On Mar 22, 1:25*pm, toad wrote:
On Mar 22, 2:53*pm, bildan wrote:









On Mar 22, 11:36*am, toad wrote:

On Mar 22, 11:49*am, bildan wrote:

Again, training and experience is critically important.

billdan,

Are you missing the point on purpose, not understanding or just trying
to have a different discussion ?

Neither the referenced article nor my post disagree with the statement
"training and experience is critically important". *But we are making
the statement "there are some risks not mitigable by training".

If you are trying to emphasize the importance of training, please do
so without diminshing the posibility of other issues.

Thanks
Todd Smith
3S

I'm not missing the point - I'm going right at it.

Exactly what issues are not 'mitigable' by training? * I'm saying
there are no such issues. *All safety issues are addressable by
training. That's the fundamental premise of safety training.

My hot button is the prevalent but very wrong headed statement,
"Soaring is dangerous and there's nothing we can do about it".
Soaring isn't inherently dangerous of itself but human factors such as
lack of skill and knowledge can certainly make it so. *Training and
experience is how we address human factors.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, I guess you are missing the point. Which is:

"Aircraft design issues can not be addressed by pilot training."

Todd

What!? Of course design issues are addressed by pilot training. It's
called a type checkout. Certain designs do have idiosyncrasies and
they're thoroughly covered in the checkout.

If you referring to structural or handling deficiencies that somehow
made through the certification process without being detected - those
are incredibly rare to the point of being almost non-existent. If
they do make it through the certification process, they'll lead to an
AD which requires all affected aircraft to be modified. With those
systems in place, the odds any individual pilot will be the
unfortunate one to find them are vanishingly small.