Reducing the Accident Rate

Dan Luke wrote:

Unless we want to have more stringent rules that further restrict what
private pilots can do, I can't think of a way we can reach the less
safety conscious members of the pilot population, unless it's with
heat-seeking missiles.

Maybe. But I'd start with a different question: why don't those that don't
attend WINGs programs (and the like) attend WINGs programs (and the like)?
I find myself astonished that so many don't (is the 80-90% number
accurate?).

Perhaps I'm just lucky, in that I'm located in an area where seminars are
plentiful and frequent. Attending seminars was just a natural thing to do,
even if only as an opportunity to hang out with pilots. Perhaps this isn't
so everywhere?

Why else not attend?

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...

Why else not attend?

I think there is a reasonable subset of pilots who frankly enjoy a bit of
danger; these pilots may be hard to reach in a safety seminar.

Have you ever asked around your airport to see the % of pilots who ride
motorcycles? The percentage is astoundingly high. I think this gives a
bit of perspective as to the risk management profile of some pilots.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

In article , "Richard Kaplan"
wrote:

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...

Why else not attend?

I think there is a reasonable subset of pilots who frankly enjoy a bit of
danger; these pilots may be hard to reach in a safety seminar.

Have you ever asked around your airport to see the % of pilots who ride
motorcycles? The percentage is astoundingly high. I think this gives a
bit of perspective as to the risk management profile of some pilots.

hmmmm, I've attended most of the Wings seminars in the local area
when I can. I also attend the aeroclub's monthly safety meetings
even though I don't have to maintain currency in club aircraft.
I recently bought a (small) motorcycle - but only after
passing a rider safety course.

I'm wondering what riding a motorcycle reveals...

--
Bob Noel

Bob Noel wrote:

Have you ever asked around your airport to see the % of pilots who ride
motorcycles? The percentage is astoundingly high. I think this gives a
bit of perspective as to the risk management profile of some pilots.

Is management the same as avoidance? The layman probably wouldn't say
so. The goal isn't part of the "management" equation. How you get there is.


Jack

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 19:59:22 -0400, "Richard Kaplan"
wrote:



"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
gonline.com...

Why else not attend?

I think there is a reasonable subset of pilots who frankly enjoy a bit of
danger; these pilots may be hard to reach in a safety seminar.

Have you ever asked around your airport to see the % of pilots who ride
motorcycles? The percentage is astoundingly high. I think this gives a
bit of perspective as to the risk management profile of some pilots.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com


That is an interesting comment. I have driven motorcycles for 35
years and have been flying for 2 years. I attend every Wings (or
other) safety seminar that I can. I think my years of motorcycle
riding have predisposed me to a safety concious attitude. You are
correct, I believe, that the percentage of motorcycle riders in the
pilot community is greater than it is in the general population but I
suspect that many of those riders are also very safety concious prior
to becoming pilots. The question that I would like to know the answer
to is this; is the percentage of motorcycle driving pilots that
attends safety seminars different than the percentage of motorcycle
driving pilots that do not. I'm not sure that there are any valid
conclusions that can be drawn here.
Rich Russell
P.S. Jay, help me out here.

Richard Russell wrote:

That is an interesting comment. I have driven motorcycles for 35
years and have been flying for 2 years. I attend every Wings (or
other) safety seminar that I can. I think my years of motorcycle
riding have predisposed me to a safety concious attitude.

You *have* to have a safety concious attitude to survive riding bikes for 35 years.
That, plus an accurate understanding that everybody else is trying to kill you.

George Patterson
In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault.
In Tennessee, it's evangelism.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:12:41 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:



Richard Russell wrote:

That is an interesting comment. I have driven motorcycles for 35
years and have been flying for 2 years. I attend every Wings (or
other) safety seminar that I can. I think my years of motorcycle
riding have predisposed me to a safety concious attitude.

You *have* to have a safety concious attitude to survive riding bikes for 35 years.
That, plus an accurate understanding that everybody else is trying to kill you.

George Patterson
In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault.
In Tennessee, it's evangelism.

You're right on the money with that one. That's exactly the thought
that I ride with, that everyone I see has been given the assignment to
kill me. I commute daily into Philadelphia so a good bit of my riding
is in less than relaxing conditions. I think this mindset helped when
I began to fly. Other habits and skills that keep you alive on a bike
also help with flying, such as being weather concious, leaning into
turns and maintaining separation.
Rich Russell

"Richard Kaplan" wrote
I think there is a reasonable subset of pilots who frankly enjoy a bit of
danger

I think that subset includes 100% of all pilots that fly for fun
except for some total idiots.

Why do I make the exception? Well, it would take a total idiot not to
realize that every flight, regardless of the manner in which it is
conducted, means some danger. Further, since the flight is for fun
rather than a matter of necessity, the danger is unnecessary. Even if
the trip itself is made for good reason (rather than simply a $100
burger) almost any other means of making the trip is safer.

these pilots may be hard to reach in a safety seminar.

On the contrary - a bit of danger is one thing, but taking large
pointless risks is quite another. It is probably the pilots who are
most aware of the danger who are most careful about managing the
risks. But to reach these people, you have to offer something better
than "Just say no."

Have you ever asked around your airport to see the % of pilots who ride
motorcycles? The percentage is astoundingly high.

Why go that far? Any auto insurance company will tell you that the
safest, most risk-averse drivers are middle aged married women. How
many private pilots fit that profile? The percentage is astoundingly
low.

Aviation has inherent risk to it, and those people who are not
comfortable with the added risk soon leave aviation. Those who are
left are comfortable with it.

Michael

Michael wrote:

"Richard Kaplan" wrote
I think there is a reasonable subset of pilots who frankly enjoy a bit of
danger

I think that subset includes 100% of all pilots that fly for fun
except for some total idiots.

You exclude all those that recognize the risk, and accept the risk as
payment for the various benefits, but that would be even happier to gain
those benefits w/o the risk.

[...]
Aviation has inherent risk to it, and those people who are not
comfortable with the added risk soon leave aviation. Those who are
left are comfortable with it.

"Comfort" does not imply "enjoyment".

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote
You exclude all those that recognize the risk, and accept the risk as
payment for the various benefits, but that would be even happier to gain
those benefits w/o the risk.

I sometimes wonder how many of those there really are.

Think about how you feel when you pull off a landing with a lot of
gusty crosswind and squeak it on, right on target. Or when you make
an approach to minimums with the needle(s) dead centered all the way
and the runway is right there. Intellectually, you know that you just
completed an increased-risk operation - and what made it an
increased-risk operation was the increased degree of difficulty. But
you still feel good - you were faced with a challenge and you were up
to it. You wouldn't feel nearly as good making that approach/landing
in calm winds/CAVU.

How many pilots don't feel that way?

"Comfort" does not imply "enjoyment".

I wonder.

In any case - whether they enjoy it or not (and I think most do, at
some level) the fact that they are comfortable with a certain amount
of risk means that most pilots are not too interested in reducing that
risk if it means a reduction in capability. Just say no doesn't cut
it. To have acceptance and value, a safety seminar has to show you
how to reduce risk without reducing capability. That's much harder,
and in my opinion few safety seminars accomplish this. I think that's
why most people don't go.

Most (if not all) pilots I know have been to at least one. They
didn't come back because they were not impressed.

I think the real solution is to have safety seminars that actually
teach you to increase safety without decreasing capability. Then
people will come and pay attention. However, you don't accomplish an
increase in safety without a reduction in capability with rules - you
accomplish it with skill and knowledge. That means we need a very
different method for choosing the people who teach these safety
seminars.

Michael