What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Accidents, working on the rate

B

b432291

Active Member
While I do not agree on a forum where we 2nd guess and speculate on the latest NTSB prelims from last week, something is clearly amiss when GA accident rates are not really improving that much and the airlines have made such great strides.
And I'm not talking about the accidents where there is some doubt, I'm talking about the ones like the Cirrus going thru Donner Pass in forecast icing conditions, or the guy who crashed on the 3rd attempt on a fogged in mountain runway, or the guy (was a friend of mine) who was killed when the plane didn't take off with enough power after refueling (but the motor completely quit on landing and was not looked at).
And the thing is those folks don't read these forums anyhow I guess, but I sure wish we could cut down on the really stupid, completely avoidable accidents.
Sorry for the rant, but I might be willing to "break some eggs" if we could lower the deaths from really stupid Pilot-101 bad errors in judgement.
 
b432291 said:
While I do not agree on a forum where we 2nd guess and speculate on the latest NTSB prelims from last week, something is clearly amiss when GA accident rates are not really improving that much and the airlines have made such great strides.
And I'm not talking about the accidents where there is some doubt, I'm talking about the ones like the Cirrus going thru Donner Pass in forecast icing conditions, or the guy who crashed on the 3rd attempt on a fogged in mountain runway, or the guy (was a friend of mine) who was killed when the plane didn't take off with enough power after refueling (but the motor completely quit on landing and was not looked at).
And the thing is those folks don't read these forums anyhow I guess, but I sure wish we could cut down on the really stupid, completely avoidable accidents.
Sorry for the rant, but I might be willing to "break some eggs" if we could lower the deaths from really stupid Pilot-101 bad errors in judgement.
Click to expand...
First thing,,, Freedom isn?t Safe! Second,,, we are not the airlines. Third,,, start with yourself.

If we all make the changes in our self?s to avoid the things we have seen others do that caused problems we will be better off, beyond that I would not like to give up any further freedom to save one more person, even myself.
 
So what about "innocent" passengers that have no idea of the risk the pilot is taking at the time? I do not care if the pilot kills him/herself thats the freedom we get under Part 91 - but taking pax along and not informing them of the russian roulette you are about to perform crosses a line for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I care about the pilot, in a very selfish way: We are such a small community that every accident has an impact on the statistics the insurance companies use to set rates. It was not that long ago that there was a rash of Lancair accidents, and for a while they were practically uninsurable.

But I also understand that some people find joy or excitement in things that involve risk: cave diving, ice climbing, low flying. I do not know how to not impinge on their adventure and totally isolate myself from it. I wish I had an answer.

But I am disturbed by the "Right Stuff" mentality you often see here. I'll bet that if you asked survivors of, say, low flying accidents, they would all say, if they were honest, "Yes, I know some people said what I was doing was high risk, but I never thought I would actually have an accident."
 
Russ McCutcheon said:
First thing,,, Freedom isn?t Safe! Second,,, we are not the airlines. Third,,, start with yourself.

If we all make the changes in our self?s to avoid the things we have seen others do that caused problems we will be better off, beyond that I would not like to give up any further freedom to save one more person, even myself.
Click to expand...

I 100% agree with that.

however the biggest hurdle is RECOGNIZING the issue in yourself. Discussing potential risk factors in a recent accident may help you recognize the issues in yourself (or your machine). That sinking feeling when an issue that lead to an accident is pointed out and you quietly realize that "wow, I did that on saturday" and make a mental note to change your approach is one thing that can help save some lives.
 
b432291 said:
So what about "innocent" passengers that have no idea of the risk the pilot is taking at the time? I do not care if the pilot kills him/herself thats the freedom we get under Part 91 - but taking pax along and not informing them of the russian roulette you are about to perform crosses a line for me.
Click to expand...
First off I am not advocating flying stupid and it is unfortunate when one of our airplanes crash and someone gets hurt or killed including possibly a passenger however freedom is not safe for passengers either and if they are over the age of consent they are not innocent, they chose to get in that airplane and they knew the pilot and if they did not know the pilot maybe they made a bad choice to fly with someone they did not know, these are choices we all make when we decide to ride in an airplane or car with anyone else, the pilot is free to fly and the passenger is free to ride or decline if he thinks that’s best. I don’t take people up I don’t know and I don’t ride with people I don’t know and I don’t ride with some people I do know, either way I’m not advocating flying stupid, however the safer you want to make GA the more rights you will have to loose in that pursuit, 0 deaths in GA means you no longer have the right to fly your GA airplanes. How much are you willing to give up and also pay $ to save how many lives in GA? Me, not much.

To make my point that a passenger in my airplane is not an innocent bystander, Getting in this airplane, obviously not a South West 737 is the same as getting into a Ferrari, you better know the driver/pilot or maybe you should stay home but it’s your choice, you are Free.
021.JPG
 
Last edited:
walkman said:
I 100% agree with that.

however the biggest hurdle is RECOGNIZING the issue in yourself. Discussing potential risk factors in a recent accident may help you recognize the issues in yourself (or your machine). That sinking feeling when an issue that lead to an accident is pointed out and you quietly realize that "wow, I did that on saturday" and make a mental note to change your approach is one thing that can help save some lives.
Click to expand...
Sometimes people don’t recognize it in themselves, but they are free and thy're free to miss it, I suggested making changes to avoid doing the dumb thing someone else did, meaning I agree we do need to look at crashes and the factors that lead to these crashes. I hate seeing someone has crashed but it gives me comfort when we find out it was pilot error and we can do something about it in our own flying, it scares me when half a prop flies off and takes the engine with it, not much I can do about that.
 
Increasing safety is inversely related to general aviation prosperity. By that I mean we will see GA costs rise to meet higher safety standards. Higher costs means a smaller number of GA participants which in turn raises costs further. You can see how this is a dangerous cycle (and it is playing out as you read this).

So how do we are increase safety within the boundaries we are already living? I think it would help to first analyze how people become safe and there are really only two ways for that to happen: 1. Gain experience and 2. Get more training. The safest way to be safe is to get more training via flight instruction, ground school, self study, etc. For most folks this will be a matter of money and/or motivation and could probably be done relatively cheaply through high motivation to self study.

But what about the people who lack the motivation/$? I would submit that these people comprise a majority of GA accidents. Some people, maybe most people, have the mindset: If the minimum wasn't good enough, it wouldn't be the minimum after all. Given that we don't want to increase the minimum standard as that would be detrimental to our hobby, we have to work on free training, safety motivation, and flying conservatively when we don't have the experience yet for a particular type of flying.

Comparing GA to airlines just isn't fair. The airlines spread their costs over a much larger population. Just watch over the next 5 years what happens to the airlines with new copilot hours bumping up. In fact the Pilot t shortage has already started and I genuinely believe that if you live another 30 years, you will see the end of GA in the US. Typing on the phone so I will leave it at that for now
 
Last edited:
Folks, I am not looking for new regulations or restrictions. I am just wondering if there is a way to affect change (and maybe there is not) to lessen the "what-the-****-was-he-thinking" kind of accident. And it's probably not thru this forum, either - because just by joining this forum says that you take flying a little more seriously. Just looking for a fresh idea to reach the un-reachable.
 
Personal Safety thoughts

Better budget has made me a much safer pilot. Learning to fly as a college-age renter I remember stretching fuel because a stop would use .2 or .3 more on the Hobbs. Worried that stopping short might cost a $50 hotel room.

I wouldn't recommend much cross-country flight to anyone who has to worry about paying an extra $100 for fuel or a hotel or whatever. If the budget is that tight better stay close to home. Another x-country factor is returning a rental on time or else paying all costs for the FBO to send a pilot to take the plane home, maybe without you.

The RV also has so many advantages, land almost anywhere, speed and range to find alternate fields, autopilot to reduce fatigue, and the opportunity to fly often and always trying to improve. I think the biggest threats to my flight safety are bird strike, then mechanical failure, then maybe mid-air collison.

I'm also not optimistic that GA in 30 years will be available for middle-class people. I hope it survives, but as costs spiral up, flight hours drop, and infrastructure is likely going to shrink.
 
'Freedom' is the excuse of the selfish to avoid responsibility.

Every time you get in an aircraft, as a GA or professional pilot, you have a duty of care to your passengers and innocent bystanders. Stating that the foolish acts of others should only affect how you yourself act, or that by getting in to an aircraft the passenger accepts all responsibility for the acts of the pilot is patently absurd.
 
Is more training the answer?

I am one that likes to read the discussions or speculation about accidents. I don't agree with the policy Doug has limiting accident discussion. But, it is his site so he makes the rules.

Since this thread is not discussing any specific accident but how to improve GA flying safety, I think it fits the rules.

The thought of many including the FAA, AOPA, EAA, is that pilots need more training. Is more training the answer? If it is, than why do very experienced pilots with great flying skills crash?

I believe I learn things to help me be a safer pilot from discussing or even speculating on what caused an accident. For a low time pilot like me, it freaks the crapp out of me when I hear about an accident where a CFI with instrument rating and thousands of hours as PIC, crashes. There have been more than a few experimental and certified accidents last year where that was the case. Either it was a stall or just plowing into the side of a hill. I don't see more training as the answer to those accidents. If you need more training than the thousands of hours those pilots had, I might as well give up. I know I will never have the experience or skills they had.

My only hope is to be smarter than they were. I want to know exactly what their decision tree was that got them in the position they couldn't get out of. If I can't know exactly what happened, the speculation of some pretty sharp people here might trigger a thought in my head that could save my a$$. Once a "report" comes out or the pilot posts information, we can see who was on the right track in their speculation and learn from the guesses of those who were off base. Either way, we learned something.

I absolutely understand that a low time pilot like me needs all the training and instruction I can get. Before I started building, I had a discussion with my wife and a few pilot friends about the risks. Together we came up with "rules" for me.

1. I will not fly at night
2. I will not fly in bad or marginal weather
3. I will not be an idiot and buzz someone or something
4. I will not run out of gas
5. I will not postpone maintenance of ANY safety issue
6. I will not fly on a trip if there is a chance I will "need" to be there or home by a fixed date
7. I will not try to do a 180 turn back to the airport unless I am POSITIVE I can make it back.
8. I will not stall trying to save the plane

1. I will do a complete pre-flight EVERY time the wheels will be leaving the ground
2. I will use a checklist EVERY time I take off or land
3. I will check the fuel level EVERY time before the wheels leave the ground
4. I will not fly when tired or stressed
5. I will have a traffic avoidance system installed or the plane does not leave the ground
6. I will crash land the plane under control straight ahead or land off airport if I lose power under ????'. (need to flight test to know this number)

Like others have said, if discussions can save someone - or me from making the same mistake, we can save lives.
 
With freedom comes responsibility.

I am with Bob Turner and ChrisH on this.

Many accidents that are in the dumb class, and we have had a spate of them here in the ultralight or LSA category of late, are ALL low fruit accidents as Van would call them. One was two dead young folk in an LSA, been drinking beers and decided to beat up a mates house. Two Dead.




Of course it would never be you...........

I get hammered on this forum for speaking the truth, I have many posts removed for it, this one may end up deleted as well. But cowboy antics, and just simple stupidity is what kills most folk in aviation.

Nothing has changed in over 100 years, no new ways to kill yourself just a few creative variations. Don't be one of them.

Only have to look at a recent -10 prang. Fortunately a good result from a bad set of actions.
 
rockwoodrv9 said:
"rules" for me.

1. I will not fly at night
2. I will not fly in bad or marginal weather
3. I will not be an idiot and buzz someone or something
4. I will not run out of gas
5. I will not postpone maintenance of ANY safety issue
6. I will not fly on a trip if there is a chance I will "need" to be there or home by a fixed date
7. I will not try to do a 180 turn back to the airport unless I am POSITIVE I can make it back.
8. I will not stall trying to save the plane

1. I will do a complete pre-flight EVERY time the wheels will be leaving the ground
2. I will use a checklist EVERY time I take off or land
3. I will check the fuel level EVERY time before the wheels leave the ground
4. I will not fly when tired or stressed
5. I will have a traffic avoidance system installed or the plane does not leave the ground
6. I will crash land the plane under control straight ahead or land off airport if I lose power under ????'. (need to flight test to know this number)

Like others have said, if discussions can save someone - or me from making the same mistake, we can save lives.
Click to expand...

I like your checklist. I was just reading about this senseless crash in NM. Innocent folks died and it's clear the cause with extremely poor judgement. http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/state&id=9015423

This was an educated man - an engineer. How could he not know the risks? Or choose to ignore them?

How do we teach common sense?
 
Chris Hill said:
I genuinely believe that if you live another 30 years, you will see the end of GA in the US. Typing on the phone so I will leave it at that for now
Click to expand...

I hope you are incorrect. The part that bothers me is I think you might be right. :(
 
Training

It took me less time to get my Private....written study time, flight hours, dual, etc. than it took for my wife to get certified in Pilates. Just saying.

We also need to keep in mind. Our PPL is a license to learn. Continue to learn. I read as much as I can to contiue to educate myself. There are alot of pilots that don't do that. I know a few.

The best learning to me, is reading about a mistake that another pilot made, especially when the consequences of their choices did not have a good ending. It seems to stick with me.
 
RV10inOz said:
With freedom comes responsibility.
I am with Bob Turner and ChrisH on this.
Click to expand...
I agree to a point, but does freedom come with responsibility? It should, but it has been proven not to work over the course of time. That is why we have rules, defined and enforced by law, law that we choose to enact through our democracy. Don't confuse democracy with freedom, big mistake.
Rules are supposed to "govern" behaviour. However, I do not think there is a single person in this discussion that has never broken a rule, thought a rule was stupid, or bent one to meet their own need.
Freedom without responsibility will lead to more laws, rules, and restrictions. We need to always be concious of how our actions may impact others, short and long term.
So, yes, freedom does come with responsibility, but can we handle that? The rash of stupid accidents seems to say no. Read my tag line. Smart people do stupid things all the time.....
If we keep it up, we will be regulated and ruled right out of this "hobby" and for some of us a lifestyle.....
 
chrish said:
'Freedom' is the excuse of the selfish to avoid responsibility.

Every time you get in an aircraft, as a GA or professional pilot, you have a duty of care to your passengers and innocent bystanders. Stating that the foolish acts of others should only affect how you yourself act, or that by getting in to an aircraft the passenger accepts all responsibility for the acts of the pilot is patently absurd.
Click to expand...
Just the opposite actually, I take responsibility for myself and you do the same, I take responsibility for myself when I am deciding whether to ride with you or not, I don?t know you and don?t know what you might do so I will pass. Now you can just give the pilot all the responsibility and jump in and go with anyone that says come on and he can have all the responsibility and you can be dead. I actually blame the pedestrians in down town Portland that get killed every month, even the ones in the cross walk, recently some got run over by a bus making a right turn at night, the bus driver lost her job etc. it was all her fault, well she did not see them but how did they not see her, she was driving a bus with all the noise and all the lights and it was a bus, no one said anything about their responsibility to themselves to look out for busses. I will take responsibility for myself when I walk in Portland; I will take responsibility for myself when deciding what airplane or car to ride in and by doing this I will have a better chance to live a long life, id rather be responsible for myself and alive then an innocent and dead.

In any case I don?t advocate flying reckless but I also don?t think I and the rest of us should be held to account for the ones who do, and I also think passengers have a great deal more responsibility for their choice when they get in a little RV with me or you then when they get in a South West 737.
 
Russ McCutcheon said:
...In any case I don?t advocate flying reckless but I also don?t think I and the rest of us should be held to account for the ones who do...
Click to expand...

I agree that that is the way it should be. Unfortunately, that isn't the way it works for a lot of the media and the general public. When they see dumb accidents, it colors their perception of the entire aviation community. And you really can't blame them. Generalities like that may be invalid and inappropriate when applied to the specific, but they are to some degree hardwired into the human condition. You really can't blame people for adopting attitudes and behaviors that they think will help preserve their personal safety and the safety of their families, friends, and resources.

Russ McCutcheon said:
...and I also think passengers have a great deal more responsibility for their choice when they get in a little RV with me or you then when they get in a South West 737.
Click to expand...

That is a very interesting point from an ethical perspective!

I certainly agree that it is reasonable to say that passengers bear a greater responsibility for their personal safety when riding in experimental aircraft than in commercial airliners. However, I also think that the operators of experimental aircraft bear a greater responsibility towards their passengers to make sure that they have the capacity to make an informed choice about such activity.

Of course, not every passenger will have the ability to make such a fully-informed choice. The most common example is taking children for rides. Depending on their age, they might have no idea at all that there is even criteria for a decision. They just want a ride in the sleek shiny airplane now! Of course, the way our society handles that is by designating parents and guardians to make those informed decisions on behalf of the child and in the child's best interests.

I would further propose that operators of all aircraft have a responsibility to deliberately and consciously consider issues of risk exposure, and to moderate that exposure according to the degree to which their passengers have made an informed decision. Taking a kid up on a Young Eagles ride, you can be pretty certain that they don't have a full understanding of density altitude and haven't read Rogers on the "impossible turn."

Thanks, Bob K.
 
chrish said:
'Freedom' is the excuse of the selfish to avoid responsibility.

Every time you get in an aircraft, as a GA or professional pilot, you have a duty of care to your passengers and innocent bystanders. Stating that the foolish acts of others should only affect how you yourself act, or that by getting in to an aircraft the passenger accepts all responsibility for the acts of the pilot is patently absurd.
Click to expand...
Hmmm! How does this sound:
Every time you get in an automobile, as a driver, you have a duty of care to your passengers and innocent bystanders. Stating that the foolish acts of others should only affect how you yourself act, or that by getting in to an automobile the passenger accepts all responsibility for the acts of the pilot is patently absurd.
Click to expand...
If one is honest with oneself, how often do any of us think like this when driving others around in our automobiles? Is the risk, responsibility, analysis any different in these two scenarios? I personally don't think so, but I can attest to the fact that I don't have conscious thoughts along these lines when driving someone around in an automobile. I do have them when I take them up in my airplane.
 
Accidents

I agree with RV10inOZ and others,

In a democracy, with freedom we are given incredible responsibility. In one congressional vote, We the People can ground ourselves.

We are lucky to live in a huge country where we allow private pilots the incredible privilege to fly around almost anywhere - even in bad weather - in homebuilt equipment, on instruments!! This, of course, can be a very dangerous affair for people on the ground, for passengers (commercial and private), and pilots.

In order to preserve and protect our freedom to fly we have to be very careful about flying. As soon as the public perceives us as threats to safety, they will restrict us. That would suck, as flying is an incredible joy. :)
 
For those who fear more rules, please re-read Bob K's post. Many of the rules were imposed after non-pilots were killed. The public at large has a fear of small aircraft, and demand action if a civillian is hurt. Less so if it was just the pilot. For example, ELTs were mandated only because a non pilot congressman couldn't be found. No one cared about pilots.

For the person with the action list, let me suggest one more thing: "Before each flight I will say five times, 'If the best course of action is an off airport landing I will do so without hesitation'". Since we are allowed to discuss NTSB reports I suggest everyone read the one on the first RV10 fatality. Although the official reason is listed as electrical failure, the report makes clear that the final action in the chain of events was a stall from 50 feet up - into a perfectly good corn field.

The great thing about the US Air ditching on the Hudson was not the stick and rudder skills; it was the captain's command decision, even when offered a chance for Teterboro, to sacrifice the airplane.

Edit: opps, I see this was already #8 on your list.
 
Last edited:
Accidents - as a safety teacher - I don't agree (long)

I don't believe that if you, we, me read the gruesome tale of some poor sole who perished or almost perished in an airplane, sailplane, helicopter, that an aha happens and prevents you, we, me from repeating the event.

I'm not sure when aviation started believing this, but it has been part of the culture and publications long enough now that it does not seem to me that anything substantial has change regarding accident rates.

I used to believe that it was true, but year-in, year-out it seems that aviation loses participants for the same relatively small list of reasons...

A couple of years ago, I started asking every pilot that I bumped into if they had ever practiced spins in their airplane or sailplane. So far, NOT ONE has said yes. Yes, I realize it is not possible in all aircraft. But that is NEVER the response. It is always something like - "I fly pretty conservatively" or some version of this.

These days, I believe in skill and situation-skill building (what do you do if). I came to this conclusion a few years ago when getting a BFR in a sailplane. The instructor asked what I wanted to work on and I said emergency procedures.

I expected the usual pull of the release at 400-600 feet.

I recited my mantra rope break at:
0-200' we land straight ahead - minor turns
200-400' ahead of the wings
400-600' land downwind on the runway

At 200', the tow pilot cut the rope at the request of the instructor - they had pre-arranged it with the intent of landing in the pasture at the end of the runway. This sailplane belongs to a club and the tow pilot was ecstatic as he had NEVER gotten to cut the rope. Due to a number of factors, by the time we were at 200', we were past the point of landing in the field the instructor assumed we would.

Remember my mantra?

When the rope flew back at 200', what I saw in front of me was telephone wires, a road and plowed fields 90 degrees to the landing direction.

Without hesitation, I put the nose down and banked hard - plenty of speed. I landed 180 degrees to the takeoff direction, in a field plowed parallel to the runway and rolled up onto the cross runway.

Remember my mantra?

To this day, I can't REALLY say why I did not land straight ahead. l believed the outcome to be worse than the impssible turn? I don't know. The only thing my instructor said after was - you forgot to release the rest of the rope.

These days, I practice these things and others that hopefully will pay dividends when and if I need them. I spin my airplanes. I do spiral descents. I take instruction for items of my own choosing and skills of my own choosing to be better prepared.

I have a similar list to post #12.

Oh - I no longer do BFR's in sailplanes.
 
rockwoodrv9 said:
The thought of many including the FAA, AOPA, EAA, is that pilots need more training. Is more training the answer? If it is, than why do very experienced pilots with great flying skills crash?

I believe I learn things to help me be a safer pilot from discussing or even speculating on what caused an accident.

1. I will not fly at night
2. I will not fly in bad or marginal weather
3. I will not be an idiot and buzz someone or something
4. I will not run out of gas
5. I will not postpone maintenance of ANY safety issue
6. I will not fly on a trip if there is a chance I will "need" to be there or home by a fixed date
7. I will not try to do a 180 turn back to the airport unless I am POSITIVE I can make it back.
8. I will not stall trying to save the plane

1. I will do a complete pre-flight EVERY time the wheels will be leaving the ground
2. I will use a checklist EVERY time I take off or land
3. I will check the fuel level EVERY time before the wheels leave the ground
4. I will not fly when tired or stressed
5. I will have a traffic avoidance system installed or the plane does not leave the ground
6. I will crash land the plane under control straight ahead or land off airport if I lose power under ????'. (need to flight test to know this number)

Like others have said, if discussions can save someone - or me from making the same mistake, we can save lives.
Click to expand...

Reading this forum, talking to other pilots, etc IS training and is the one f the cheapest ways to get training. BUT it takes motivation to do it. Coming up with personal limits appropriate for your level of training and experience IS THE CORRECT way to apply what you've learned in order to be safe.
 
Ethan L said:
In order to preserve and protect our freedom to fly we have to be very careful about flying. As soon as the public perceives us as threats to safety, they will restrict us. That would suck, as flying is an incredible joy. :)
Click to expand...

the number of accidents where airplane skill people on the ground is very low. The pilots perceptionof the public's perception is much worse than the public's actual perception. It would be a great survey to go ask people as they enter Walmart how many times a year they are worried about a plane crash hurting them or their families. The threshold for public outcry due to GA safety is going to be outrageously high.

The only public perception that matters is that of airline safety since that directly affects the demand for that industry.
 
rockwoodrv9 said:
I am one that likes to read the discussions or speculation about accidents. I don't agree with the policy Doug has limiting accident discussion. But, it is his site so he makes the rules.

Since this thread is not discussing any specific accident but how to improve GA flying safety, I think it fits the rules.

The thought of many including the FAA, AOPA, EAA, is that pilots need more training. Is more training the answer? If it is, than why do very experienced pilots with great flying skills crash?

I believe I learn things to help me be a safer pilot from discussing or even speculating on what caused an accident. For a low time pilot like me, it freaks the crapp out of me when I hear about an accident where a CFI with instrument rating and thousands of hours as PIC, crashes. There have been more than a few experimental and certified accidents last year where that was the case. Either it was a stall or just plowing into the side of a hill. I don't see more training as the answer to those accidents. If you need more training than the thousands of hours those pilots had, I might as well give up. I know I will never have the experience or skills they had.

My only hope is to be smarter than they were. I want to know exactly what their decision tree was that got them in the position they couldn't get out of. If I can't know exactly what happened, the speculation of some pretty sharp people here might trigger a thought in my head that could save my a$$. Once a "report" comes out or the pilot posts information, we can see who was on the right track in their speculation and learn from the guesses of those who were off base. Either way, we learned something.

I absolutely understand that a low time pilot like me needs all the training and instruction I can get. Before I started building, I had a discussion with my wife and a few pilot friends about the risks. Together we came up with "rules" for me.

1. I will not fly at night
2. I will not fly in bad or marginal weather
3. I will not be an idiot and buzz someone or something
4. I will not run out of gas
5. I will not postpone maintenance of ANY safety issue
6. I will not fly on a trip if there is a chance I will "need" to be there or home by a fixed date
7. I will not try to do a 180 turn back to the airport unless I am POSITIVE I can make it back.
8. I will not stall trying to save the plane

1. I will do a complete pre-flight EVERY time the wheels will be leaving the ground
2. I will use a checklist EVERY time I take off or land
3. I will check the fuel level EVERY time before the wheels leave the ground
4. I will not fly when tired or stressed
5. I will have a traffic avoidance system installed or the plane does not leave the ground
6. I will crash land the plane under control straight ahead or land off airport if I lose power under ????'. (need to flight test to know this number)

Like others have said, if discussions can save someone - or me from making the same mistake, we can save lives.
Click to expand...

I pretty much use the exact points on your list. If every pilot would religiously follow this list we would certainly see a reduction in the accident rate. It has been shown that experience doesn't make much difference actually. We see plenty of accidents involving CFIs, high time military and airline pilots. If you go to the root cause, you will see they probably broke one or more of the rules above. High time pilots suffer from complacency and over confidence when it comes to accidents. Lower time pilots might be more cautious but lack the flying skills of more experienced pilots.

Accidents will always happen of course. Losing power at 150 feet just as you cross the far end threshold on takeoff over a bunch of trees is not going to turn out well but we can mitigate many common accident causes by flying smart and using a list like this IMO.
 
Scott,
Spins:
You must not have ever bumped into one of my former students. Back when I was doing primary training I told my students that while spins were not required for a PP license, I really wanted them to see and do a few prior to solo stall practice. No one ever said no. But on this subject: Why do builders who have no spin experience nevertheless do their own phase one stall testing?

Low altitude emergencies: this is one area where airline pilots have a real advantage, as they can practice these in a good simulator, including scenarios that are too risky to do in a real airplane.
 
Sience it is my belief that many "low hanging fruit" accidents could have been forseen and stopped way before the aircraft was boarded, let me ask how your decision making process to fly or scrub would go in the following situation:

Airport is Angel Fire airport (KAXX) 8380' elev/8900' runway (17/35). There is a direct crosswind of 30-50mph, and you are in a RV-10 with 3 non-aviation aware pax and they are related to you.

Yes, this relates to a recent accident BUT DO NOT RELATE/DISCUSS THAT - what would YOU do in this situation?

What would YOUR thought/decision process be? To me this is the key.

Ted
 
Chris Hill said:
the number of accidents where airplane skill people on the ground is very low...
Click to expand...

No argument there.

Chris Hill said:
...The pilots perception of the public's perception is much worse than the public's actual perception. It would be a great survey to go ask people as they enter Walmart how many times a year they are worried about a plane crash hurting them or their families. The threshold for public outcry due to GA safety is going to be outrageously high.

The only public perception that matters is that of airline safety since that directly affects the demand for that industry.
Click to expand...

Hang on a second there. On the one hand, you say that it would be a great survey, to which I can only agree. It would yield some fascinating data. But then you go and presume to know the outcome of the survey, a presumption that seems to be based on facts not in evidence.

In my experience, public perception of general aviation depends on many different factors, not the least of which is proximity of the respondent's house to a general aviation airport. I have been to several city council meetings in which it was clear that the general but uninformed sentiment was that the local airport was not good for the community. A lot of suburban and metropolitan GA airports survive only through education, outreach, and general good citizenship.

Thanks, Bob K.
 
selhardt said:
...A couple of years ago, I started asking every pilot that I bumped into if they had ever practiced spins in their airplane or sailplane. So far, NOT ONE has said yes...
Click to expand...

Sort of off-topic:

By the way, I once watched an ASW-20 break over the top and spin for two turns or so down through a thermal. Besides the sharp break and pivot, the most interesting thing to me was the asymmetrical wing bending as it went over the top. It looked almost like it was trying to do the "walk like an Egyptian" dance.

Thanks, Bob K.
 
Okay, I'll try to be honest. I wouldn't try it, but not because I thought I might die. My thought pattern is that I might not be able to keep it on the runway, go off the runway, damage the airplane, and be terribly embarassed in front of my passengers. Perhaps I'm deluding myself about the risk of a more serious accident. I'm not familiar with this airport, I picture it as having unobstructed dirt or grass safety zones on either side, not trees or a cliff.

Related: the other day I was at Harris Ranch, a CA central valley airport with a nice restaurant and nothing else. Narrow runway. Strong crosswind, maybe 15 or 20 knots. I watched a Cherokee do one go around, then land, go off the runway into the dirt with its left main, recover. The pilot broadcast on the CTAF (to me, I guess, no one else was there) that he wouldn't have landed except that he had to be there. Had to? Was lunch that important?
 
But Bob, the key thing is that you realized that there was extra risk here, in fact enough risk that you might lose control of the aircraft.
For me it would be a no-go becuse I had non-aviation pax and therefore (in my thinking) I needed to fly with a much reduced risk acceptance level.
 
selhardt said:
A couple of years ago, I started asking every pilot that I bumped into if they had ever practiced spins in their airplane or sailplane. So far, NOT ONE has said yes. Yes, I realize it is not possible in all aircraft. But that is NEVER the response. It is always something like - "I fly pretty conservatively" or some version of this.
Click to expand...
I spin everything I have flown where spins are allowed, and spin the RV-4 regularly.
I do know people that fly aerobatics and have never spun there plane, not a great idea.
 
What's the point of this thread?

We churn through one of these things every few months all with the same wringing of hands/gnashing teeth about the other guy and what a moron he is. After a few pages, we're polarized into the "risk averse, stay in the center of our comfort zone" or the "screw it, flying is dangerous" camps.

In any case, nobody is willing to take any action to change their own behavior even one little bit. The risk averse will continue to hide in the direct center of the envelope, and the "cowboys" will continue doing their thing - both firmly entrenched in their belief that the other guy is to blame.

So what is the problem we need to correct anyway? Saving more lives? Sure, pilots continue to do dumb things, but I'll bet more people die falling off a ladder every year than are killed by little airplanes. Is it "saving" GA? Well we have been looked upon as a threat by Joe Public as long as there have been little airplanes.

There are more productive ways to protect lives and our rights than preaching on an Internet forum. Start with voting, holding our elected representatives accountable, living your life in a responsible manner, and minding your own business. If we all did this, the rest will sort itself out.
 
Well, there are the 'mind your own business' schools, and the 'I am my brother's keeper' schools. I guess I'm in the latter. For example, over the years there have been accidents where pilots attempted high density altitude takeoffs at full rich, because they had forgotten or never learned proper use of the red knob. I know if I saw this about to happen, said nothing, and watched him crash, I wouldn't sleep very well.

While I am pessimistic about changing attitudes, I do think training should cut down on this type of accident.
 
BobTurner said:
Well, there are the 'mind your own business' schools, and the 'I am my brother's keeper' schools. I guess I'm in the latter. For example, over the years there have been accidents where pilots attempted high density altitude takeoffs at full rich, because they had forgotten or never learned proper use of the red knob. I know if I saw this about to happen, said nothing, and watched him crash, I wouldn't sleep very well.

While I am pessimistic about changing attitudes, I do think training should cut down on this type of accident.
Click to expand...
Yes, training WOULD cut down on that type of accident because what you just described is NOT an attitude accident. That is an ignorance accident! Therefore if you have an educational discussion with that ignorant pilot, you are explaining to him the error of his ignorant ways, not attempting to change his attitude.

Now, on the other hand if the pilot is already aware, perhaps through your education, of the red knob functionality but chooses to ignore the consequences of his action/inaction in regards to that knowledge, well, then, he is destined for an attitude accident after all. :p
 
Toobuilder said:
What's the point of this thread?

We churn through one of these things every few months all with the same wringing of hands/gnashing teeth about the other guy and what a moron he is. After a few pages, we're polarized into the "risk averse, stay in the center of our comfort zone" or the "screw it, flying is dangerous" camps.

In any case, nobody is willing to take any action to change their own behavior even one little bit. The risk averse will continue to hide in the direct center of the envelope, and the "cowboys" will continue doing their thing - both firmly entrenched in their belief that the other guy is to blame.

So what is the problem we need to correct anyway? Saving more lives? Sure, pilots continue to do dumb things, but I'll bet more people die falling off a ladder every year than are killed by little airplanes. Is it "saving" GA? Well we have been looked upon as a threat by Joe Public as long as there have been little airplanes.

There are more productive ways to protect lives and our rights than preaching on an Internet forum. Start with voting, holding our elected representatives accountable, living your life in a responsible manner, and minding your own business. If we all did this, the rest will sort itself out.
Click to expand...
Plus 1^^^^^^^^^^^
 
AKA....the Mission Debrief

Chris Hill said:
Reading this forum, talking to other pilots, etc IS training and is the one f the cheapest ways to get training. BUT it takes motivation to do it. Coming up with personal limits appropriate for your level of training and experience IS THE CORRECT way to apply what you've learned in order to be safe.
Click to expand...

I completely concur. In the Air Force (and the Navy too methinks) we call it a debrief. In fighter land, we spend 2-4 hours planning for every 1 hour we intend to fly. Step, start, and taxi take 30-60 minutes (that 2.5 to 5 hours on the running clock). The training sortie takes 1-2 hours, or more if it involves aerial refueling. 40 minutes after landing we all make it into the debriefing room. We're about at the 6 hour point.

Now, we take that same amount of time reconstructing the sortie. Recapping the briefing, step, start, taxi, takeoff, landing, and taxi-in should only take about 20 minutes. THe rest of that time is spent going over EVERY detail of the mission. The Debrief is where the day's learning takes place.

By the same token, competent aviators discussing at length the learning points, "holding the baby up to the light from every angle"...well, Chris is right. That IS training, especially if we're learning from somebody else's experiences. But it isn't for the faint of heart: Chris is again right that it takes motivation to (a) delve into the effort, and (b) it takes cojones to bare our mistakes so that others may learn. In our USAF debriefs, the name and rank comes off...

(Doug, can I say "cojones" on this site?)
 
Look, the fact of the matter is, there are plenty of pilots who feel they are just fine at their level of skill. They will parrot the "license to learn" mantra, but only if it involves discussing someone else's mistakes on a forum. Some months ago after having my fill of one of these "what should we do?" threads, I put out a challenge for everyone to pick one thing that made them uncomfortable, master it, and report back to the group...

...Nothing but crickets from the hand wringers.

I guess everyone thinks they have this "flying thing" nailed.

Well here's my take: I know licenced pilots who are uncomfortable with stalls to the point of near hysteria. Still others who can't perform a 60 degree bank, maintain level flight at MCA, know that the rudder picks up a wing in a stall, etc, etc, etc. These pilots are UNFIT to fly passengers to the Sunday morning pankake breakfast, yet some of them visit this forum and crow about the "moron" who dished out of a low altitude roll or ran out of gas in IMC!

So until we are able to admit our deficiencies AND ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, this thread and the scores like it are just a waste of time.
 
This thread made me curious about what the actual accident stats say, so I went and looked it all up on the NTSB aviation accident database.

From 6 Mar 2012 to 6 Mar 2013, there 180 EAB accidents reported to the NTSB. 41 accidents resulted in 50 fatalities. Of all of these accidents, a Van's RV made up 50 accidents for 5 fatal accidents resulting 7 fatalities (only 1 of which was due to bafoonery. the rest were just accidents). I'd say thats really not too bad...

Maybe the reason we dont see continual reduction in accident rates is due to reaching the practical limit of accident reduction demand. Sort of like diminishing returns if you are familiar with that term. For those who arent, an example of what I mean goes like this...why dont airliners have an emergency escape window for each passenger? They could build a plane with enough thrust to fly and durability to do it, so why not do it? The reason is that its just not worth the $$$ to provide that level of safety. Similarly, maybe GA is at that point where the return on reducing the accident rate further is just not worth it...

From that point of view, I would be inclined to agree: whats the point of this thread?

From a safety point of view, provided someone had the motivation to hold legitimate discussion, why not go to the NTSB and find an RV accident where the NTSB determined probable cause and one in which someone might learn something through discussion, and post it as safety discussion topic of the week?
 
Chris Hill said:
...From a safety point of view, provided someone had the motivation to hold legitimate discussion, why not go to the NTSB and find an RV accident where the NTSB determined probable cause and one in which someone might learn something through discussion, and post it as safety discussion topic of the week?...
Click to expand...

Yeah, we could talk about it...

...or would safety be better served if we actually practiced some of the things we're rusty with... Say on our NEXT flight?

As they say: "actions speak louder than words".
 
I agree! Discussion would serve no purpose if the knowledge were never implemented.

I'm coming up on 30 years of aviation in my life this year. I look back at what I know now versus what I knew when I started, and I just don't know how I made it this far in one piece. Then I remember there are people starting out today with the same experience I had 30 years ago! Would it not be worth a discussion to provide the opportunity to learn and then go apply?

I'm not a fan of increased regulation. I'm not a fan of policing other pilots. I AM a fan of educating so people can make smart decisions, or at least a better decision than they would have otherwise made.
 
I looked at the NTSB data; I cannot tell which accident was "baffoonery" and which were "just accidents".
Was it the "IMC prevailed, no flight plan filed"?
Was it the MD who was self-medicating?
Was it the "hit the ground while turning base to final" while lining up for the downwind runway?
Was it the formation flight which collided on the runway?
Or the spin for unexplained reasons?
 
It was the "buzzed a lake and made a sharp turn and stalled and crashed." This one I think: WPR12LA146. Gross baffoonery in my book...

Plenty of decisions/techniques worthy of discussion though...
 
take the microscope off of the accidents

People have been using aspirin and its chemical relatives to mitigate pain for thousands of years. In 1971 a scientist published a paper finally explaining the mechanism associated with aspirin's obvious efficacy. By 1971 the causes of headaches were still mostly not very well understood. But none of that stopped people from using this intervention to fix what ailed them before the causes or the mechanism of the treatment was well explained.

We already understand enough about the causes and circumstances of air mishaps to be able to mitigate them. What we need to do is just figure out which kind of aspirin works best, and then use it. We need to move away from the accident microscope and on to the study of the safety and efficacy of various interventions.

And before someone objects that "this will just limit our freedom", please answer me this: The airlines had a hideous safety record back in the day, but they figured out (with some help) how to fix it and to a fare-thee-well; which freedom did they sacrifice in doing that?

Don't get me wrong; I've read thousands of NTSB finding summaries, and I recommend the same to all, including passengers, and I like numbers and statistics as much as the next flyer, but we need to graduate from navel-gazing to solving the problem.

What will fix us? If you say "nothing, it's hopeless" you are wrong. If you say "giving up our freedoms" I don't think that is either necessary or helpful in this case.

Answers, please!
 
It seems to me that the FAA should change their focus from enforcement of a lot of the draconian regulation to emphasize safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top