When do you use autopilots?

Judah writes:

When will you learn to trust airplanes?

When the statistics show that they've become trustworthy.

That is already true for most large airliners, but not for GA
aircraft. I suspect that it's not possible to make them completely
reliable and still keep price points affordable enough to ensure
sales.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Judah wrote:

The disturbing comment from Manix is that GA aircraft are less safe because
of "their questionable maintenance records."


Ha! We've seen that applied to large jets too. Remember the seat belt
holding the fan blade picutres. About 1990 I went shopping for a 172
(and it kinda grew an extra engine), I found all kinds of aluminium
sins. 2000 hour airplanes with foot holes worn in origional carpets. And
around the airport I see all kinds of things that shouldn't be
happening. Everybody means well enough and much of the mods happening
are basically okay but some things that shouldn't happen also. People
getting carried away. Then again on the other end, operators would not
snag something because they don't have maintenance, and can't do the
take off so the part fails in the air and they can continue to the next
stop.

Design can only do so much, what people do with it trumps all else I guess.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Judah writes:

When will you learn to trust airplanes?

When the statistics show that they've become trustworthy.

That is already true for most large airliners, but not for GA
aircraft. I suspect that it's not possible to make them completely
reliable and still keep price points affordable enough to ensure
sales.

Can you document a statistic that shows what percentage of aviation accidents
are caused by Pilot Error vs. Equipment Failure?

I think the statistics would show that it's safer to trust airplanes than it
is to trust pilots.

Judah writes:

I think the statistics would show that it's safer to trust airplanes than it
is to trust pilots.

If they are well maintained, that's probably true. But it's safer to
trust uncomputerized instruments than computerized instruments,
too--and for the same reasons.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
Judah wrote:

I think the statistics would show that it's safer to trust airplanes than it
is to trust pilots.

sigh statistics don't show safety (consider that no one actually knows the
distribution function). But applying accepted safety analysis techniques
would likely show airplanes can be trusted more than pilots. Here's one
issue with that: what is the reliability of any specific pilot?

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

Bob Noel writes:

sigh statistics don't show safety (consider that no one actually knows the
distribution function). But applying accepted safety analysis techniques
would likely show airplanes can be trusted more than pilots. Here's one
issue with that: what is the reliability of any specific pilot?

The human variable always has the largest range.

I'm sure there are pilots who could safely fly a broken washing
machine back into the airport, and would survive just about any type
of situation conceivable. There are also pilots who would kill
themselves in every one of those same situations, thanks to a serious
lack of skill or prudence. The only variable that changes is the
pilot. So pilots make a big difference.

I daresay that the number of accidents in which no pilot could have
possibly saved the day is very small. Similarly, the number of
accidents or in-flight incidents that even the worst pilot could
handle is also very small. So it usually depends on who is at the
controls when bad things happen. Indeed, depending on the pilot,
things that should be routine can become deadly, and vice versa..

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
I daresay that the number of accidents in which no pilot could have
possibly saved the day is very small. Similarly, the number of
accidents or in-flight incidents that even the worst pilot could
handle is also very small. [...]

Although this sounds reasonable on its face, I think it misses the
point. It's not about handling the incident, it's about not having the
incident to begin with.

There are a number of accidents where no pilot could save the day.
Instrument failure, pressurization failure, engine falling off, these
are all famous accident causes.

If you leave aside those catastrophic causes, then the majority of
accidents are not really about being able to save the day once the
emergency exists. They're about avoiding the situation in the first
place. VFR pilot flight into IMC, or pilot into thunderstorms, or
trying to stretch low fuel.

Headed to bed now, but you get the idea I hope.
Kev

Kev writes:

Although this sounds reasonable on its face, I think it misses the
point. It's not about handling the incident, it's about not having the
incident to begin with.

There are a number of accidents where no pilot could save the day.
Instrument failure, pressurization failure, engine falling off, these
are all famous accident causes.

If you leave aside those catastrophic causes, then the majority of
accidents are not really about being able to save the day once the
emergency exists. They're about avoiding the situation in the first
place. VFR pilot flight into IMC, or pilot into thunderstorms, or
trying to stretch low fuel.

Headed to bed now, but you get the idea I hope.

Yes. I agree to a point, but there are also circumstances that only
become incidents when the pilot is not competent. For example, a very
steep turn may carry risks with it that a good pilot can understand
and deal with, whereas these same risks in the same turn might be
beyond the capacity of a lesser pilot. Thus, the good pilot makes a
safe, steep turn, and it is not necessary for him to avoid such turns.
The bad pilot makes a mistake in such a turn and it becomes an
incident, or an accident.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:


Yes. I agree to a point, but there are also circumstances that only
become incidents when the pilot is not competent.

Unlock your brain and let it think.

The Visitor writes:

Unlock your brain and let it think.

In other words, you disagree.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.