Mark said " If publication of accident data had the effect that you seem to believe it would have, then paraglider pilots would stop crashing into ridges after launch, GA pilots would stop spinning in during cropdusting or crashing short of airstrips due to fuel starvation, and glider pilots would stop having midairs or spinning in during inadequately planned outlandings.."
Ermm, this comment is fallacious Mark how do you know that some or even many such accidents were not prevented because of publishing information? They could have been much more frequent without the publishing of information. No one knows, either way. "No, you're putting words in my mouth. The mere fact that you'd entertain the possibility that that's what I'm suggesting is a bit astonishing to me. What did I say that'd give you that impression? Its astonishing your astonished Mark, I suspect your consistent denial of the value of accident reports over many posts and apparent antagonism towards them, such as the silly statement above, probably led this person to this impression. You perhaps should re read your own posts to see how YOU have given others that impression, rather than try and get them to do it for you. "those who believe that some kind of magical safety panacea will be achieved if GFA would just publish more detailed accident data are _clearly_ wrong" Who would "they" be Mark. I believe in the value of reports, but I certainly don't believe anything can be a "magical safety panacea". Neither do I recollect anyone making that claim. What was that about putting words in people's mouths again? "It seems to me that training, currency, flexibility of thinking and planning are far more powerful preventers of accidents, and maybe GFA's accident stats would look better if more pilots had more than 20 - 25 hours per annum worth of experience." And your method to deliver this is? Not stated! Of course the above would help the accident rate, but at considerably greater cost than a page or two in SA. If only one accident is prevented that is enough to justify reports, but of course then we wouldn't know that it was prevented! A final question for Mark is this, if ALL the accident reports you ever read were magically deleted from your brain would you be: 1. A pilot more likely to have an accident. 2. A pilot less likely to have an accident. Dave -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Newton Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2007 9:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ACCIDENT & INCIDENT REPORTING IN THE GFA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think I understand your reasoning Mark. > And surely you aren't suggesting that less would be even better? No, you're putting words in my mouth. The mere fact that you'd entertain the possibility that that's what I'm suggesting is a bit astonishing to me. What did I say that'd give you that impression? What I am suggesting is that those who believe that some kind of magical safety panacea will be achieved if GFA would just publish more detailed accident data are _clearly_ wrong, and are consequently probably getting hung up on the wrong thing. If publication of accident data had the effect that you seem to believe it would have, then paraglider pilots would stop crashing into ridges after launch, GA pilots would stop spinning in during cropdusting or crashing short of airstrips due to fuel starvation, and glider pilots would stop having midairs or spinning in during inadequately planned outlandings. The mere fact that those things keep happening even though we talk about them all the time and there's inarguable awareness of the issues tells me that talking about them all the time and being aware of the issues doesn't seem to make a lot of difference to whether or not an accident is going to happen. It seems to me that training, currency, flexibility of thinking and planning are far more powerful preventers of accidents, and maybe GFA's accident stats would look better if more pilots had more than 20 - 25 hours per annum worth of experience. If you want to campaign your heart out to make the changes you're talking about then go right ahead -- I'm certainly not "suggesting that less would be even better," but I am suggesting that if you want to make a real change to glider pilots' safety culture then you're probably fighting the wrong battle, and your necessarily limited time and energy can probably be directed more productively along other avenues. - mark -------------------------------------------------------------------- I tried an internal modem, [EMAIL PROTECTED] but it hurt when I walked. Mark Newton ----- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 ------------- Fax: +61-8-82356937 ----- _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
