scsmith
Well Known Member
Doug's safety missive stirred a lot of good discussion on a variety of topics. Paul suggested starting individual threads, so I thought I would add one on a topic not mentioned yet.
First, we all have some level of flying safety judgment. The idea of writing down where our personal boundaries lie is a great one - like a line in the sand, it puts the boundaries where you can see them, make decisions based on them, and, as Doug pointed out, make rational decisions about when to bend them.
A couple of 'rules' mentioned resonated with me. Flying single engine airplanes at night, and over water are both outside my personal normal op's rules.
I extend this to crossing rough, unlandable terrain when I can avoid it. Of course that one would be very limiting if I really stuck to it. Here's where some rational judgment makes you evaluate. The probability of something going wrong during any particular 15-minute period of cruising flight is pretty darn small, but not zero. This is part of the risk-level that we choose to accept. But if I can detour 5 minutes out of my way to follow a path that has some meadow, or clearcut, or big highway, rather than fly a route that takes me diagonally across a longer stretch of unlandable terrain, I will do it.
It just improves the odds. Why not improve the odds when we can?
So the point here is that some of my 'safety rules' are very gray rather than black and white, and I use judgment to weigh the benefits and mitigate risk when I'm in the gray band.
So this brings me to the main idea of my post. When, and how do we decide to bend our own rules? One classic 'bad' way to decide is the 'spur of the moment' impulse to do something, preceded by "hey, watch this". Another one that has killed a lot of pilots and passengers is "Get-home-itis".
This one is insidious because it also has a wide gray band. Judgment of how bad the conditions actually are is based on limited information, and how important it really is to get to the destination depends on circumstances.
Here is an example of a go/no-go decision I had to make recently. I had promised to take a colleague from work over to Fresno from San Jose to give a seminar presentation. 45 minutes flying time instead of a 3-hr drive. The day before the flight, the forecast for Saturday was for 50% chance of light rain and 2000-ft cloudbase. In Oregon, this might be considered a nice day! I am not instrument rated.
Those familiar with the south SF bay area know there are two highway routes out to the central valley with summits of about 1000--1200 ft. through the coastal mountains (the Diablo range) with ridges up to 4000 ft.
So here are the key points that factored into my decision:
1. If we stick to the plan and try to fly, there is some chance that the weather would be bad enough at some point on the route that we couldn't get through without stretching beyond my normal comfort threshold, and my colleague would not be able to keep her commitment to give the presentation. This would create pressure to bend my 'rules'.
2. As a high-time glider pilot, I'm more comfortable close to terrain than many, and I understand how to fly safely in the mountains. I am familiar with the terrain in this area, I'm 100% confident that I can fly through the 1200 ft pass with a 2000 ft or even 1750 ft cloudbase (meaning 500+ ft overcast)
3. As a low-time VFR-only power pilot, I am less comfortable around nasty weather than many. This is an odd thing really - I sometimes feel reluctant to fly my RV-8 where I would have no problem flying my glider.
4. There is no imperative reason to make this flight. I am just saving my colleague a 3-hr drive. If we make the decision early enough, she will be able to drive there. If we defer the decision to wait to see how the weather is in the morning, there is insufficient time to drive there and then we will have to fly, or she will miss her commitment.
So, this turned out to be an easy decision. I cancelled Friday night, and my colleague drove to Fresno Saturday morning. It turned out that it rained most of the day, and the cloud base did stay about 2000 ft all day. I am confident that if I HAD TO, I could have made that flight safely. But it made me examine my decision process and think about what circumstances MIGHT have made me decide differently. What if a friend or relative was injured or needed help urgently? What if I had promised to meet someone and flying was the only way to be on time? What if the cloudbase was 1500 ft instead of 2000 ft? What if the weather was 3500 scattered, but I needed to go at night? What if I found a small fuel leak while pre-flighting? What if weather was forecast to deteriorate further, so if I don't go now, I may not get home for days?
Each of these "what-if's", and others, present different risk-benefit trade-offs that would influence a decision of whether or not to bend my rules. A key point, I think, is to anticipate and avoid situations that would force a decision that you wouldn't normally make. If I fly somewhere on a trip, I keep the return schedule open and uncommitted (as best I can) so a weather or mechanical delay can be be accepted without too much stress.
Beyond that, each one of us has to make the risk-benefit decision based on our own judgment. Sadly, sometimes the outcome is bad, and others are left to wonder why someone decided to make their last flight.
First, we all have some level of flying safety judgment. The idea of writing down where our personal boundaries lie is a great one - like a line in the sand, it puts the boundaries where you can see them, make decisions based on them, and, as Doug pointed out, make rational decisions about when to bend them.
A couple of 'rules' mentioned resonated with me. Flying single engine airplanes at night, and over water are both outside my personal normal op's rules.
I extend this to crossing rough, unlandable terrain when I can avoid it. Of course that one would be very limiting if I really stuck to it. Here's where some rational judgment makes you evaluate. The probability of something going wrong during any particular 15-minute period of cruising flight is pretty darn small, but not zero. This is part of the risk-level that we choose to accept. But if I can detour 5 minutes out of my way to follow a path that has some meadow, or clearcut, or big highway, rather than fly a route that takes me diagonally across a longer stretch of unlandable terrain, I will do it.
It just improves the odds. Why not improve the odds when we can?
So the point here is that some of my 'safety rules' are very gray rather than black and white, and I use judgment to weigh the benefits and mitigate risk when I'm in the gray band.
So this brings me to the main idea of my post. When, and how do we decide to bend our own rules? One classic 'bad' way to decide is the 'spur of the moment' impulse to do something, preceded by "hey, watch this". Another one that has killed a lot of pilots and passengers is "Get-home-itis".
This one is insidious because it also has a wide gray band. Judgment of how bad the conditions actually are is based on limited information, and how important it really is to get to the destination depends on circumstances.
Here is an example of a go/no-go decision I had to make recently. I had promised to take a colleague from work over to Fresno from San Jose to give a seminar presentation. 45 minutes flying time instead of a 3-hr drive. The day before the flight, the forecast for Saturday was for 50% chance of light rain and 2000-ft cloudbase. In Oregon, this might be considered a nice day! I am not instrument rated.
Those familiar with the south SF bay area know there are two highway routes out to the central valley with summits of about 1000--1200 ft. through the coastal mountains (the Diablo range) with ridges up to 4000 ft.
So here are the key points that factored into my decision:
1. If we stick to the plan and try to fly, there is some chance that the weather would be bad enough at some point on the route that we couldn't get through without stretching beyond my normal comfort threshold, and my colleague would not be able to keep her commitment to give the presentation. This would create pressure to bend my 'rules'.
2. As a high-time glider pilot, I'm more comfortable close to terrain than many, and I understand how to fly safely in the mountains. I am familiar with the terrain in this area, I'm 100% confident that I can fly through the 1200 ft pass with a 2000 ft or even 1750 ft cloudbase (meaning 500+ ft overcast)
3. As a low-time VFR-only power pilot, I am less comfortable around nasty weather than many. This is an odd thing really - I sometimes feel reluctant to fly my RV-8 where I would have no problem flying my glider.
4. There is no imperative reason to make this flight. I am just saving my colleague a 3-hr drive. If we make the decision early enough, she will be able to drive there. If we defer the decision to wait to see how the weather is in the morning, there is insufficient time to drive there and then we will have to fly, or she will miss her commitment.
So, this turned out to be an easy decision. I cancelled Friday night, and my colleague drove to Fresno Saturday morning. It turned out that it rained most of the day, and the cloud base did stay about 2000 ft all day. I am confident that if I HAD TO, I could have made that flight safely. But it made me examine my decision process and think about what circumstances MIGHT have made me decide differently. What if a friend or relative was injured or needed help urgently? What if I had promised to meet someone and flying was the only way to be on time? What if the cloudbase was 1500 ft instead of 2000 ft? What if the weather was 3500 scattered, but I needed to go at night? What if I found a small fuel leak while pre-flighting? What if weather was forecast to deteriorate further, so if I don't go now, I may not get home for days?
Each of these "what-if's", and others, present different risk-benefit trade-offs that would influence a decision of whether or not to bend my rules. A key point, I think, is to anticipate and avoid situations that would force a decision that you wouldn't normally make. If I fly somewhere on a trip, I keep the return schedule open and uncommitted (as best I can) so a weather or mechanical delay can be be accepted without too much stress.
Beyond that, each one of us has to make the risk-benefit decision based on our own judgment. Sadly, sometimes the outcome is bad, and others are left to wonder why someone decided to make their last flight.
Last edited: