Nice Guys Die Too....

[Webb]

Originally Posted by kentb

In regards to some comments on stalls. Everyone needs to do stalls on a routine basis. Even though these planes stall very nicely. The pilot needs to practice the stall recovery after phase I.

Kent

Another comment on a killer stall.....tailwind on base can set a pilot for a deadly low altitude pattern stall. They overfly the final, try to turn back to correct for the overshoot and down they go.

[John Clark]

Originally Posted by Webb

Another comment on a killer stall.....tailwind on base can set a pilot for a deadly low altitude pattern stall. They overfly the final, try to turn back to correct for the overshoot and down they go.

Usually by skidding the turn, guaranteeing a spin entry. YIKES!

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

[videobobk]

I agree with Paul, we need to "encourage" safety. Problem is, who will listen? I have found it easier to correct someone (anyone) if you have praised them from time to time. Even if it is just how nice and clean their plane is, it builds a respect for your opinion. Also, I would never do it in front of someone else, unless timeliness demanded it. I don't want these fine folks to end up like dirty rags and cat's meat, but I really don't want them so p....d at me they won't listen. I have been guilty of that far too often...

Bob Kelly

[WhiskeyMike]

Every individual has the right to accept whatever risks they wish for themselves - but they do not have the right to put others at risk without their knowledge and informed consent. And that includes those who might be emulating their actions.

If I am misunderstanding the statement above please forgive me, but I'm having a problem with the premise. I strongly agree with the first portion, that each person has the RIGHT to accept risks for THEMSELVES. But then it seem to say that the RIGHT to accept risk for oneself becomes nullified (i.e. is LOST) if there is a possibility that others may emulate the behavior, because in so doing the risk taking person is putting the would-be emulators at risk (without their consent). It seems that the second point directly contradicts the first. If my so-called RIGHT to take a risk for MYSELF is lost if/when someone else (who by definition is outside of my control) MIGHT emulate my behavior, then all I can say is that we're now torturing the definition of what a RIGHT is!

There is a principle known as PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY... I know, it's one that is not terribly popular in today's culture. We reason away, rationalize and blame, and even litigate anyone/everyone to exempt ourselves from confronting the pesky but profound truth that we and WE ALONE are responsible for our OWN ACTIONS AND DECISIONS.

In my life I've been involved in ski racing, hang gliding, technical rock climbing, motorcycling, professional fighting, flying sailplanes and other more "noisy" contraptions. I have always been an advocate and supporter of risk management thinking and behavior when engaging in risk-oriented activities. It is usually well intended to speak of role models and how they may influence the behavior in others. But it is misguied in my view because it deflects from the sober fact that we must each accept the responsibility and consequences for the smart/good and dumb/bad things we CHOOSE to do. Choose is the operative word. The sooner we accept this and act accordingly the better off (and safer) we will be!!

[Ironflight]

I think you read too much in to my short statement Bill - I agree 100% with you about personal responsibility. Let me explain my statement in a simple and blunt fashion.

A person has the RIGHT to go driving through his own cow pasture completely and totally stinking drunk, as long as there is no possibility whatsoever that he can endanger another person. He DOES NOT have the right to go out on the highway in the same condition and put UNSUSPECTING people at risk - they have not signed up to the risk, and in fact are not aware of it.

To put it in aviation terms, you can go out and do anything you want in an airplane solo in a deserted area...but do stupid stuff over a populated area, or with a passenger who hasn't been informed of the riskiness - I judge that as unacceptable. you may not - it is my own moral judgment.

Paul

[Canadian_JOY]

Paul - thanks for getting this thread going. It's something we all need to have at the front of our minds. I recently had a very positive experience with respect to sharing aviation knowledge. A fellow EAA chapter member was about to have his aircraft go through final inspection prior to having its airworthiness certificate issued. This aircraft had been 24 years in the making and is an absolute beauty to behold. Still, I asked the builder if he wanted me to pass a critical eye over the aircraft in hopes of having the aircraft at least one step closer to perfection.

Now here's where the magic began. The builder welcomed my offer and encouraged me to be as thorough as I could be. When I found a couple of extremely minor items (believe me, I had to look hard to find them - this airplane is extremely well built) the builder immediately set about correcting them. When I was done he thanked me profusely.

Now that's the way things should be done - if only we could all be as humble and open-minded as this particular builder.

Oh, by the way... The official inspector found two snags on the aircraft as a result of a change in the rules regarding acceptability of a particular fastener in a particular application. Both the builder and I learned from this experience. Believe me, it was a huge pleasure to be the first to shake the builders hand following the successful final inspection. After going through this process we knew first flight was likely to be uneventful, and it was!

[frankh]

A few months back I had the "opportunity" to help a lady pilot begin her IFR flight training...she had about 80 hoursTT..She did Ok right up until we came back to the pattern to practice some landings.

Some of the worse flying I have ever seen..Never looked at the ASi once despite repeated reminders..Stall warning chirped a couple of times but still seemed oblivious.

After we landed we talked about it and it was clear she had had some prior near misses by applying full power with full flaps with the stall horn going off in a 172..She had no idea how close to pancake land she was becoming.

I became so worried about her (and her attitude of "Frank you need to be quiet and just let me fly"), that I felt she wa not safe by herself in an airplane..I then heard she was offering to take some non pilot friends flying....Thats where I drew the line.

reluctantly I sent an email to the director of her flying club suggesting that she needed time with a CFI and in my opinion she was a smoking hole looking for a place to happen.

Needless to say she was grounded immediately pending a check ride and she subsequently bawled me out because I didn't know what I was talking about.

i think my actions were justified but to took me waay too long to have a higher power intervene..in retrospect.

having gone through this once I will have much less hesitation next time.

But discouraging somebody is something I absolutely hate having to do.

Cheers

Frank

[WhiskeyMike]

Paul,

I completely agree with your "simple and blunt version", and my moral compass is sympatico with yours. Certainly we do not have the right to act in a manner that puts others at risk when they are neither informed or willing participants in the endeavor (aviation related or otherwise). We are talking now about "innocent bystanders", and one would not expect reasonable and responsible people to disagree with that.

And to be clear, I am not excusing or defending reckless or inappropriate behavior, such as driving drunk (through a corn field or anywhere else) or picking needles off of Saguaro cactus with a wingtip! I just think we have to be careful about assigning or imputing responsibility to some people (e.g. those that we might call role models) for the actions and choices of others. And I thought that that is what you were implying. Again, if I misread ya....sorry!!

[rv9aviator]

A local business man in my small town and a flying friend took chances on a regular basis when flying. He was a very influential person and very smart in business. His route of flight came close to my house when he was flying back and forth to work. I had seen him fly in weather I wouldn't drive a car in. He lived about 50 miles from me and used a private grass strip. I thought several times about saying something to him about his flying habits but never did mostly because I knew he would not have listened. His last flight was on a terribly windy rainy night in a twin. He tried to land on the grass strip close to his home but couldn't stop in time and sheared off the wings in the trees at the end of the strip. His plane burned with him trapped inside. He left a wife and teenage son. I knew in my heart someday this would happen. I wish there was some way I could have made him understand how dangerous his flying was but there are some people you just can't reach.

[AZtailwind]

Paul, You do bring up the big elephant issues!
After attending too many funerals of friends and fellow pilots, It is something I confront in the mirror, and some time, in front of local pilots. Frank has this correct. The 172 experience is a blatant example of the lack of real self-examination. The reaction of anger and then slam-door psychology is exactly the wrong temperament of a good future pilot. Some things can be overcome by training and experience. But some temperaments can?t.
I have had my ego SMACKED by a good instructor. That is a really good thing! And it will never be as hard as the ground!
I believe this is reasonability within our community of pilots- For all you GA pilots with experience out there; We owe it to each other to be blunt! - there is little room for anything else!