Are pilots really good or just lucky???

When I read something like this:

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/...2/A03A0022.asp

....I worry a lot.

We have a pilot with 110 successfully Atlantic crossings and 5000 hours,
taking a plane...IFR... 2000 miles across the North Atlantic into the
Canadian sub-Arctic in the dead of winter...

The plane has no Cabin heat.
The plane has no working turn coordinator.
The plane's ELT battery is out of date.
That doesn't really matter because the ELT switch was turned to "OFF",
anyway.
The plane does not have enough fuel to reach alternate + 45... barely enough
to reach alternate.
That doesn't really matter, because the alternate was actual and forecast
below limits anyway.
That doesn't matter either, because the plane was not equipped with the
necessary equipment to accomplish any of the published approaches at the
alternate, anyway.

In spite of all that, if she could have lasted just 6 more miles, it would
have been another ho-hum crossing.

.... but the AI gyro gave up with 6 NM to go, and with no Turn
coordinator...in IMC..., she became a statistic on the ice of Hamilton
Inlet.

Which brings up the question.... is this kind of decision-making truly an
anomaly.... or is it the norm more often than we would like to think?

Do a whole ton of flights stay out of the Safety Board's reports more by
good luck than good management?