Flying Life: Legal isn't always safe

It would have been perfect, except for one thing: the chaperone. My mother, always wonderfully adventurous, volunteered to help chaperone us around the various cities and countrysides of Spain, where the legal drinking age was 16.

Before we kids hit the town that first night, my mom called me into her hotel room and casually mentioned that I would not be having any alcohol with my friends. You can imagine the argument that ensued. And you can also probably imagine who won.

“I don’t care what the legal drinking age is here, Natalie,” my mom said. “It’s just not safe. You are too young.” I considered her to be a party pooper of the highest order.

Now almost 20 years later, when I do ground lessons with my students, I find myself calling on that killjoy spirit of mothers everywhere to help keep my students safe. First, I guide them through an understanding of the regulations to make sure they know what is and is not legal. Then, I hit them with my long list of things that are perfectly legal, but not at all safe.

Lord knows we don’t want any more regulations in the aviation industry. But I do think it’s important that we all add an extra margin of safety to our decision making, beyond what the regulations call for.For example, Part 91 takeoff minimums state that an instrument-rated pilot can take off at most airports with zero visibility and a ceiling so low that you would have no way of getting back into the airport on an instrument approach if something went wrong. A little common sense will tell you this is a bad idea.

Airspace regulations are another big one. While it is true that you do not need a clearance to fly into an active military operations area (MOA), the idea of sharing airspace with people who are flying twice my speed, while also trying to maintain a six-inch separation with the airplane off their wing, does not sound like my idea of a safe situation.

Class G weather minimums? One statute mile and clear of clouds? No thank you.

Special VFR clearances are another idea that sounds risky to me. I always preach that it might be legal to take off and stay below that low cloud deck, but I better not ever hear of my students doing it unless they are in dire straits and need to get in somewhere to land.

Maybe they all think I am an overly cautious, mother hen of a flight instructor. But I guarantee you they will think twice before they request that special VFR clearance or fly into an active MOA.

Currency regulations are another accident waiting to happen. It is perfectly legal to hop in an airplane after not having flown for almost two years. But am I the only one who thinks this sounds like a death wish? Or who questions the wisdom of an instrument pilot flying in hard IFR conditions when he or she may not have even been in an airplane in five months—even though it’s legal?

The new airman certification standards call for a discussion of the difference between proficiency and currency: in other words, safety versus legality. I think it is a valid distinction. Lord knows we don’t want any more regulations in the aviation industry. Besides, trusting a government agency to decide what is and is not safe for us sounds like faulty logic at best. But I do think it’s important that we all add an extra margin of safety to our decision making, beyond what the regulations call for.

We have to determine what is safe and what makes sense for us, keeping in mind that what works for me may not work for a brand-new private pilot or for the pilot who has been flying for 50 years. Those personal safety minimums also need to be periodically reevaluated as we gain more experience and knowledge. I know it’s a tedious process, but it’s absolutely worth it. Better safe than sorry—at least I think that’s what mom always said.

Mom, I apologize for what I said about you in that hotel room in Spain. You were probably right, as much as I hate to admit it.