Doug Reeve's Safety Missive

Doug's post this morning of his personal safety missive is a great concept for everyone to think about.

It is a personal document that sets out the “rules” by which Doug flies, lives, and thinks about airplanes. We call them “Flight Rules “ in my business – yes, they fill two six-inch binders – and we try to live by them. Because we understand the rationale behind the rules, we can sometimes come up with a good and valid reason why they might be bent slightly - because it can be hard to think of everything in advance.

While I might have a slightly different set of rules than Doug does, that is not an issue – the idea is valid. HAVE a set of rules, write them down (along with their rationale, which he did – extremely important, because that is how you check to see if they make sense!), and have the self discipline to hold yourself accountable. Let me emphasize that again – the RATIONALE (the reasoning behind) each rule is how you test for their validity. “Why” you choose to do, not do, or believe something is important to understand.

You can never MAKE anyone else live by your own set of rules, unless you are elected emperor, but you CAN set an example that others can choose to follow if they understand the benefits of your way. That is what I have always tried to do – emulate that which I admire. We need to choose our role models carefully. I choose those who think about the "why" of the limitations and behaviors they choose to follow, and they are a number of those types here in the forums and throughout aviation. There are others that I wouldn't follow across a deserted country road.

Choose wisely, but have a set of rules and limitations by which you live and fly - you'll live and fly longer!

Gotta' go fly,

Paul

[ed. Thank you Paul. dr]

Safety Culture

Doug I'm on board 100% with your "safety culture" post. You have learned well Grasshopper.....

My Personal RV Safety Culture Document

I absolutely agree with Doug's safety rules. The key is learning from our mistakes and adopting a safe positive approach to safety without ego's getting in the way. Always, debrief yourself or your flight...

Bravo!

Doug,
I appreciate your leadership by example!
Great article and if it only saves one person from doing something regretable, it's obviously well worth the effort.

Not to steal Ron Lee's thunder, but this very concept was discussed last night on a conference call with some volunteers that are organizing a safety organization, me being one of them.

A personal oath, like yours, is a great first step to changing our culture for the better.

Great work! I look forward to meeting you in person some day!

Through my professional flying - 22 years, 19 on jets, I have taken 'bits' from so many good people to arrive at where I am.

As F/O's come along, I try and pass on the same ideas. Take what you like from the people you admire in terms of smart operation but above all safe flying.

Usually, you find that the two go hand in hand.

You end up with a set of personal rules that you want to fly with.

Now, so much of it drifts down into private flying and especially when you are operating a high performance airplane like the RV.

I agree. We also should learn to be polite to our fellow aviators. The HB community aready has a kind of Rube Goldburg reputation and the RV community is getting a reputaition as well. The RV is so popular now that every HB that a novice sees thinks it is a RV. It would be great if the RV comunnity could set the example instead of destroy it. We have to be careful. There are eyes every where.

mike newall said:

Usually, you find that the two go hand in hand.

Click to expand...

Whaaaat? You go hand in hand with your F/Os? Not through the terminal I hope... we only do that once blocked out and the door is closed.



I keed, I keed!!

Personally I have a serious issue with Doug's missive.

Not the concept; setting personal rules of conduct is a very fine idea.

However.....

If I see you flying illegally, I will bring it to your attention. If I see you doing the same thing a second time I will report you to the authorities. If you post a video of yourself flying illegally somewhere online and link to it in my forums, I will delete the post and immediately forward the YouTube link to the appropriate authorities.

Doug, we've all been sinners. I've gotten a quiet word from a man I respect.....and I don't do that anymore. Respect and peer approval are good ways to foster a safety culture.

The rest crosses a line into a place you don't want to go.

one man's view - many will follow

Doug,
you may never know, but I am likely one of the 13,500 who will read your message, print it out, and pencil in a few things. It is going into my preflight folder.

already learned something about others methods....the 'post-flight'....great idea. takes the 'gotta go flying, even though I forgot that quart of oil' out of the equation for the most part.

I am in the category of buyer, not builder, so even more important that I call the builder before I add or delete any equipment etc., not to mention at annual time. I may not agree with 100% of his philosophy, but it is more likely to help than harm.

kudos to all who adopt some standards, in whatever way.

Key phrase in red.

DanH said:

If I see you flying illegally, I will bring it to your attention. If I see you doing the same thing a second time I will report you to the authorities. If you post a video of yourself flying illegally somewhere online and link to it in my forums, I will delete the post and immediately forward the YouTube link to the appropriate authorities.

Doug, we've all been sinners. I've gotten a quiet word from a man I respect.....and I don't do that anymore. Respect and peer approval are good ways to foster a safety culture.

The rest crosses a line into a place you don't want to go.

Click to expand...

My thoughts here are that his viewpoint is that of a man who's livelihood it directly tied to these forums.

In the unreasonable culture of a lawsuit happy society that we live in, and the almost total refusal of folks to accept personal responsibility, I can understand where Doug is comming from.

Mike S said:

My thoughts here are that his viewpoint is that of a man who's livelihood it directly tied to these forums.

In the unreasonable culture of a lawsuit happy society that we live in, and the almost total refusal of folks to accept personal responsibility, I can understand where Doug is comming from.

Click to expand...

This (unmentioned) part isn't VAF business...

If I see you doing the same thing a second time I will report you to the authorities.

Click to expand...

As for this part...

But, posting a link to it in my forums exposes me and my family to legal repercussions...

Click to expand...

...all you need to do is cut the link.

Look, it's plain human nature. You can do great things when people respect you. Nobody respects a snitch. If you don't like another pilot's behavior, settle it within the family.


[ed. Google's cache feature is forever, Dan. Even a deleted thread can be 'found' years after the fact. And yes, if somebody does a low high speed pass at my field and then pulls up into a roll, I'll ask them nicely to not do that again. If they do it a 2nd time I will report them with a clear conscience. I've seen enough crashes at my airport.
Sorry, but we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, I'm afraid. And I do enjoy the safety discussion. br,dr]

Doug Reeves Safety Missive is excellent.

I agree with Dan, no disrespect to Doug and I am on board with the concept and the discussion of improving safety. I just lost a good friend last weekend so this topic is fresh in my mind.

But lets be honest, that is a very conservative safety missive. If that works for you, great, but not every pilot will share such a view.

Flying airplanes is all about risk mitigation, and every pilot has different limits of what kind of risk they want to assume in their flying activities. Lets not go overboard with policing other pilots 'style' of flying just because they dont share your view of safety. And in Doug's defense, I dont think that is what he is implying in his message. I am just commenting in general.

I mean, lets be honest, why are we building 200mph aerobatic airplanes if we dont want a little excitement in our lives. Within reason, within the FAA's rules and regulations and to not give aviation a bad name, of course. Society today has gone a little overboard with trying to remove every element of danger from our lives. Whats next? Is doing a loop or roll in my airplane something that somebody will eventually tell me is too dangerous and I shouldnt do it? Or worse, make it illegal...for my own good? Where do we draw the line? I'm ok with some element of risk, otherwise I wouldnt be a pilot and I certainly wouldnt be building an airplane. Otherwise I'd be at home...on my couch...sitting in the dark.

Until we find a way to eliminate gravity, there will never be a 'no risk' flight endeavor...putting distance between yourself and the ground will always carry some risk. The laws of physics make it so. Its up to each pilot to decide how much risk they want to assume...and that should be a personal decision in my view.

DanH said:

Personally I have a serious issue with Doug's missive.

Not the concept; setting personal rules of conduct is a very fine idea.

However.....

If I see you flying illegally, I will bring it to your attention. If I see you doing the same thing a second time I will report you to the authorities. If you post a video of yourself flying illegally somewhere online and link to it in my forums, I will delete the post and immediately forward the YouTube link to the appropriate authorities.

Doug, we've all been sinners. I've gotten a quiet word from a man I respect.....and I don't do that anymore. Respect and peer approval are good ways to foster a safety culture.

The rest crosses a line into a place you don't want to go.

Click to expand...

Senseless crashes from buzz jobs, low level acro, showing off etc. affects all of us here. Increased scrutiny from authorities, increased insurance rates, more regulation. I don't need any of it.

I'm with Doug on this one and this is the whole basis of this talk on safety and changing attitudes. Even if you go out and crash during a low pass away from civilization somewhere, you are still added to the stats. Not sure what's so hard about obeying the regs?

Low passes usually require an audience for maximum ego stroking however and where there is an audience, passengers and other aircraft especially, you put others at risk. Not theory, I could relate a couple of stories that were about 100 feet and .1 seconds away from big fireballs through incredibly poor judgment.

I can say with a clear conscience that I've never done these activities in my RV.

Maybe we do need to report more of this stuff and clean up our collective act through the back door. I'd feel sorry even for a fool who had a midair or left a smoking crater when something went wrong just because they had to show off. If you've ever been involved with a crash scene or investigation you'll know it's a sobering and disturbing experience.

Finally, we have seen enough inane lawsuits before in GA and I'd never want to see anything come back to Doug. I completely understand and support his stance here.

We'll all have a list different from Doug's but the main point is to get everyone to think about risk and how we fly. If this prevents even one more accident, it has been worth it.

I don?t fly in aircraft that have car engines in them.
And I don't drive cars powered by aircraft engines, either. I admire those gearheads, but I'm not one. I know you aren't either. Please don't do it.

Click to expand...

I happen to agree with this, in practice at least.

But I notice that the Alternative Engines forum is still there...

Thanks, Bob K.

Taking a stand

Although I applaud Doug's article (as I mentioned in a previous post), I don't plan to apply his exact personal minimums to myself - everyone's an individual.


As for buzz jobs and the like, Doug is in a leadership role in the community and as such he should take a hard stand to get everyone's attention. I personally won't go to the cops, but I will certainly confront someone who is being reckless.


If you are an egomaniac, like me, get an ACE card and sign up for some local airshow work to get your jollies.
Beating up your grandma's house or your local aerdrome will get you violated- if you're lucky, or worse if you're hamfisted...

Thanks Doug, Mike, Dan, Paul, etal

I had a set of personal rules back when I took up motorcycle riding. Most were a combination of my own "conservative minimums" and wisdom from older riders & instructors.

I have done the same with flying. What I take from "Doug's Safety Document" and this thread is that I should codify my rules - not for others to read, but to make it clear that breaking those rules is breaking an agreement I make with myself. It can sometimes be too easy - "in the moment" - to stretch the rules and then stretch them again. Sooner or later, our personal code of safe conduct can get distorted ... usually at the worst possible time.

I won't be publishing my personal safety rules but I will take some time to review them again and amend them if I find gaps.

Thanks for the thread !

Doug...

1 query

Video of acro with a passenger and no chutes.

Click to expand...

A number of issues... Why has this been singled out? In the RV family, which have jettisonable canopy designs? AFAIK in the RV-8 the rear seater is not going to get out (air pressure closes the canopy?).

You might quote a USA rule, but we don't all live over there So curious who you'll report us to

Andy

I support DR on "offense #2" issue


Normally, I would not chime in on something others had already handled so well. This time I do so because I think that it is a difficult issue and one that demands a personal, moral decision from each of us.

Doug is not merely protecting his personal litigation situation. He's being responsible to the public, the flying community, the experimental AC community, etc. If the behavior is sufficiently clear that it would be both illegal and unsafe to a reasonable observer, then it should not be tolerated. One private word should be enough. Doug's "rule" on this would be correct even if there were no litigation issue.

I admit that what looks to me to be reckless flying is another man's use of skills that exceed mine. It's up to each of us to be careful about judging the other guy. I assume DR and many of you are able to make that judgement well. If you believe that you can, then you cannot in good conscience ignore or defend repeated dangerous behavior.

The anti-snitch mentality may have its place, but in this old guy's view, this is not the place to let that mind-set win. I don't mean to pick a fight with DanH and mean no disrespect. It's just too important for silence.

Attitudes

Andy Hill said:

You might quote a USA rule, but we don't all live over there So curious who you'll report us to Andy

Click to expand...

Smilies not withstanding, videos of people doing stupid things tend to make it "OK" for newbies (to RVs and EAB aircraft) to emulate. Your rules may be different, but to me, breaking basic safety rules is an indication of poor attitude. The example of no parachutes is just an easy example that has been seen many times. You Tube posts of low passes at Vne just seem to encourage people to think "Well he did it, why can't I?"

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

So........

To all the guys who fly RV6's and 7's without canopy release, what is the point of wearing a parachute when doing aero's ?

You ain't getting out of a tip up - period.

I have just started my 8 and can't see a real easy way of getting out of an 8 in the back seat, so, again, why wear a parachute ?

You also increase the weight, the aeroplanes aren't designed as a full on aerobatic machines - I do all I need within +3/-1 and then I am belly cleaning for 20 minutes 'cos I don't have inverted

I understand that in the US, it is required/recommended to wear a chute, however, Andy is putting forward the point that we choose when we wear one in the UK.

In my previous aeroplanes - Christen Eagle, Zlin 526, Citabria, I have worn them. Not in an RV.

However, this is thread drift and I return to the original part of the discussion.

John Clark said:

Smilies not withstanding, videos of people doing stupid things...

Click to expand...

Some would argue that wearing a 'chute in a seat you can't jettison the canopy from is stupid. Some would argue that someone who knows nothing about airplanes building an airplane is stupid. The former is "against the rules" (in the US). The latter is not only allowed, it is celebrated by everyone on this forum.

I accept DR's stance on deletion/reporting of stuff on the forum that is against US regs, since US liability is what he needs to be worried about. "US Regs" should not be blindly assumed to define what is "safe" or "stupid" for all people all the time, however. I've seen many legal videos of guys doing stuff that would be very unsafe for me to try.

Amen Brother

Thank you Doug.

Safety is a topic that is far too often given lip service as we proceed on our merry way. The fact is, and has been for some time, that EAB aircraft have a far worse safety record than other segments of aviation. Why do we tolerate that? Are we in denial?

Efforts by you and Van to bring this topic into the open is a service that I applaud. Until we discuss safety openly, we haven't a prayer of fixing our failings in this area. Corporations often talk about fostering a "safety culture" in their employees, and I believe we need a similar "safety consciousness" in our hobby. It's too long a discussion for a short "thank you" note, but I believe that by keeping safety as a top of mind issue we make a great start at ingraining it in our actions.

Add a Kevlar vest to the Nomex flying gear, Doug, and keep up the crusade.

Chris

Agree with DR

Couple of things . . . Just want to thank DR for providing leadership in this area. I'm sure he knew before hitting the submit key, that along with kudos there would be a fairly significant amount of criticism and some disagreement with portions of his safety-letter. My personal safety consideration will allow for night flight in a single engine aircraft. Why? . . . because the night sky is just so incredibly beautiful and I like being close to it. I do understand that particular decision elevates risk, but I accept that specific risk elevation. DR's delivery of the message had a very well reasoned down-to-earth tone and I learned some really good points that I will immediately add to my flying: The Nomex protective clothing is a good idea (some may think its a little over the top, but for me, it really makes sense and I will implement it immediately.) 2 last things . . . (1) I continue to be impressed with the civil, and intelligent manner in which VAF members express their opinions even when you don't agree; and (2) I've got a question from reading through the responses to this thread (but don't want drift from the subject at hand - I'll post it in another thread . . . . p.s. has to do with emergency release canopies.

What do you do when no one is watching?

This is a great discussion, but we're all debating various degrees of good practices. I run a construction company. We have safety meetings all the time, and at those meetings, everyone says the right things. The hazards, though, don't exsist in the meetings. What happens in the field is different. What do you do when no one is watching? Probably more to the point, what do you do when it's just your buddy that is watching? You know... the same one who told you about the time that he [insert courageous and exagerated story here].

And how about when he told you about that IMC scud running / botched, untrained acro / unworthy aircraft / buzz job / low pass story? Did you laugh and take another pull on your beer, tell a story of your own to try to "one-up" him, or did you not smile and instead say, "You know, that was a pretty stupid thing to do."

There is a ton of study on safety culture and what encourages it. Regulation doesn't. Here is something from Dupont, world renowned for their safety culture.

http://www2.dupont.com/Consulting_a...en_US/content/CultureOfSafetyPresentation.pdf

You'll notice from the Bradley curve on page 10 that the lowest incident rates come when we look out for each other.

Bob Kuykendall said:

I happen to agree with this, in practice at least.

But I notice that the Alternative Engines forum is still there...

Thanks, Bob K.

Click to expand...

Well, it wouldn't be the end of the world if Doug decided to axe that topic from his forum. Most of the Alt guys already hang out elsewhere these days. It would certainly free up some bandwidth! Ah, though we might miss out on some of those epic, off topic discussions of years past. There was a lot of entertainment value there. That would be sad for many.

rv6ejguy said:

Ah, though we might miss out on some of those epic, off topic discussions of years past. There was a lot of entertainment value there. That would be sad for many.

Click to expand...

So true!

L.Adamson -- RV6A

Thanks Doug

Knowing what to expect from you as both a business man and a friend is key to maintaining both kinds of relationships. You have set a standard (and a rather high standard) that I am free to emulate or not. As for how my behavior on this website will effect how you treat me, if I get crosswise with you, I have no one to blame but myself.
I have the PRIVILEGES of both a private pilot and an A&P. My relationships with individuals in the FAA have been very fruitful in a large part because when I don't know I ask, and when something turns up wrong, (honest mistake) I self report. Now, when a client has some paperwork or other potentially legal issue that I uncover, my PMI expects me to "just fix it"
Part 65 has a "Moral qualifications requirement" for airmen.
Honesty, open mindedness and willingness have kept me reasonably safe, driven my behavior toward being more conservative, and also kept me out of any serious legal trouble.
Anyone have ideas for a safety "template", like a list of questions to answer?
Would that be worth starting a thread?
Thanks again.

"Watch this" means watch out!

While we're talking safety culture, I'll relate a couple of stories that touch on the topic.

First one, I had a friend whose last words, the last ones anybody living heard at least, were "Watch this." Unfortunately, his wife was with him at the time, and she perished too. That was in 1987. (LAX87FA286)

Now, whenever I hear "watch this," or hear myself think it, or even think I'm going to think it, I back up a step or two and think things through again. How is this going to look in a newspaper article? In an NTSB synopsis? An autobiography?

Second story, two years later. I was working a glider contest when I was offered a ride in a VariEZE. I accepted the ride, but then couldn't go because I had to go retrieve a glider out of a field. Someone else went instead. That night the VariEZE owner's hangar stood open all night with the lights on. The next day the airplane was found spread across substantial acreage in the Mohave. (LAX89DUQ05)

The takeaway there was that not everybody applies good sensibilities and best practices when it comes to aircraft critical structure. As a result of that accident and one or two other incidents, there was a reevaluation of the construction techniques used in the VariEZE spars and wing joints. That's when Rutan circulated a service bulletin (still in effect) that limits VariEZE (but not LongEZ) to +2.5g load factor.

Prior to these accidents, I was rather less critical about what I flew in and who I flew with. Afterwards, I adopted the practice of doing an independent preflight of anything I rode in, and not being particularly gentle about making sure the important bits were well attached. I also started evaluating the attitude and coherence of anybody I rode with.

Thanks, Bob K.

Bob Kuykendall said:

While we're talking safety culture, I'll relate a couple of stories that touch on the topic.

Click to expand...

Bob, I get the gist. Can't get the first link to work.

n5lp said:

Bob, I get the gist. Can't get the first link to work.

Click to expand...

It looks like the NTSB server is choking; there's a script error bringing up the HTML synopsis. I updated the link so it points to the .pdf version.

Boy.. I really have to go with Dan on this one. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. I really don't think we need to go down that path. I do and have always believed in setting personal rules as well as limits but, it is not up to others to check our limits. This is not intended to offend but provide another point of view.

randyintejas said:

...I do and have always believed in setting personal rules as well as limits but, it is not up to others to check our limits...

Click to expand...

That's kind of the point here. Back at the origin of this thread, the thesis was that everybody should formalize a few basic rules that encompass their own personal level of risk tolerance.

The only things that go outside those boundaries, the things where Doug proposes to drop a dime, are seriously egregious acts with potential to reflect badly on himself and on the homebuilt community even when everything turns out well.

Besides that, it's funny you mention communism. Based on current safety statistics, it looks like we have a problem in the homebuilt community. And if it looks like that on our side of the fence, imagine what it must look like to the FAA and to the NTSB and to tabloid journalism. If we don't police ourselves to some moderate degree, the FAA will be glad to do the policing for us. And there ain't nobody who thinks the FAA will use any particular moderation if it has to do so.

Besides that, in real communist police states there is no personal aviation, and no forums moderated or unmoderated in which to discuss it.

Thanks, Bob K.

I understand the point perfectly. The communist police state rules with fear.. i.e. pilots fearful of the FAA and Media so they are willing to turn in others. At what point does it end? We all know there is a problem in the home built community and I believe the reasons are simple and not going to go away. 1. Pilots are drawn to the experimental because in part more freedom. 2. Because of 1. You get the rouge Pilots and you are not going to change their behavior. And besides most pilots are mavericks by nature anyway. And you might better consider the pilot that is willing to retaliate because you turned him in.

FAA Concerns

I understand there is a renewed emphasis on AB safety. It stems from an FAA mandate that basically said, "fix this disproportionate share of GA fatalities or we will fix it for you." It listed statistics. The statistics said that EAB have an awful record in first flight accidents. They even issued a new Advisory Circular. Van's article, while it questioned the statistics did indeed extol the virtues of Mike Seeger's transition training. While we continue to address the "culture" of poor flying habits...no one has solved the beginning...the transition. If someone who has flow ultralights or jets for the last 20 years decides to build a plane and take it on its first flight "because he knows how to fly" there is nothing to stop him. One falls behind the plane, the other thinks he can't pull the wings off. Van has very nicely suggested that something be done about this that the manufacturers cannot do...guarantee safe first flights. I have yet to see anything besides an AC. Soon there will be an FAR. Perhaps a mandated check ride by a Fed in make/model. Insurance companies would certainly support it.

Bob Kuykendall said:

While we're talking safety culture, I'll relate a couple of stories that touch on the topic.

First one, I had a friend whose last words, the last ones anybody living heard at least, were "Watch this." Unfortunately, his wife was with him at the time, and she perished too. That was in 1987. (LAX87FA286)

Now, whenever I hear "watch this," or hear myself think it, or even think I'm going to think it, I back up a step or two and think things through again. How is this going to look in a newspaper article? In an NTSB synopsis? An autobiography?

....

Click to expand...

"Watch this" were also the last words on the radio for this fatal accident -

http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/AccidentReports/xerg40550znzhi55eo0d1gip/M04302011120000.pdf

safety

This is a serious subject that I take very seriously. I have, however, read some of these posts with some amusement, amused because they are pretty much going exactly where I expected them to go.
Not defending any of this BUT:
I think there are certain areas of the US where there is a lot more outlaw flying than in most areas. One of these areas is a rather large state in the northeast, where at one time many years ago I wondered if the unliscensed pilots and airplanes did not outnumber the legal ones.
Another example would be residential airparks. At one that I have in mind, I would not be at all surprised to see multiple low passes by everything from Warbirds to aerobatic airplanes on any typical day.
At one aerobatic contest that I attended years ago, the local custom was an inverted pass down the ramp after the contest ended. Others played chicken with semis, while flying inverted about 20 feet above the highway, on the way home. Some of the worst offenders were airline pilots.
The low pass was called a flyby in the early history of EAA. While I suppose there were some altitude restrictions, many did not pay attention. After the end of the Rockford era(1969), things just got too out of control. 50-75 airplanes in one chaotic gaggle. QUESTION: is a low pass, conducted in a reasonable manner, really any different than the Rockford era. If it does not involve aerobatics and/or a violation of the traffic pattern, I personally don't have an issue with this. In the vast majority of cases the FAA will not pursue this. So if you turn someone in for this, be prepared to have your head handed to you.
The gentleman a few years ago that lost control of his high performance, Oshkosh Reserve Grand Champion and killed himself, after some low level flight and attempted acro, perhaps if someone had talked to him before that he might still be with us.
I knew a flight instructor at a small airport that instructed well into his seventies. He is long gone of natural causes. He allegedly never flew a new airplane that he didn't roll, with his student, usually in the traffic pattern. Cessna 150, Cherokee, Cessna 310, you name it he rolled it. No parachutes of course.
I personally don't have a problem with a proficient aerobatic pilot demonstrating a roll to a passenger at a reasonable altitude. Just don't get caught and DON'T MAKE A VIDEO. I personally don't have a problem doing spins in an airplane I know without chutes if the chutes put the airplane over gross or out of cg.
Hypothetical case: well known airshow pilot on his way to Oshkosh, at a fuel stop, gets a wild hair and makes a high speed pass down the runway followed by a vertical pullup. Is Joe private pilot really going to lecture Mr. Airshow Pilot on the dangers of his behavior and say " if I see you do that again I'll turn you in to the FAA". REALLY!!!!
If everyone would do two things:
Take a ten hour course in the Pitts at a place like Sunrise Aviation.
Take another five hours dual with a REALLY GOOD INSTRUCTOR in your two place XYZ special homebuilt. This should include a LOT of slow flight and stalls and a LOT of flying with all the fancy gadgets covered up.
I truly believe that if everyone did this the AB accident rate would drop at least 30% next year.

first flight

A few years ago there was a first flight fatal accident that got a lot of press. The PIC was very experienced, ex military, with all the civilian ratings and a lot of civilian experience. IIRC correctly he was the local Chapter President and SAFETY OFFICER. He planned to make the first flight a big event, a party. He put a passenger in the right seat and took off. The engine quit just past the end of the runway. 2 fatal. There were a lot of people there, several were in a position to and should have intervened. The accident report says engine failure for undertermined reasons. Most believe he ran out of fuel. He had been asked about fuel but said he had enough. He knew carrying a passenger was not legal but did it anyway.

DanH said:

Nobody respects a snitch. If you don't like another pilot's behavior, settle it within the family.

Click to expand...

I agree with DR. Try to resolve it once, if the perp doesn't change, violate them. Report it. What are we, some ghetto gang with a no-snitch code??

Judgement

jrs14855 said:

Hypothetical case: well known airshow pilot on his way to Oshkosh, at a fuel stop, gets a wild hair and makes a high speed pass down the runway followed by a vertical pullup. Is Joe private pilot really going to lecture Mr. Airshow Pilot on the dangers of his behavior and say " if I see you do that again I'll turn you in to the FAA". REALLY!!!!

This example, and this whole thread, is about judgement. If Mr. Hotshot airshow pilot did his little testosterone display with no traffic and not over people or houses while Joe private pilot watched from the ramp it might be "no harm, no foul'. However, if Mr. Hotshot scared Joe in the pattern or, as I once witnessed, flew over him on final while making a low pass, Joe should drop a dime to the FAA pronto.


If everyone would do two things:
Take a ten hour course in the Pitts at a place like Sunrise Aviation.
Take another five hours dual with a REALLY GOOD INSTRUCTOR in your two place XYZ special homebuilt. This should include a LOT of slow flight and stalls and a LOT of flying with all the fancy gadgets covered up.
I truly believe that if everyone did this the AB accident rate would drop at least 30% next year.

Click to expand...

I agree completely. Too many of the stats we are talking about here are stall/spins and relying on technology when short on currency and training.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

Buggsy2 said:

I agree with DR. Try to resolve it once, if the perp doesn't change, violate them. Report it. What are we, some ghetto gang with a no-snitch code??

Click to expand...

While I agree with most of what Doug has written, I strongly agree with DanH on this point. The problem with the "tattle-tale" approach is that the idea of what is a "reportable" offense is often in the eye of the beholder. Obviously if a drunk pilot is loading his family of 4 into a two-seater airplane, that is something that requires some level of immediate intervention. But things in the real world are rarely that clear cut. For example, there are many pilots out there (including some on this forum) who might watch me lead a flight of 4 into an overhead approach at an uncontrolled field and conclude that this was such a gross affront to safety as to require a similar intervention. "Safety" and the line between safe and reportable conduct is not well defined, and the idea that the proper response is to run to the authorities will do nothing but bring increased, un-needed scrutiny on our hobby.

@Doug- if it's not too far out of line, I'm curious if your idea to warn once, then report someone who posts a non-parachute-wearing aerobatic video was recommended to you by your attorney? [ed. Nope. dr] With all due respect to google archives, it would seem that deleting the post and privately warning the poster would meet any legal burden, and that reporting them to authorities smacks of legal overkill. Otherwise, I might have to start filing a NASA report with every VAF post

Boy, start a thread and let it go on its own for 24 hours - lots of tremendously good comments get generated! My intent of highlighting Doug's post was to point out the importance of HAVING personal rules an living by them. And many of the posts here address that perfectly. I intentionally stayed away from commenting on the PARTICULAR points of Doug's personal code, because I figured that would just end up in a bunch of different furballs....and please take that with tongue in cheek - discussion is GOOD!

Thread drift, of course, is inevitable, but Doug's Missive has SO MANY incredibly good points of departure for productive discussions, that I would suggest that there is a button at the top of the forums for "NEW THREAD". If you want to start a discussion on the morality of reporting a fellow pilot to the FAA - start a thread. The merits of NOMEX? Great discussion....how about a dedicated thread? Heck - you could start one on every one of Doug's points. Choose one you want.

Think of this as a pilot lounge. Three guys are talking about a topic. More guys come in and start throwing in tangential comments. The crowd breaks up into more small groups to talk of those comments. Pretty soon, the noise level in the room gets so high, no one can concentrate on any of the points. Same thing happens here. It gets so confusing, the good points get missed. Yeah, I am an engineer, I like things organized.

LOTS of good comments here - at least one person started a new thread, and I saw it went to two pages pretty fast!

Just a thought from a high inverted position over the furball....

Kudos to Doug for writing his down. Although I share several, I have never thought of putting them to paper. One of mine is:

No over water flights with a passenger
I don't believe a passenger would be able to get out of my -8 in the event
of a water landing. I have passed on several wonderful trips with friends
And have looked at their trip reports with envy. But for me, it is beyond my
risk tolerance for my passenger and myself.

Can't see the "Missive"?

Is the link to http://http//www.vansairforce.net/myTakeOnFlying.htm broken? I've tried getting to it from both firefox and IE, both return "Server Not Found".

Any ideas how to get to the file?

java said:

Some would argue that wearing a 'chute in a seat you can't jettison the canopy from is stupid. Some would argue that someone who knows nothing about airplanes building an airplane is stupid. The former is "against the rules" (in the US). The latter is not only allowed, it is celebrated by everyone on this forum.

Click to expand...

you can learn how to build an airplane, especially an RV, as you go. i don't know that you can ever learn how to push a tilt up canopy enough to jump out.

riffelj said:

Is the link to http://http//www.vansairforce.net/myTakeOnFlying.htm broken? I've tried getting to it from both firefox and IE, both return "Server Not Found".

Any ideas how to get to the file?

Click to expand...

its on the front/ home page

There are two "http//"'s in the link. Paste it, modify it, and it'll work.

There is safety culture, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Only one is productive and I would argue this steps over that line. You make some very good points and bring up great discussion items, but threatening to turn guys in, no one wants to be around that guy.

Doug no offense, but a 1500 hour private pilot has no place TELLING some guys on here how to operate or what is acceptable. I'll take that a bit further and say no one should be TELLING anyone else how to operate. Safety culture is fostered by an open and willing ability to share. Threatening to turn someone into the FAA, especially anyone that works as a professional pilot is a dangerous course of action, for a lot of reasons.

It is your house though, and like my dad always said, you want to live under my roof you'll live by my rules.

safety

I agree with and support most of what Doug said in the safety missive. However, turning someone in to the FAA is, in almost all cases, a VERY VERY BAD IDEA. Sort of like playing with fire. How many Joe Private Pilots completely understand the waiver process for pilot and airspace that allows acro flight below 1500'. We are not talking about FAR's, we are talking about waivers of FAR's.
Hypothetical: Joe arrives at a little used public airport just before dark. No one around. He ties down his XYZ Special and gets a ride to a nearby motel. Next day he arrives at the airport and witnesses a pilot flying down the runway 10 feet off the ground inverted. He immediately calls the nearest FSDO and reports the numerous violations. The problem is there were no violations. The airspace and the pilot are covered by two separate waivers. While the airspace is usually not directly over the runway, it COULD BE. The pilot would be in radio contact with a spotter looking for other traffic. The pilot, in this case, holds a ground level waiver.
I had been flying for nearly twenty years before I understood how this works.