Duggar Aviation LLC

[amster]

What is in Tulsa and Kirk Field (wherever those places are - I'm not American) that necessitates all the trips back and forth?

[grandmadugger]

What is in Tulsa and Kirk Field (wherever those places are - I'm not American) that necessitates all the trips back and forth?

If I'm remembering correctly, Kirk Field would be near Ben's parents. I'm wondering if someone is courting or has a "special friend" in Tulsa. That was my first thought anyway.

[amster]

If I'm remembering correctly, Kirk Field would be near Ben's parents. I'm wondering if someone is courting or has a "special friend" in Tulsa. That was my first thought anyway.

That was kind of what I was getting at, but I have no idea of the geography of the States, so I thought I should ask.

[Coconut Flan]

If Mr. Google is accurate, Kirk field is near Paragould, AR, which is definitely not near Hot Springs. Ben's family lives near Hot Springs so that wouldn't be it. Paragould is near Memphis though so maybe a Duggar is visiting a friend there? The airport in Hot Springs is called Memorial Field I think.

[grandmadugger]

If Mr. Google is accurate, Kirk field is near Paragould, AR, which is definitely not near Hot Springs. Ben's family lives near Hot Springs so that wouldn't be it. Paragould is near Memphis though so maybe a Duggar is visiting a friend there? The airport in Hot Springs is called Memorial Field I think.

:lol: I knew it was a Field near Hot Springs. Memphis would be a great city for Jana. I could see her thriving in a city like Memphis.

[Coco]

That is weirdly unsettling to me...

good grief. me too. i've been through Big Sandy many times (okay like 5 or 6 times) :lol: on the way to Barnwell Mt. ORV Park. It's kinda the boonies but still shocking that ATI has somehow managed to get the airport named after their program.

[Caramel]

They are realizing that these small planes have 50 years of defective parts, which makes them EXTREMELY dangerous. I think the plane may have cost less on this information.

If you've decided to live a QF life, IMHO, you have a responsibility to be as safe as you possibly can. I have 4 children, ages 13-18, and I purposely avoid high-risk activity because I feel like if I made the decision to bring my 1/5th QF into this world, I should take special care of their parents (me and Mr. 1/5th). To this end we haven't even traveled overseas; we figure we have plenty of time for that once our kids are up and out.

With Michelle still hoping her catcher's mitt is working, and Miracle baby still being super young, taking on this kind of risk and liability is incredibly selfish. I know it may not be a popular opinion, but it is one I feel strongly about.

usatoday.com/longform/news/nation/2014/06/12/lies-coverups-mask-roots-small-aircraft-carnage-unfit-for-flight-part-1/10405323/

There probably aren't fifty years of defective parts in a 2004 plane. And I'm not sure what you mean by "I think the plane may have cost less on this information." You think that the market for private planes is depressed because of a USA Today story? or you mean this was an extra-defective plane? Brand new, the current year Cirrus 22 costs $489,000 from the manufacturer. A 2004 plane costs less because it is used, like how a ten year old car costs less than a brand new car.

I don't mean to be overly critical, but I am curious about how individuals perceive risk. What is it about "overseas" travel that makes you think it is more risky than domestic travel?

Here, for the reference of anyone who may find them interesting, are a set of risk tables for general aviation:

http://www.aopa.org/About-AOPA/General- ... d-Historic

And here's a little info. about calculating transportation risk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporta ... ted_States

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

There probably aren't fifty years of defective parts in a 2004 plane. And I'm not sure what you mean by "I think the plane may have cost less on this information." You think that the market for private planes is depressed because of a USA Today story? or you mean this was an extra-defective plane? Brand new, the current year Cirrus 22 costs $489,000 from the manufacturer. A 2004 plane costs less because it is used, like how a ten year old car costs less than a brand new car.

I don't mean to be overly critical, but I am curious about how individuals perceive risk. What is it about "overseas" travel that makes you think it is more risky than domestic travel?

Here, for the reference of anyone who may find them interesting, are a set of risk tables for general aviation:

http://www.aopa.org/About-AOPA/General- ... d-Historic

And here's a little info. about calculating transportation risk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporta ... ted_States

They are finding that crashes that were previously attributed to pilot error were actually problematic parts - recalls which never were issued or executed over the last 50 years are causing the small crafts to be unpredictably dangerous and they cannot trace the parts because the problem has extended over decades.

I pulled one article to help support my understanding of it. Whether it impacted the value of the aircraft I wouldn't know, but I pulled it as a theory.

ANY criticism at all of my comfort level in overseas travel can be considered "overly critical" as it really isn't your business to criticize, risk factor or not. You are not aware of risk factors my family may have that are different than others, and that doesn't really matter anyway. It was an illustration of a point that we have a responsibility to not engage in high risk activities which put our children's parents in jeopardy. What that may be is sliding scale - be it bearing a 20th child, jumping out of an airplane, cycling down a busy road, or whatever may increase our chances of harm. The reason I chose that particular point is to illustrate a point where we have identified risk and chosen not to engage even though it is something we would love to do. We put off personal enjoyment for the protection of our family unit, knowing that eventually we can enjoy things that we feel at this point are inappropriate.

[Mama Mia]

They are finding that crashes that were previously attributed to pilot error were actually problematic parts - recalls which never were issued or executed over the last 50 years are causing the small crafts to be unpredictably dangerous and they cannot trace the parts because the problem has extended over decades.

I pulled one article to help support my understanding of it. Whether it impacted the value of the aircraft I wouldn't know, but I pulled it as a theory.

ANY criticism at all of my comfort level in overseas travel can be considered "overly critical" as it really isn't your business to criticize, risk factor or not. You are not aware of risk factors my family may have that are different than others, and that doesn't really matter anyway. It was an illustration of a point that we have a responsibility to not engage in high risk activities which put our children's parents in jeopardy. What that may be is sliding scale - be it bearing a 20th child, jumping out of an airplane, cycling down a busy road, or whatever may increase our chances of harm. The reason I chose that particular point is to illustrate a point where we have identified risk and chosen not to engage even though it is something we would love to do. We put off personal enjoyment for the protection of our family unit, knowing that eventually we can enjoy things that we feel at this point are inappropriate.

No offense, and I'm sure you'll find this overly critical.....but do you drive in a car? Because there have been a metric shit-ton of recalls that should have been done on cars- but weren't. Plus you are far more likely to die just driving to the store than on a plane. Or if you walk to the store because the cars are too risky, you could get hit while in the crosswalk. Or if you stay home and have your groceries delivered, maybe you'll trip and hit your head on the counter and die from a brain bleed while going to answer the door for the delivery driver....or, or, or.....I know life is all a matter of balancing various risks and benefits - but damn :shock:

Also, just a word from someone who put off waaaayyyy to many enjoyable activities ( due to money/ work pressures/ child issues) ....you or your spouse could end up with bad health or disabilities or one of you could have a mid-life crisis and run away, or you could lose your job ....there a dozen reasons why you may not be able to travel or do fun things you always wanted to do, if you wait until some better time.

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

I understand there are inherent risks to living, since death is a given for all of us.

I am not going to argue this to the nth degree or lead anyone to believe I am agoraphobic or something ridiculous. My point only is that small aircraft has been overlooked in this regard, which I believe causes them to be more dangerous overall, and I think it's a safe bet and understanding that the chance of DYING in a small plane crash are greater than the chance of DYING in a car crash.

Let's pretend like I never said anything, because I obviously was unclear in my point (or I am wrong, I can handle it) and this has degenerated into a discussion about me and the choices I have made in my life, which I don't have any desire to explain or defend.

[FakePigtails]

I understand there are inherent risks to living, since death is a given for all of us.

I am not going to argue this to the nth degree or lead anyone to believe I am agoraphobic or something ridiculous. My point only is that small aircraft has been overlooked in this regard, which I believe causes them to be more dangerous overall, and I think it's a safe bet and understanding that the chance of DYING in a small plane crash are greater than the chance of DYING in a car crash.

Let's pretend like I never said anything, because I obviously was unclear in my point (or I am wrong, I can handle it) and this has degenerated into a discussion about me and the choices I have made in my life, which I don't have any desire to explain or defend.

I can imagine that some families have unique situations that make overseas travel problematic, apparently including yours. I do think that if you want to make your original point in the future you should include that there's a family-specific situation (no details necessary) involved. Otherwise you're calling something that many, many parents do a high-risk, irresponsible decision and that's going to not get taken well (for good reason, IMO).

[Caramel]

ANY criticism at all of my comfort level in overseas travel can be considered "overly critical" as it really isn't your business to criticize, risk factor or not. You are not aware of risk factors my family may have that are different than others, and that doesn't really matter anyway. It was an illustration of a point that we have a responsibility to not engage in high risk activities which put our children's parents in jeopardy. What that may be is sliding scale - be it bearing a 20th child, jumping out of an airplane, cycling down a busy road, or whatever may increase our chances of harm. The reason I chose that particular point is to illustrate a point where we have identified risk and chosen not to engage even though it is something we would love to do. We put off personal enjoyment for the protection of our family unit, knowing that eventually we can enjoy things that we feel at this point are inappropriate.

A question isn't necessarily a criticism, but even if it is, criticism is allowed. You have made a claim. I asked you to say more. You have declined. Okay. No apologies here.

[toejamflipflop]

I understand there are inherent risks to living, since death is a given for all of us.

My point only is that small aircraft has been overlooked in this regard, which I believe causes them to be more dangerous overall, and I think it's a safe bet and understanding that the chance of DYING in a small plane crash are greater than the chance of DYING in a car crash.

I have to agree with you on this about smaller aircraft crashing as apposed to say 747's. I continually read in the paper and see on tv news that smaller aircraft crash, some right even after take off. Pilot error covers more than 49 % while Equipment failure causes the rest. You won't get me in a smaller plane but then again you won't get me in the larger aircraft either.

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

A question isn't necessarily a criticism, but even if it is, criticism is allowed. You have made a claim. I asked you to say more. You have declined. Okay. No apologies here.

You said "overly critical" as a superlative of your original criticism. If you had simply asked about my comfort level that would have been one thing, but you said <> which means you, yourself, acknowledged a level of criticism, which I maintain was inappropriate.

I wasn't asking for an apology, just stating my lack of desire to further the conversation, as clearly your position was a critical one, as you stated in the quote above.

[Caramel]

You said "overly critical" as a superlative of your original criticism. If you had simply asked about my comfort level that would have been one thing, but you said <> which means you, yourself, acknowledged a level of criticism, which I maintain was inappropriate.

I wasn't asking for an apology, just stating my lack of desire to further the conversation, as clearly your position was a critical one, as you stated in the quote above.

Maintain what you like, but I have not begun to scratch the surface of inappropriate.

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

I can imagine that some families have unique situations that make overseas travel problematic, apparently including yours. I do think that if you want to make your original point in the future you should include that there's a family-specific situation (no details necessary) involved. Otherwise you're calling something that many, many parents do a high-risk, irresponsible decision and that's going to not get taken well (for good reason, IMO).

Fair enough - it was inappropriate for me to make the statement that a high-risk behavior for us would be overseas travel when for others it is not. It was NOT, however, inappropriate for me to make the point that parents who care first and foremost about their children should not engage in activities which they know will be a concern for their families, and thereby leave their families in danger And because I am apologizing I will also apologize for using that as an example of how a parent should put their own desires above those of their children.......... even though that was.my.freaking.point.

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

Maintain what you like, but I have not begun to scratch the surface of inappropriate.

Okey dokey, then, LOL.

pssst - you take yourself FAR too seriously ;)

[grandmadugger]

Fair enough - it was inappropriate for me to make the statement that a high-risk behavior for us would be overseas travel when for others it is not. It was NOT, however, inappropriate for me to make the point that parents who care first and foremost about their children should not engage in activities which they know will be a concern for their families, and thereby leave their families in danger And because I am apologizing I will also apologize for using that as an example of how a parent should put their own desires above those of their children.......... even though that was.my.freaking.point.

There are parents everyday who risk their lives and it's because they love not only their children but your children too. Firefighters, police officers, Emergency Medical responders, and members of the armed forces are not bad parents. How dare you insinuate that those brave men and women are horrible parents!

[FakePigtails]

Fair enough - it was inappropriate for me to make the statement that a high-risk behavior for us would be overseas travel when for others it is not. It was NOT, however, inappropriate for me to make the point that parents who care first and foremost about their children should not engage in activities which they know will be a concern for their families, and thereby leave their families in danger And because I am apologizing I will also apologize for using that as an example of how a parent should put their own desires above those of their children.......... even though that was.my.freaking.point.

To be clear, I don't believe I indicated that it was inappropriate to state family-specific risks, or to make decisions based on those. I honestly don't understand why you're claiming those things. The only thing I find inappropriate is to declare perfectly common activities as irresponsible for parents. Then I find it puzzling to be shocked and upset that people would question the logic behind it when you haven't clarified that it's a family specific issue rather than a judgment of other parents' decision-making. That's just the type of thing you have to say from the beginning, especially at a place like FJ.

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

To be clear, I don't believe I indicated that it was inappropriate to state family-specific risks, or to make decisions based on those. I honestly don't understand why you're claiming those things. The only thing I find inappropriate is to declare perfectly common activities as irresponsible for parents. Then I find it puzzling to be shocked and upset that people would question the logic behind it when you haven't clarified that it's a family specific issue rather than a judgment of other parents' decision-making. That's just the type of thing you have to say from the beginning, especially at a place like FJ.

Okay, I am sorry. I was out of line and wrong.

[Caramel]

Okey dokey, then, LOL.

pssst - you take yourself FAR too seriously ;)

I take critical thought, clarity, courtesy, and rationality very seriously.

[blisterine]

I am of the belief that Jimbob does nothing without it having some type of great advantage to him, whether it's cash or ego related. He may have purchased the plane thinking about how much money he could be reimbursed from TLC, even if it is just for short jaunts here and there. If it is just little junkets but it's part of the storyline, they could be paid for it, as well as using things like fuel, pay for JD and other expenses for tax write-offs.

From what I understand, Paragould is prime meth country. You also have the retirees buying homes on golf courses and living the high life, even if there is a meth lab on the other side of the golf course. It's probably cheaper on the front end for flight related expenses to be run through Paragould but billed out at a higher rate, closer to what it would cost to go out on from Little Rock. I have a friend who works for a soybean farmer in Paragould but has many different businesses. The farm has its own runway and aviation set up, and lots of people use the hangar to store their planes.

[JHeathen]

good grief. me too. i've been through Big Sandy many times (okay like 5 or 6 times) :lol: on the way to Barnwell Mt. ORV Park. It's kinda the boonies but still shocking that ATI has somehow managed to get the airport named after their program.

Well, it's a private airport owned by the Institute in Basic Life Principles (Gothard), so it makes sense. http://www.airnav.com/airport/18TE

And there's a link to the Alert Academy at the bottom of that airport info web page.

[OneFifthQuiverFull]

There are parents everyday who risk their lives and it's because they love not only their children but your children too. Firefighters, police officers, Emergency Medical responders, and members of the armed forces are not bad parents. How dare you insinuate that those brave men and women are horrible parents!

I did not mean that at all, and would never say such a thing. I truly apologize for the implication.

[TheChibi]

I am of the belief that Jimbob does nothing without it having some type of great advantage to him, whether it's cash or ego related. He may have purchased the plane thinking about how much money he could be reimbursed from TLC, even if it is just for short jaunts here and there. If it is just little junkets but it's part of the storyline, they could be paid for it, as well as using things like fuel, pay for JD and other expenses for tax write-offs.

From what I understand, Paragould is prime meth country. You also have the retirees buying homes on golf courses and living the high life, even if there is a meth lab on the other side of the golf course. It's probably cheaper on the front end for flight related expenses to be run through Paragould but billed out at a higher rate, closer to what it would cost to go out on from Little Rock. I have a friend who works for a soybean farmer in Paragould but has many different businesses. The farm has its own runway and aviation set up, and lots of people use the hangar to store their planes.

Agree with you on JB always having ulterior motives, Michelle too. That's what is so terrifying about them to me. They can seem so caring and sweet but in the end, everything they do will work out some way to their benefit.

Unfortunately all of AR has pretty bad meth problems... they just don't like to admit it.