Safety, yet again...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message

Why would you want to?

Because I'm interesting in *my* probability of dying in a plane crash,
not anyone elses.

Since I:
snip a-n

...I conclude that I may eliminate many of the "stupid pilot tricks"
from my personal risk assessment.

Trouble is, I don't know how to do that...

Your list is comprehensive and no doubt helpful, with the exception of items
D and E, which taken together I consider a net negative. Be that as it may,
you're doing a creditable job of reducing risk, and that in itself serves to
markedly reduce your risk, the theory being that if you personally take
responsibility for every phase of decision making, and you know that you can
greatly control the degree to which you screw up, then you can reduce your
risk to a very low point indeed. And keep it such for a long time.

Where the process breaks down is he when you operate and fly, it is in a
world (GA) that offers you precious little backstop, as you try to reduce
your personal risk assessment to something akin to a commercial airline.
YOU (meaning you and/or Mary) monitor, manage, plan, fly, maintain
(throughsupervision), fuel, monitor, repair, and replace every aspect of
your plane and your flying, with some assistance from a mechanic, a fuel
guy, and perhaps some friends at the airport. When I was flying (or anyone
else in an airline environment) I had two other pilots in the cockpit with
me, or inspecting the plane for me, and we were all flying 12-17 days a
month; a loadmaster and cargo handling crew, or sometimes 5-15 FAs; a
dozen ramp people and mechanics working around the plane on every flight,
all of them - 30-35 people or more - keeping an eye out for anything that
didn't look right, plus ops planners, dispatchers, maintenance schedulers, a
training department, and a bunch of others behind the scenes all managing
this and a hundred other airplanes to make sure that when the plane was at
the gate, it was ready and in good shape to go, and that the pilots flying
it were as ready as they could be. And still there would be minor mistakes,
mechanical failures that delayed things, oversights, etc., usually none of
them serious, but there none the less.

It is this backstopping infrastructure that gives the airline environment
the safety record it enjoys. Its not just great pilots (although we'd all
like to take some credit :-))- its the whole show: if I overlooked
something, there were 2 other people looking over my shoulder in the
cockpit. If anyone anywhere in the process overlooked something, there were
always a number of other folks somewhere whose job included double checking
the first guy.

This is an environment that GA does not, and simply cannot, provide. The
bottom line is that when you fly, you're doing damn near everything
yourself, and in that environment, the probability of mistakes slipping
through will always be higher. You can reduce the risk through exceptional
vigilance, but imo you can never individually duplicate the type of safety
net that an airline provides.

The point is this: what can you do? and what will you do in response?
What is the real world benefit to you if you calculate that you can decrease
your fatality probability from 1 in 73,187 flights (GA) to 1 in 581,395
flights (scheduled 135)? How many total flights have you made up to now?
When will you likely reach 73,187? Even at an average 3 hours per flight
you'd have to log over 24,000 hours of GA flying to get close to that point.
Then what? Will you stop flying because the so-called "law of averages" is
now working against you?

The fact that you think of these things, and take steps to make your flying
as safe as you can means that you probably *are* making your flying as safe
as you can. You don't need to attach a probability number to that, because
it would be meaningless in real world terms. You're doing the best you can,
which is a hell of a lot better than most of your GA compatriots, judging by
the numbers you will undoubtedly beat.

Your list is comprehensive and no doubt helpful, with the exception of items
D and E, which taken together I consider a net negative.

Interesting that you would say that, John. Why is not flying IFR, and
not flying at night "taken together a net negative"?


The point is this: what can you do? and what will you do in response?
What is the real world benefit to you if you calculate that you can decrease
your fatality probability from 1 in 73,187 flights (GA) to 1 in 581,395
flights (scheduled 135)?

There is no real world benefit -- it's an intellectual exercise. I
would continue to fly regardless of the risk -- but one of my family
members has inquired, and I would like to be able to share some real
numbers with her.

Preferably, I would like to share numbers that include: "If you don't
fly drunk, the statisics improve to 'x'..." ,or, "If you don't run out
of gas, the statistics improve to 'Y'..."

Unfortunately, there seems to be no scientific way to arrive at an
answer. (Which, if you think about it, is really quite amazing. What
the hell do we pay all those FAA bureaucrats to DO all day, anyway?)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

...I conclude that I may eliminate many of the "stupid pilot tricks"
from my personal risk assessment.

Can you really? I recall one of your particular Sun-and-Fun return trip
write-ups (perhaps last year) that had a moment that could be classified as
a stupid pilot trick, namely continuing VFR into deteriorating weather and
scud running.

Here it is:
http://tinyurl.com/n3ptz

My point is simply to suggest that no matter the experience, we all have
engaged in some piloting behaviour that could be classified as a "stupid
pilot trick." To suggest that you can eliminate SPTs from your personal
risk assessment is ignoring that which you do seem to still possess in some
small degree.

Instead of admitting that types of accidents can be eliminated from my risk
assessment, I still use them to motivate me not to make them.

--
Peter

...I conclude that I may eliminate many of the "stupid pilot tricks"
from my personal risk assessment.

Can you really? I recall one of your particular Sun-and-Fun return trip
write-ups (perhaps last year) that had a moment that could be classified as
a stupid pilot trick, namely continuing VFR into deteriorating weather and
scud running.

Um, if you actually READ my account, we performed a 180 and landed the
plane. I believe this is the prescribed procedure to follow when one
runs into deteriorating weather?

Instead of admitting that types of accidents can be eliminated from my risk
assessment, I still use them to motivate me not to make them.

That is obvious, and goes without saying. Any other reading of my
"eliminating them from my personal risk assessment" is a
misconstruction of my intent.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Certainly avoiding many of the SPTs will greatly increase your safety.

Sadly, many of those who crashed in a SPT were respected by their
fellows as a good and careful pilot who never did SPTs. It makes one wonder.

So while those who regularly perform SPTs are more likely to crash, it
appears that any pilot can suffer a "brain fart" and do an SPT. For
some it's the first and last time.

http://www.cyberair.tv/tower/faa/jtm...t/content.html
I found this on the net a few years ago and used it for a report about
Pilot Judgment for my EAA Chapter. Even though it's titled "Judgment
Training Manual for Student Pilots" I believe that a review of the
material would be useful to any pilot.


"Don't just do something, sit there!"

- John Ousterhout -



Jay Honeck wrote:
Since I:

a) Usually fly with two pilots on board
b) Have a well-oiled cockpit resource management scheme in place
c) Always top off the tanks after each flight
d) Never fly IFR
e) Never fly at night
f) Never "buzz" anyone's house
g) Never skip a pre-flight inspection
h) Personally supervise the maintenance of my plane
i) Don't let anyone else fly my plane
j) Rarely fly in mountains
k) Fly twice per week, on average
l) Maintain excellent health
m) Don't "skate" on maintenance
n) Keep the plane in a locked hangar

...I conclude that I may eliminate many of the "stupid pilot tricks"
from my personal risk assessment.

Trouble is, I don't know how to do that...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"John Ousterhout" wrote:

Certainly avoiding many of the SPTs will greatly increase your safety.

Sadly, many of those who crashed in a SPT were respected by their fellows
as a good and careful pilot who never did SPTs. It makes one wonder.

So while those who regularly perform SPTs are more likely to crash, it
appears that any pilot can suffer a "brain fart" and do an SPT. For some
it's the first and last time.

Bingo.

Ever met a pilot who didn't think he or she was cautious and prudent about
flying?

Private GA flying is dangerous. Period. Anyone who convinces himself
otherwise is engaging in self deception, and is thereby increasing his risk
level.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Jay Honeck wrote:
Does anyone know how to extract the "stupid pilot trick" fatalities
(I.E.: Running out of gas; Flying into terrain; Buzzing your
girlfriend's house; etc.) from this statistic?

Why would you want to?


Because I'm interesting in *my* probability of dying in a plane crash,
not anyone elses.

Since I:

a) Usually fly with two pilots on board
b) Have a well-oiled cockpit resource management scheme in place
c) Always top off the tanks after each flight
d) Never fly IFR
e) Never fly at night
f) Never "buzz" anyone's house
g) Never skip a pre-flight inspection
h) Personally supervise the maintenance of my plane
i) Don't let anyone else fly my plane
j) Rarely fly in mountains
k) Fly twice per week, on average
l) Maintain excellent health
m) Don't "skate" on maintenance
n) Keep the plane in a locked hangar

Make sure you add don't fly in marginal weather, near(within 20 miles)
of convective weather.

...I conclude that I may eliminate many of the "stupid pilot tricks"
from my personal risk assessment.

Trouble is, I don't know how to do that...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Margy Natalie" wrote:


Make sure you add don't fly ...(within 20 miles) of convective weather.

A nice rule, but down here in Thunderstorm Alley it would keep you on the
ground a lot.

http://www.weatherpages.com/variety/thunderstorms.html

Where CBs are an almost daily event 5 months of the year, one has to be a
bit more discriminating about what constitutes a really dangerous storm, or
one's flying will be severely restricted.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
Does anyone know how to extract the "stupid pilot trick" fatalities
(I.E.: Running out of gas; Flying into terrain; Buzzing your
girlfriend's house; etc.) from this statistic?

Why would you want to?

Because I'm interesting in *my* probability of dying in a plane crash,
not anyone elses.

Since I:

a) Usually fly with two pilots on board
b) Have a well-oiled cockpit resource management scheme in place
c) Always top off the tanks after each flight
d) Never fly IFR
e) Never fly at night
f) Never "buzz" anyone's house
g) Never skip a pre-flight inspection
h) Personally supervise the maintenance of my plane
i) Don't let anyone else fly my plane
j) Rarely fly in mountains
k) Fly twice per week, on average
l) Maintain excellent health
m) Don't "skate" on maintenance
n) Keep the plane in a locked hangar

...I conclude that I may eliminate many of the "stupid pilot tricks"
from my personal risk assessment.

Trouble is, I don't know how to do that...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I think that your question proves that you are at least thinking about your
safety and risk management which is good (and more than many do). However I
suggest that it might be more useful to concentrate on our personal risk
management rather than attempting a quantified personal risk assessment.

I think that we will agree with the NTSB that most aircraft accidents are
due to pilot error and I would submit that a large portion of those errors
are due to human factors that (being human) we all have to some degree. In
this case suggesting that you are not likely to commit SPT seems to be
indicative of what in human factors training is an example of the hazardous
thought pattern of 'invulnerability'. It is akin to 'it can't happen to
me', and while it may provide us with some comfort I would suggest that it
is the false 'fat, dumb and happy' feeling that comes just before 'oh oh'
and 'oh ****'.

While I am sure that you learned a great deal from your SNF trip I think you
must agree that sections of your trip story were starting to read like an
accident report. We always say that an accident is usually the result of a
cascading chain of events and our task as pilots is to break the chain as
early as possible. I would submit that in this discussion the way to break
the first link in this chain is to admit to ourselves that we are all
capable of SPT.

Here in Canada human factors training is required as part of the PPL, CPL
and the ATPL ground training and I suspect is also required in the US. In
an earlier post John Ousterhout provided a link to a website that seems to
have some very good material http://www.cyberair.tv/tower/faa/jtm/index.html
Transport Canada publishes two excellent books 'Human Factors for Aviation'
'Basic Handbook TP12863E' and 'Advanced Handbook TP12864E' which are the
texts usually used for ground instruction, there is also an instructors
guide but I do not have the cat#. Unfortunately TC is not as enlightened as
the FAA and AFAIK these manuals are not available on the net as our cheap
government expects us to buy them in paper form. While looking for a link
on the TC site I did stumble on this which may be of some interest
http://www.transportcanada.ca/CivilA...tIII/human.htm
http://www.transportcanada.ca/CivilA...rtIII/menu.htm

I would respectfully suggest that you add human factors to your personal
recurrent training program. Like Pogo said "We have seen the enemy and it
is us."

Happy landings,

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
. ..

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message

Does anyone know how to extract the "stupid pilot trick" fatalities
(I.E.: Running out of gas; Flying into terrain; Buzzing your
girlfriend's house; etc.) from this statistic?

Why would you want to? You would then present a false picture of GA,
deliberately skewed to make it appear safer and more responsible than it
truly is.

On that basis, you might want to eliminate the stupid driver trick too, like
DUI, not wearing seat belts etc.