elite high school ROTC camp this summer (I don't know enough to say what this is).
So why shouldn't someone like this start to learn to fly at younger than 16? I can assure you that no FAR was violated. In fact, when she first started with me, I specifically asked a senior inspector with the FAA if he saw any problems. The reply was a shrug of the shoulders, and the question asked of me was "Aren't you the pilot in command?"
It's called maturity and control. Sure, some kids may be able to control an aircraft and make sound aeronautical decisions, but there are plenty of examples in civilization where there are risks that offset these kinds of things. There's a reason why there are learners permits for operating a motor vehicle. There are reasons why the law considers someone over the age of 18 an adult and anyone under a minor. There are reasons why we want to know where our kids are going at night, when they'll be back, and who they are with.
Basically, what you are saying rvmeder, is that children are capable of making sound decisions just like adults. While this may be true for some, it isn't true for all, and that's why we have the above laws, and why someone has to be a certain age to get their pilot's liscense.
We can give instruction and student permits, and if the kid is truely interested in aviation then that is great, but "child pilots" is a tough subject and one has to realize that children do not poses the maturity to always make as sound decisions as adults. Are there a minority of adults that don't make sound decisions? Sure, but that's not indicitive of the whole here.
Just because a child "student pilot" survives solos and solo XCs does not mean they are a great pilot, flight skills are one thing, and ADM is another, and the difference between an accident and a non-eventfull flight can simply be luck.
I don't disapprove of flight training kids with flight instructors, but the age restrictions are there for a reason.
No, Stryker, that's not what I'm proposing. Never have, never will. I did say, as you indicated in your last line, that dual instruction for someone under 16 is OK. Nothing more, nothing less - please feel free to read my posts carefully, as I do know the law and understand maturity levels in young adults.
What I am objecting to is the idea that someone under 16 not be allowed to fly with a qualified CFI as a blanket statement. It is up to the CFI at that point to determine whether or not the person is capable of absorbing the lessons. Maybe tailoring them to a younger person's level of maturity is appropriate. Maybe saying "come back in a couple of years" is appropriate. Just depends on the individual.
By extending the argument beyond aviation, young people would be shut out of many, many opportunities afforded by adult supervision, mentoring, and instruction. For example, I certainly would not agree to a bunch of 15-16 year olds going off to the Wisconsin North Woods to go winter camping without qualified, responsible adults supervising and involved. Just as potentially hazardous if not done properly (I've been involved with these, and I needed supervision from the truely experienced adult campers in the group). But, what a great maturing experience for those involved if done properly.
Finally, as an instructor, I resent the idea that giving dual to a young person is an undue risk. Acknowledging that any form of transportation involves risk, I don't see giving dual to a younger student any riskier than providing it to, say, a forty-year old. In fact, I might argue that, having a serious young person as a student gives me, as an instructor, the opportunity to develop better safety habits instead of having to fight uphill against ossified habits and socialization found in those over 35 or 40.
I guess I fall somewhere in the middle on this one. I have give instruction to those younger than 16, including 2 of my own daughters when they were early teenagers. Neither had a great interest, and never pursued aviation, other than the fact that one of them married a Captain. I have also given dual instruction to others when they were either pre-teens or early teenagers. I have also give dual instruction to some older individuals who, we both knew, would not be able to get a medical certificate. They wanted to try flying and I saw no reason to deny them. None of those people were eligible for a certificate of any kind, but I was the PIC, and responsible for the safety of the flight. As RVMEDER says, I take that pretty seriously. What's the big deal? Legally they were all passengers, I was the pilot. The only thing I would say though, is I would be a little hesitant with a child as young as 8 years old. My 8 year old grandson is here with me (son of one of those previously mentioned daughters), and he is just so unpredictable and so quick when he does something, I would want to be very careful with him in the front seat with his hands on the controls.
Incidentally, any time I flew with any of those persons who were ineligible for a certificate of any kind, I made sure that they knew that, and that they accepted that. Actually I have a neighbor right now who is in his early 70's with a pacemaker, who wants enough dual to be able to land a small airplane if something happens to the pilot. He flys a lot with me and another neighbor, and my generation thinks like that a lot. I have started him out with a condensed version of the 4 fundamentals, and will continue from there. He loves it. I also explained to some of the younger persons that if they did not continue with periodic instruction they would likely forget a lot of what we covered.
My 2 cents, a little more rambling than I intended when I started.
...personally, I think that the age restrictions were put in the books for a REASON--otherwise, what would be the point? Sure, little Bobby, and little Suzie (both age 12) may be bright, budding airline pilots--but why not wait until they're LEGALLY "of age?"
What's next? Scrapping the requirement to even HAVE a license--in order to be PIC???? "Old George" is a very intelligent, and mature old dude. He shouldn't NEED to have a pilot's license--in order to fly a plane!!! (He's been DIVORCED two times--so, he's definately a survivor!!!!)
Where does it end?
Top Rated
Tip of the Week
brought to you by
Take extra care to avoid activities that might detract from flying.
Partner Pages
