|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

04-12-2011, 05:05 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,840
|
|
Thanks Jack
[quote=Jack Tyler;532344Lane came up with a hierarchical 4-step learning model that formed the basic building blocks of every module needing to be mastered by every cast member:
-- unconscious incompetence (the focus of some of this thread's discussion)
-- conscious incompetence (where you'd all like those underskilled, unaware pilots to be)
-- conscious comptence (the person has to 'work' at building and maintaining the competency)
-- unconscious competence (the competence just 'happens', the skill sets are ingrained, which allows the person to move on to higher order conscious incompetencies)
How were folks moved from level 1 to level 2, on their way to building a different kind of culture? Basically, 3 ways: Leadership, peer pressure, and standards enforcement. The less of one, the more of the others.
Jack[/QUOTE]
Amazing system that Lane developed!
In our Ag aviation world, as I've stated before, we have the PAASS (Professional Aerial Applicator support System) in place that many of us attend annually and benefit from a large insurance premium reduction ( around $1,000 or more).
Our Southeastern branch is trying to mandate that all applicators who want to receive credits for license renewal from the Dept. of Agriculture, must have attended a PAASS presentation. Some grumble that they're being force-fed and that it would be trampling their freedoms. I can see both sides of the matter but the goal is to reduce the annual fatalities and accidents.
How would a mandate be accepted, you think?
Best,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15 Sold
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20 Sold
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga
It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132
Dues gladly paid!
|

04-12-2011, 05:39 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Seattle, wa
Posts: 679
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs14855
Van has lost two airplanes that I can think of, one to weather, one to aerobatics.
|
And...... Van himself ran out of gas in the 3 
|

04-12-2011, 06:30 AM
|
 |
VAF Moderator / Line Boy
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dayton, NV
Posts: 12,256
|
|
Carrots and Sticks
Quote:
Originally Posted by pierre smith
Our Southeastern branch is trying to mandate that all applicators who want to receive credits for license renewal from the Dept. of Agriculture, must have attended a PAASS presentation. Some grumble that they're being force-fed and that it would be trampling their freedoms. I can see both sides of the matter but the goal is to reduce the annual fatalities and accidents.
How would a mandate be accepted, you think?
|
See, that's the fundamental problem we have here in our little (but growing) corner of aviation - the lack of a "stick"...or even a "carrot". The airlines and military have incredibly good safety records because they are standardized and if you don't conform, you are out the door. That's a "big stick", wielded by those who have something the pilot wants - good pay, cool airplanes, whatever. But in private aviation, the only one wielding a stick is the FAA..."Conform or lose your license" - and what we are trying to avoid here (go back a bunch of pages) is giving them a bigger stick.
So we need a carrot - and the only one that really seems to work for a lot of people who won't admit that they have any problems that they need to solve personally is monetary. Well, I doubt that giving someone a 10% break on their airplane insurance is going to be a huge incentive for someone that pays that much for gas in a week or two of flying. And I doubt that the insurance industry is going to give their service away for free. So that one is out.
The FAA has tried for years to give away "Ego Boosts" in the form of the Wings Programs awards. I don't want to minimize that - it is a good effort, and good people take advantage of it. But it primarily captures the folks that already have the proper attitude towards safety, and those who really need to get it knocked into their heads are the ones who don't participate.
So there's the problem. You can argue all day about whether the cause of the crash is bad weather, lack of transition raining, poor judgment, stupid builder modifications....whatever. The ROOT CAUSE is attitude...unitl you can fix that - figure out a "carrot" to keep the FAA from finding a bigger "stick" - you are not going to make much progress. But I sure will keep trying...
__________________
Paul F. Dye
Editor at Large - KITPLANES Magazine
RV-8 - N188PD - "Valkyrie"
RV-6 (By Marriage) - N164MS - "Mikey"
RV-3B - N13PL - "Tsamsiyu"
A&P, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor
Dayton Valley Airpark (A34)
http://Ironflight.com
|

04-12-2011, 07:19 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 778
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenn654
...For example, we have pilots who perform aerobatics, race (usually at low altitude), fly formation even formation aerobatics and any accident from these type activities are included as well as ordinary flight operations in the accident statistics for aviation....
Are accident statistics of automobile racing included in all automobile accident statistics? We know they are not but they are for aviation.
The same holds true for motorcycles.
Are horse racing, steeple chasing, rodeo, jumping etc included in accident statistics relating to ordinary horse riding? I seriously doubt it.....
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironflight
See, that's the fundamental problem we have here in our little (but growing) corner of aviation - the lack of a "stick"...or even a "carrot". The airlines and military have incredibly good safety records because they are standardized and if you don't conform, you are out the door...
|
Glenn had an interesting point related to the types of flying done in RVs. Presumably the ultimate goal of airline flying is to make every flight as boring and predictable as possible (at least that's my hope as a passenger). However, this kind of standardization seems incompatible with how RVers tend to use their planes. The fun, freedom, and exhilaration of flying a quick little airplane you built yourself are an undeniable part of the appeal. The homebuilt accident statistics from the Nall report seem to support this. In fact only about 13% of the fatal accidents resulted from fuel issues or flying into IMC.
My question is what's the best way to make fun-flying less risky, without simply prohibiting it? A related question is how to gain public (read FAA) acceptance for the idea that recreational flying in homebuilts is different than just point A to point B transportation, and that this is OK?
__________________
Alan Carroll
RV-8 N12AC
Last edited by Alan Carroll : 04-12-2011 at 07:49 AM.
|

04-12-2011, 09:25 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: pittsburgh pa
Posts: 533
|
|
wow great comments
and they really help focus the debate.
Getting the hardcore horse to drink is tough. But I think there are a bunch of horses that are'nt so hard core that can be helped at least a little bit - I contend primarily by increasing the community's professionalism (which is generally peer pressure).
In addition, there are a whole bunch of "unconsious incompetents" that will willingly be converted to at least "conscious incompetence" if they can be educated on how dangerous "unconsious incompetence" is and how easily it can be cured for the willing with a bit of readily available training, encouraged again by some additional professionalism (again peer pressure).
Hope I'm not deluding myself.
__________________
Gary Reed
RV-6 IO-360
WW 200 RV now an Al Hartzell for improved CG
|

04-12-2011, 10:26 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 358
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buggsy2
The reasons cited are all common to certificated aircraft, including maintenance. So again, why are OBAM aircraft so much more likely to be involved in accidents than factory-built? Yes, we DO need to spend time understanding that. Otherwise it's Ready...Fire...Aim.
|
The reason is the culture of the homebuilt community is much different than the spam can community...
One difference in our culture is a a group, we have a much larger appetite for risk. Because of that we tend to participate in higher risk activities, like acro and formation. And we are more likely to fly closer to the edge.... All of this contributes to higher accident rates.
But you are correct, the reasons are common to all aspects of aviation.
And it is pretty well understood, but apparently not so well communicated.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
|

04-12-2011, 12:53 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 08A
Posts: 9,500
|
|
Looks like around 25% of accidents have a mechanical cause. It is probably underestimated. I can't do much about the pilot culture, but I can help people build better airplanes.
I don't give a hoot what area you improve...
__________________
Dan Horton
RV-8 SS
Barrett IO-390
Last edited by DanH : 04-12-2011 at 06:54 PM.
|

04-12-2011, 03:57 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lake Havasu City AZ
Posts: 2,393
|
|
stainless
The late John Thorp said that statistically an aluminum firewall was ok. You won't find me with anything but stainless components thru/on the firewall, steel if stainless is not available. Much of the firewall "stuff" in the various catalogs is aluminum
|

04-12-2011, 04:58 PM
|
 |
VAF Moderator / Line Boy
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dayton, NV
Posts: 12,256
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanH
Looks like around 25% of accidents have a mechanical cause. It is probably underestimated. I can't do much about the pilot culture, but I can help people build better airplanes.
|
And, among other things, building better airplanes will help the situation. I bet though, if you look at those cases, a lot more accidents are caused by loss of engine power due to lack of fuel supply than are caused by FWF fire/firewall burn through. Granted the thought of burning to death in the cockpit due to a FWF fire is terrifying, but I doubt that it is a statistically significant event that needs complete focus. Yes, building a good firewall is a great idea, and I am a proponent of attacking ALL accident cause - because we fix them one at a time - but focusing on one statistically small cause at the expense of others isn't as productive.
Now if we have a panel of experts, each of which has an area of expertise on which they like to focus, that's great - but each expert needs to support the others in tackling their areas - not fight about which is moe important - that just diverts everyone's attecntion, and nothign gets done. That's how government fails to work - everyone argues for their position, so nothing ever gets solved.
Paul
__________________
Paul F. Dye
Editor at Large - KITPLANES Magazine
RV-8 - N188PD - "Valkyrie"
RV-6 (By Marriage) - N164MS - "Mikey"
RV-3B - N13PL - "Tsamsiyu"
A&P, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor
Dayton Valley Airpark (A34)
http://Ironflight.com
|

04-12-2011, 05:54 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: WA State
Posts: 192
|
|
Just Looking for Context...
The safety article that Van wrote, and which was referenced by the OP, says...
?...the FAA has reviewed the history of EAB accidents which showed a fatal accident rate around 6 to 8 time higher than overall GA, and that this rate had not improved in recent years. The FAA also pointed out that they expect EAB accident to be somewhat higher than GA because of the very nature of this aviation activity. (Uncertified designs, amateur construction, no production QC, etc.) This consideration aside, their consensus is that the rate is inexcusably high and must be improved.?
This seems to be saying that the fatal accident rate for EAB has historically been 6 to 8 times higher than overall GA, and that the rate has not changed in recent years. So there?s been NO increase in the accident rate, and NO decrease. Please correct me if I?m off base...
__________________
Will McClain
N954WM (Reserved)
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:42 AM.
|