Very useful, Mark - thanks for letting us in on your thinking, it makes a lot of sense!!
Kind regards Bernard > On 3 Mar 2016, at 11:12 AM, Mark Newton <new...@atdot.dotat.org> wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2016, at 8:44 AM, Peter (PCS3) <p...@internode.on.net > <mailto:p...@internode.on.net>> wrote: >> As an L2 instructor, I teach that glider pilots have to be flexible and not >> fixate on landing on the RWY they took off on. I also quote that we had a >> spin in and death at our airfield of a pilot who was flying with RAA. His >> beautiful self constructed glider had a motor in it and he flew low past one >> runway to join the duty runway and spun in on joining downwind. :-( :-( > > Flexibility is part of it, decision-making is another. And it isn’t even > cockpit decision-making. > > Aviation in small airplanes has an accident rate roughly equivalent to > motorcycle riding. > > To my mind (which could be very wrong), there’s a difference between riding > motorbikes and flying, in that I think motorcyclists have less agency, which > means they’re more susceptible to accidents that they don’t contribute to. > That is: you can be the best motorcyclist in the world and still get randomly > run off the road by a B-double, but aircraft accidents tend to result from > the actions, inactions, and decision-making chains of aircrew. > > So I look at the categorizations of aircraft accident data, and I make > decisions from my lounge room which affect my risk exposure, and the > tradeoffs I’m willing to make. > > For example: > > There’s a disproportionate number of aircraft accidents resulting from > low-flying; I choose not to do that. > > VFR into IMC has always been a problem; so I’m conservative about weather, I > bought an autopilot, and I undertook additional instrument flying training so > that if I end up in IMC it’s an inconvenience rather than a loss-of-control > event. > > There appears to be a peak of “losing control on the runway” accidents; so > I’m probably one of the few non-trainee licensed pilots who goes out for > sessions of circuit bashing, to maintain proficiency by doing 30 landings in > a month instead of the 6 or 8 I’d otherwise typically do in a month of > weekends. > > Losing control in flight is another one; I went out and got an aerobatics > rating, and do recurrent training there too. > > In gliders, the risk of a midair collision is significantly higher in comps; > so I chose not to fly comps. > > The general idea is that I can understand that flying is risky, but make > decisions about which risk factors I’ll expose myself to. As I gain knowledge > of risks and/or apply countermeasures, my willingness to expose myself to > them can (and does) change. > > Some of those involve tradeoffs: For instance, the specific type of > instrument flying training I undertook was a night VFR rating. Single-engine > night VFR comes with its own risks, which I can judge with my eyes open, and > mitigate appropriately (the decision to acquire the autopilot came part-way > through the training as a mitigator for the risk of perceptual illusions). > Time will tell if my tradeoffs are good ones. > > Will I have an accident? No idea, I really hope not. But if I do, I know > there’s a 100% chance that it won’t be due to low flying, or loss of control > in cloud, or mishandling of a crosswind on landing, or inadvertent spinning. > I’ve made specific decisions to exclude myself from those. Maybe I’ll be > surprised by something else, but the residual risk in aviation in small > planes looks significantly safer than the baseline once those classes of > accident are eliminated from the stats. > > Hope that’s useful to someone. > > - mark > > > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > Aus-soaring@lists.base64.com.au > http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.base64.com.au http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
