Hi Mark I did seem them and they all valid points. But they still fit into our current 'avenue' - I thought you perhaps had more in mind? In the scheme of things, we'll have no meaningful or transparent way of determining if any of our approaches to accident prevention are being successful if the data isn't being analysed and published.
As you have also said, the publication of data won't directly prevent accidents. That's true. It will however measure the success of the things we do (like training, promoting currency etc etc) to prevent accidents. I don't really think it's the 'wrong battle to fight' if we are to have that cycle of improvement going. Jo -----Original Message----- From: Mark Newton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2007 10:36 AM To: Davis, Jo Cc: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ACCIDENT & INCIDENT REPORTING IN THE GFA Davis, Jo wrote: > Mark, it seems like you stopped writing just at the critical moment. > Your suggestions on how to make improvements in this area would be > warmly appreciated. What productive avenues did you have in mind? I also said: # 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. Don't those things count as productive 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
