Breaking a plane

[cpw]

One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
damage. Is it common or unusual?
CPW

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

cpw wrote:
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?


I don't know about other guys but I've had a prop strike into turf taxiing on a
grass strip with a C-182. I've also totaled a Lance and dinged up a C-210 that
lived to fly again; both after dead stick landings.

Don't stand next to me in a lightning storm, if you know what I mean.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Bob Noel]

In article . com>,
"cpw" > wrote:

> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?

Define "long time pilots"

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Jay Honeck]

> Is it common or unusual?

We're not exactly long-term, but Mary and I haven't busted anything
yet, in 12 years and 1500+ hours...

(Knocking on wood, with my fingers crossed, and a rabbit's foot in my
pocket...)

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[John[_9_]]

Interesting question. I have little flying experience myself but as an
A&P I have seen more than a few accident aftermaths, though not as many
as you might think. I realize you're not looking for a systematic or
organized approach to this but I have to wonder what about the accident
prone versus the fortunate? I know some long time pilots with
thousands of hours over decades with no accidents at all and some who
have had major repairs to pilot induced damage several times in a few
years. Go figure.

John Dupre'


cpw wrote:
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?
> CPW

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

cpw wrote:
> This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?

Bad ju-ju to answer that... <G>

[Thomas Borchert]

RN,

> Don't stand next to me in a lightning storm, if you know what I mean.
>

Is it the numbers? (if you don't watch "Lost", just ignore my comment)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[[email protected]]

I have been flying 23 years and so far not a single ding on anything..
Of course I do fly the "beast"and the day is still young.. <G>

Ben
www.haaspowerair.com
cpw wrote:
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?
> CPW

[Gene Seibel]

I've had two incidents in 30 years.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.


cpw wrote:
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?
> CPW

[Ron Wanttaja]

On 27 Oct 2006 03:37:37 -0700, "cpw" > wrote:

> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?

"It ain't the years...it's the mileage."

36 years of flying, ~20+ years of ownership, nothing to speak of (yet) but my
total time isn't all that high. We've got a guy in my EAA chapter who has
crashed four times in 50 years...three due to mechanical problems (including a
case of jammed controls) and once when landing in unexpectedly-deep snow.

Ron Wanttaja

[Robert M. Gary]

cpw wrote:
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?
> CPW

I've never had an accident like you described but I've hit the wing on
a couple of occasions. Once in a vary narrow field in Mexico trying to
turn a Mooney (very, very low wing) around at the end of the runway.
Once while turning in a 172 hitting my own car window with the wing tip
(while a pilot friend of mine was standing there spotting me).
I watched my plane get crushed by a big truck backing into it, not sure
if that counts though.

-Robert

[Steph]

"cpw" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?
> CPW
>

I destroyed a C150 on my second solo as a student............

[Brian[_1_]]

As with most of these types of questions, the answers are always more
complicated than we would like to think.

The guy that will impress me is the flight instructor that has over
1000 hrs of Tailwheel instruction given to primary students that has
never had an incident. This guy will probabaly have over 5000 Take offs
and landings in tailwheel aircraft while letting and inexpirenced pilot
handle the controls.

The guys that flys only tri-cycle gear aircraft and most of his time is
enroute flying doesn't impress me near as much as the guys the fly in
the pattern for hours on end in varity of aircraft.


Jay Honeck wrote:
> > Is it common or unusual?
>
> We're not exactly long-term, but Mary and I haven't busted anything
> yet, in 12 years and 1500+ hours...
>
> (Knocking on wood, with my fingers crossed, and a rabbit's foot in my
> pocket...)
>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter R.]

Brian > wrote:

> The guys that flys only tri-cycle gear aircraft and most of his time is
> enroute flying doesn't impress me near as much as the guys the fly in
> the pattern for hours on end in varity of aircraft.

Really. Given that weather-related accidents make up a large percentage of
NTSB statistics, those who fly a lot of x/c will encounter much more
challenging weather and weather decision making than the pilot who never
leaves the pattern.


--
Peter

[Grumman-581[_3_]]

One gyrocopter converted into what could probably best be described as a
modern art sculpture... One Grumman still flying, albeit with minor hangar
rash from its days in a communal hangar...

[Brian[_1_]]

We were talking mostly about incidents which I think are a lot more
prevalent than the serious accidents or fatalities that make up the
majority of weather related accidents.

A look at the NTSB really only shows accidents and a few incidents. A
lot more incidents occur than are reported to the NTSB and I know only
some of the ones reported even make it to the NTSB website.

I know of a 20,000 hr 747 pilot that will admit a large majority of
that 20,000 hrs was spent sleeping in the crew bunk.

I also know a 20,000 Crop Duster pilot and instructor that I doubt
slept more than a few minutes of that 20,000 hrs and he has had his
share of incidents. That he is alive to tell about it a testament to
his piloting abilities.

Brian

Peter R. wrote:
> Brian > wrote:
>
> > The guys that flys only tri-cycle gear aircraft and most of his time is
> > enroute flying doesn't impress me near as much as the guys the fly in
> > the pattern for hours on end in varity of aircraft.
>
> Really. Given that weather-related accidents make up a large percentage of
> NTSB statistics, those who fly a lot of x/c will encounter much more
> challenging weather and weather decision making than the pilot who never
> leaves the pattern.
>
>
> --
> Peter

[Al G[_1_]]

"cpw" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
> damage. Is it common or unusual?
> CPW


Let's see,
6300+ Logged PIC from Quickie to LR24
2000+ dual given
1100+ Military crew
35 years, 30 as CFI, II, MI
Taildragger/Basic acro 200 hr
7 engine fails on 6 a/c, all landed on paved runways

Never had a ding, dent, damage, incident, so far...


Al G

[Al G[_1_]]

"Al G" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cpw" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
>> prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
>> course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
>> how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
>> I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
>> damage. Is it common or unusual?
>> CPW
>
>
> Let's see,
> 6300+ Logged PIC from Quickie to LR24
> 2000+ dual given
> 1100+ Military crew
> 35 years, 30 as CFI, II, MI
> Taildragger/Basic acro 200 hr
> 7 engine fails on 6 a/c, all landed on paved runways
>
> Never had a ding, dent, damage, incident, so far...
>
>
> Al G
>
Oops, I did have this little hang glider schmuck. Does that count?

Al G

[Stache]

Al G
Oops, I did have this little hang glider schmuck. Does that count?

Hand glider don't count they are a vehicle.

I see a lot of incidents and accidents because of the line of work I am
in. Is there a pattern leading up to them? Yes, it has to do with
ones ability and decision-making.

The FAA pushed recurrent training through the wings program and when
incidents or accident happen the FAA will want to know if the pilot
attend any wings training in the last three years. Most who have
problems have not attended any training and don't seem to fly often
enough to stay sharp on emergency procedures.

Having incident or accident does not make you a bad pilot. There are a
lot of factors that lead up to an incident/accident. Strangely as it
seems when something does go wrong and the FAA looks at the pilot and
aircraft records there seems to be a tail tail sign of something going
wrong.

Having lots of hours such as a airline captain does not guarantee your
won't have a problem in a GA aircraft, it happens all to often. I
don't have an answer to the problem other that it does and will
happen to each of us. It is a risk we assume each time we climb in the
seat, but we can cut the risk with additional training and talking
about it such as on the forum.

Stache