Breaking a plane

One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
damage. Is it common or unusual?
CPW

cpw wrote:
One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
damage. Is it common or unusual?


I don't know about other guys but I've had a prop strike into turf taxiing on a
grass strip with a C-182. I've also totaled a Lance and dinged up a C-210 that
lived to fly again; both after dead stick landings.

Don't stand next to me in a lightning storm, if you know what I mean.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

RN,

Don't stand next to me in a lightning storm, if you know what I mean.


Is it the numbers? (if you don't watch "Lost", just ignore my comment)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

In article .com,
"cpw" wrote:

how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
damage. Is it common or unusual?

Define "long time pilots"

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

Is it common or unusual?

We're not exactly long-term, but Mary and I haven't busted anything
yet, in 12 years and 1500+ hours...

(Knocking on wood, with my fingers crossed, and a rabbit's foot in my
pocket...)

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

As with most of these types of questions, the answers are always more
complicated than we would like to think.

The guy that will impress me is the flight instructor that has over
1000 hrs of Tailwheel instruction given to primary students that has
never had an incident. This guy will probabaly have over 5000 Take offs
and landings in tailwheel aircraft while letting and inexpirenced pilot
handle the controls.

The guys that flys only tri-cycle gear aircraft and most of his time is
enroute flying doesn't impress me near as much as the guys the fly in
the pattern for hours on end in varity of aircraft.


Jay Honeck wrote:
Is it common or unusual?

We're not exactly long-term, but Mary and I haven't busted anything
yet, in 12 years and 1500+ hours...

(Knocking on wood, with my fingers crossed, and a rabbit's foot in my
pocket...)

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Brian wrote:

The guys that flys only tri-cycle gear aircraft and most of his time is
enroute flying doesn't impress me near as much as the guys the fly in
the pattern for hours on end in varity of aircraft.

Really. Given that weather-related accidents make up a large percentage of
NTSB statistics, those who fly a lot of x/c will encounter much more
challenging weather and weather decision making than the pilot who never
leaves the pattern.


--
Peter

We were talking mostly about incidents which I think are a lot more
prevalent than the serious accidents or fatalities that make up the
majority of weather related accidents.

A look at the NTSB really only shows accidents and a few incidents. A
lot more incidents occur than are reported to the NTSB and I know only
some of the ones reported even make it to the NTSB website.

I know of a 20,000 hr 747 pilot that will admit a large majority of
that 20,000 hrs was spent sleeping in the crew bunk.

I also know a 20,000 Crop Duster pilot and instructor that I doubt
slept more than a few minutes of that 20,000 hrs and he has had his
share of incidents. That he is alive to tell about it a testament to
his piloting abilities.

Brian

Peter R. wrote:
Brian wrote:

The guys that flys only tri-cycle gear aircraft and most of his time is
enroute flying doesn't impress me near as much as the guys the fly in
the pattern for hours on end in varity of aircraft.

Really. Given that weather-related accidents make up a large percentage of
NTSB statistics, those who fly a lot of x/c will encounter much more
challenging weather and weather decision making than the pilot who never
leaves the pattern.


--
Peter

Interesting question. I have little flying experience myself but as an
A&P I have seen more than a few accident aftermaths, though not as many
as you might think. I realize you're not looking for a systematic or
organized approach to this but I have to wonder what about the accident
prone versus the fortunate? I know some long time pilots with
thousands of hours over decades with no accidents at all and some who
have had major repairs to pilot induced damage several times in a few
years. Go figure.

John Dupre'


cpw wrote:
One of my partners in our 1974 Citabria bounced a landing and had a
prop strike. We are rebuilding the engine and buying a new prop, of
course, but he feels awful about it. This has caused me to speculate;
how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?
I'm not asking about wear and tear, but actual incidents resulting in
damage. Is it common or unusual?
CPW

cpw wrote:
This has caused me to speculate;
how many long time pilots have flown without ever damaging an aircraft?

Bad ju-ju to answer that... G