More Stupid Pilot Tricks

flyingron said:
Yeah, the last thing I want to do is stop an engine with a balky battery. I learned the interesting way that jump starting my Navion with the APU plug won't result in the battery being charged. The contactor coil is powered from the battery side, so the battery is not ever put back in the circuit after such starts (though the contactor is accessible so a short piece of wire will fix that problem if you are aware of it).
Click to expand...

Quite a few GA airplanes are like that. Cessna’s external power connector only powers the starter also.

In addition if one diode fails shorted (not the common failure mode) there’s a path to ground through the starter contractor and the starter will start to spin immediately upon plugging in ground power if the ground power isn’t switched off.

By modern standards a very dangerous circuit config. Also not helpful they put the connector forward of the wing strut close to the prop.

Pretty good way to see how well your flying Slap Chop works on a line guy.
 
mryan75 said:
GA flying is much, much safer than being on the roads with the great unwashed.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the numbers no longer back this up. They did once not too long ago. But the virtual cocoon of airbags in ground vehicles reversed the numbers quite a while ago. Especially for fatalities.

Modern cars have also made drivers technically stupider, but that’s a different problem. Not that we ever required drivers to know anything about driving anyway...
 
If the yardstick is fatality, your risk of dying in a light airplane is about the same as dying in a motorcycle crash. Both are substantially worse than being in a car.
 
mryan75 said:
. Drunks, people stoned, talking, texting, not qualified, not paying attention, speeding, running lights or stop signs. You name it. At least half the people on the road shouldn't be.

GA flying is much, much safer than being on the roads with the great unwashed.
Click to expand...


Those all fall under the category of “driver error.” Do you think there aren’t pilots who are drinking, medicated / stoned, not qualified, stupid,...? I suggest you read the accident reports, especially the toxicology material, for the Bernath and Halladay crashes. A little research will turn up incidents of pilots stoned on cocaine, flying without a medical and without enough fuel (look up John Denver’s crash), et cetera ad nauseam.

Plus, cars have become much much safer over the last few decades. Antilock brakes, airbags, backup cameras, stronger passenger compartments, and so forth have greatly reduced fatalities. Meanwhile, most of us are flying airplanes that are 40 or 50 years old and more dangerous than the cars of the same era.

Whether it’s cars, motorcycles, or planes, there are things an individual can do to improve his personal odds, but to think small personal planes are safer than cars is to fool oneself.
 
Jim K said:
The survivability of the modern automobile is what really throws these stats. I believe ga and cars were fairly comparable fatality-per-mile wise 40 years ago, but cars have gotten much, much safer, especially in terms of occupant safety, while we are still flying the same airplanes.
Click to expand...
Yes, modern safety equipment, which simply doesn't exist in most small aircraft—yet. Not to mention modern medical care has kept a lot of accident victims alive that would have died. In a car crash, it's fairly likely someone will get to you quickly, in a plane crash, not so much, so there's that delay as well.
 
mryan75 said:
To me it's about factors within your control. In an airplane, most of them are. In a car, almost none of them are.
Click to expand...

That's true, and of course we are all above average pilots who never make dumb mistakes. But the statistics still show that driving is safer, must be all the other dumb pilots dragging the average down.
 
MFE said:
Can you provide a source for this assertion?
Click to expand...

Ron W here has done fairly extensive research as well as the fatality numbers just being what they are. You can find his numbers and assumptions in older threads.

One can argue by miles flown/driven or hours operating and the hours number is difficult to come by but reasonable assumptions of non-commercial hours look pretty bad compared to cars.

Fatality rates come out roughly the same as motorcycles in most studies, all of which have to make various assumptions.

The other way to work backward into it is via insurance rates but those are skewed by juries usually awarding silly things as soon as they hear “airplane”.
 
GA light planes may or may not be safer than cars, but after 40 years of flying, most of it professionally and never hurting anyone or breaking a plane, I think I can say that I am safer in my plane than in my car. To me, that is all that matters.
 
flying is like scuba diving...... you are in a space u really wasn't designed to be.


I made that up...
 
flyingron said:
Yeah, the last thing I want to do is stop an engine with a balky battery. I learned the interesting way that jump starting my Navion with the APU plug won't result in the battery being charged. The contactor coil is powered from the battery side, so the battery is not ever put back in the circuit after such starts (though the contactor is accessible so a short piece of wire will fix that problem if you are aware of it).
Click to expand...

for that reason, in some models Cessna installs a resistor from the APU contactor to the battery... to allow a trickle charge to allow the master contactor to eventually be closed.
 
denverpilot said:
I’d settle for what Australia does with car insurance — it’s linked databases and plate scanners in every cop car. You’re driving without insurance you will be caught and stopped. This is so easy to implement but of course we won’t.

The need for uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage just isn’t a thing there like it is the massive ripoff of law abiding people paying for the law breakers here.
Click to expand...
They do that here. Not all the cop cars have tag readers, but tag number will produce proof of insurance. Actually, it's gotten to the point where an insurance card is almost not worth the paper it's printed on.
 
denverpilot said:
I’d settle for what Australia does with car insurance — it’s linked databases and plate scanners in every cop car. You’re driving without insurance you will be caught and stopped. This is so easy to implement but of course we won’t.

The need for uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage just isn’t a thing there like it is the massive ripoff of law abiding people paying for the law breakers here.
Click to expand...

In Nebraska, you don't actually have to have insurance. Not sure if any other states are like that.

The law says you have to have proof of "financial responsibility" to license a vehicle. One of the easiest ways to satisfy the requirement is to have insurance, but technically it is not required.
 
JD318 said:
The law says you have to have proof of "financial responsibility" to license a vehicle. One of the easiest ways to satisfy the requirement is to have insurance, but technically it is not required.
Click to expand...

That would be correct in Texas, Alaska and New Mexico. I am not sure about anywhere else but I would bet that it is pretty much the same.
 
Zeldman said:
That would be correct in Texas, Alaska and New Mexico. I am not sure about anywhere else but I would bet that it is pretty much the same.
Click to expand...
Same in Ohio. You can show a large bank account instead. But those with large bank accounts buy insurance.
 
JD318 said:
In Nebraska, you don't actually have to have insurance. Not sure if any other states are like that.

The law says you have to have proof of "financial responsibility" to license a vehicle. One of the easiest ways to satisfy the requirement is to have insurance, but technically it is not required.
Click to expand...

Same here, but the dollar amount you are required to show is a pittance compared to your actual liability if you, for example, disable someone for life.

I don’t know of any (good) fiscal pros who recommend anyone wealthy be self insured. If anything it just makes them a lawsuit target.

Point still stands though. The database could recognize self insurance as okay. It’s the uninsured who would be automatically flagged to be pulled over.

My understanding of the Oz system is that it’s not just a fine there, the car doesn’t move again under its own power until it is covered by insurance. You’re catching a cab home and the car is getting towed to an impound lot until you can show compliance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top