Which plane for 5 small pax?

If you plan on flying Part 91, there is no requirement for each passenger to
have their own seatbelt.

As stupid as it sounds, you could wrap your 3 kids in one seatbelt.

Don't get me wrong, I'd never recommend it, but it was brought up to me by a
DE on my CFII oral. He asked me how many people I could put in a 4 place
aircraft and I spouted off the common answer of as many as the plane had
seat belts for. He promptly told me "wrong, now where do you find the
answer?"

I admitted that I couldn't remember reading anywhere in the FAR's any such
rule, other than the normal takeoff/landing rule, and he told me that it
wasn't in the normally printed version of the FAR's, you'd have to get the
Pre-Amble, which is about 3 inches thick.

So, he dug out his copy, and turned to a flagged page that had highlights
all over it. Basically, it went on about 135 and 121 operations must have
one seatbelt for each occupant over the age of 2, but by no means should
this be construed nor does it apply to part 91 operations as the FAR's only
say that each passenger must be seatbelted, not that each passenger have his
own seatbelt.

The lesson has nothing to do with seatbelts, it has to do with common sense
and the law. What might be legal, might not be safe, smart, or even make
sense. I personally saw a guy load up a 182 with himself, his wife, 3 kids
in the back seat, and 1 more kid in the "kiddy" seat in the baggage
compartment (who had to crawl through the baggage door). Now think about
how those kids would get out if the plane caught on fire. After hanging
around airports enough, you will come to realize one of my favorite phrases.
"You can see something stupid everyday, all you have to do is look." Get a
Cherokee 6.

Jim Burns

"Adam Aulick" wrote in message
om...
I have the opposite problem from the usual "four seats doesn't
mean four pax" problem -- I'm looking for an aircraft with typical
four-place load (and price) to carry five small passengers and
minimal baggage. What aircraft are out there on the used market
(including hombuilts!) which can safely, legally, and economically
carry two small adults (150 lbs each) three children (projected
total weight in five years at ages 9,7,5: 170 lbs), 100 lbs
baggage, and reasonable fuel, say 3 hrs? (570 lbs + fuel)

On the certificated side, it looks like a Skyhawk or its ilk would
(barely) carry the load, but I understand there's no legal way
to squeeze three kids in back of the four-place Cessnas and Pipers.
(Why not? Surely it's not that hard to add seatbelts!)

What else is out there in the world that I haven't heard of,
without moving up to a six-place plane?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.736 / Virus Database: 490 - Release Date: 8/9/2004

"Jim Burns" wrote in message
...
If you plan on flying Part 91, there is no requirement for each passenger
to
have their own seatbelt.

As stupid as it sounds, you could wrap your 3 kids in one seatbelt.

Don't get me wrong, I'd never recommend it, but it was brought up to me by
a
DE on my CFII oral.

Is it actually unsafe to have two people sitting side-by-side and sharing a
seat belt, if their combined weight is within the belt's design limit? (I
don't know; just asking.)

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:0pRSc.137433$eM2.73403@attbi_s51...

Is it actually unsafe to have two people sitting side-by-side and sharing
a
seat belt, if their combined weight is within the belt's design limit? (I
don't know; just asking.)

Piper did it for years.

Rich S.

"Rich S." wrote in message
...
Piper did it for years.

Didn't Bell helicopters do it with their bench seat?

(b) Each forward-facing or aft-facing seat/restraint system in normal,
utility, or acrobatic category airplanes must consist of a seat, a safety
belt, and a shoulder harness, with a metal-to-metal latching device, that
are designed to provide the occupant protection provisions required in
§23.562.

Sounds like you need a safety belt for each seat and the word occupant is
singular.

--
Cy Galley
Safety Programs Editor
EAA Sport Pilot

"Rich S." wrote in message
...
"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:0pRSc.137433$eM2.73403@attbi_s51...

Is it actually unsafe to have two people sitting side-by-side and
sharing
a
seat belt, if their combined weight is within the belt's design limit?
(I
don't know; just asking.)

Piper did it for years.

Rich S.

"Cy Galley" wrote in message
news:soUSc.138373$eM2.57714@attbi_s51...
(b) Each forward-facing or aft-facing seat/restraint system in normal,
utility, or acrobatic category airplanes must consist of a seat, a safety
belt, and a shoulder harness, with a metal-to-metal latching device, that
are designed to provide the occupant protection provisions required in
§23.562.

Sounds like you need a safety belt for each seat and the word occupant is
singular.

I think that parses as "the occupant-protection provisions", referring to a
generic occupant.

(See my reply to Newps in this thread for the legal opinion cited by the
Boston FSDO.)

--Gary



--
Cy Galley
Safety Programs Editor
EAA Sport Pilot

"Jim Burns" writes:

If you plan on flying Part 91, there is no requirement for each passenger to
have their own seatbelt.

Hmmm...I recently got a card for an STC to stick three people in
the back of my Aztec. I'm just Part 91 so I wonder what good the
STC would do?

--kyler

Someone metioned 'Rental' in one of the replies. Since I started flying
regularly I have decided I do not want to make a habit of taking my entire
family along on flights every weekend. It's suprising how many of my pilot
friends have a story about an engine failure followed by a forced landing.

On the rare occassions when I need to carry my entire family, I can rent a
Cherokee Six. The rest of the time it just me and a friend or two
travelling by Archer.

Regards,
Mike

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/amountainaero/fspic1.html
"Kyler Laird" wrote in message
...
"Jim Burns" writes:

If you plan on flying Part 91, there is no requirement for each passenger
to
have their own seatbelt.

Hmmm...I recently got a card for an STC to stick three people in
the back of my Aztec. I'm just Part 91 so I wonder what good the
STC would do?

--kyler

"Mike Noel" wrote in message
...
Someone metioned 'Rental' in one of the replies. Since I started flying
regularly I have decided I do not want to make a habit of taking my entire
family along on flights every weekend. It's suprising how many of my
pilot
friends have a story about an engine failure followed by a forced landing.


That was my thought when I posted. I should have explained more. I have
friends that bought larger aircraft only to realize that they usually fly
solo or with a single passenger. Buying small and renting big could be
money ahead.

Mike,

It's suprising how many of my pilot
friends have a story about an engine failure followed by a forced landing.


Hmm, than you must have a statistically highly unlikely combination of
friends. Engine failures are EXTREMELY rare events and even rarer as the
cause of fatal accidents.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)