Safety...Hipocrit to Aviation?

[Bones]

Heres a topic thats been floating around in my head a bit.

SAFETY

Is Safety a hipocrit to aviaiton? How many different ideas of safety does each pilot have? Who's is correct? Does anyone debrief themselves on the safety of the flight they just conducted and how they might have done better? What does the term Safety of Flight mean to the average pilot.

Just finished a very rough draft of a short article on safety for a local aviation publication. Really got me to thinking about if anyone even cares to be introspective on how they view and practice safety in their flying. As a professional pilot safety is always at the top of the list with customer satisfaction nipping at its heels trying to bring it down.

So if you don't fly for compensation or carry passengers is the priorty and and order of safety irrelavant?

"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world."
--Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden

What is safety to you?

 

[tom.]

Does anyone debrief themselves on the safety of the flight they just conducted and how they might have done better? ?

Yes I do, but the more profound thoughts occur when I wake up in the middle of the night and remember something I didn't think of in the post flight briefing.

 

[Fast n' Furious]

If you're asking if safety and flying are antithetical (that is they both can't occupy the same space at the same time) they I say, they must be inseperable and it doesn't matter what type of flying you're doing.

Flying, like boating, walking your doggie, using a chainsaw or driving a car is not without some risk. I think everyone sane enough to not stick their head into a propeller would agree. Yet some perfectly sane people put their head dangerously close to the prop every weekend.

Safety in flying is what you plan for. In my opinion if you do not take the time or make the effort to look at all of the pieces of the pie for your flight (man, machine, environment, etc.) and are not fully prepared, then you are not safe. Some may disagree but I would point you in the direction of the NTSB's database. As Bob Hoover is frequently quoted as saying "There are no routine flights." I'll take him at his word.

That said, people only do things well that they are trained well to do. I wonder how many accidents could have been prevented if Joey Bag O' Donuts with the Cherokee really understood the risks and knew when to say "not today". Fortunately, I've had the benefit of some very fine aeronautical decision making/risk management training and only wish that everyone was as blessed if blessed is the right word. This is not to say that there are not some great CFI's out there but far too many airplanes and pilots coming to peril. Please don't claim aviation Darwinism...he was a bit too optimistic in my comic book.

So you asked if I look back and debrief myself as to what could have gone better? Sure, looking backward is a good tool but my real focus is on the before and during. Afterwards, I'm more concerned with finding good BBQ and sweet tea.

 

[GaryO]

Does anyone debrief themselves on the safety of the flight they just conducted and how they might have done better?

Yes. After nearly every flight.

 

[Steve]

In my twisted view of reality safety is a dynamic condition that varies with mental fitness (the level to which your judgement is impaired, either through ignorance or physical debilitation). Training, experience (a form of training), physical health, and environmental pressures can affect that fitness.

When assessing risk it is a given that the idea of absolute safety is unachievable, so what one ends up doing is making a judgement call on the margin of safety perceived to exist and whether that is acceptable to them, imho. That judgement can be based on facts or beliefs, or a mixture of both. As a pilot, one has the option to modify the perceived margin of safety in flying. The choices available are limited by the same factors that affect mental fitness.

What is safety to you?

 

[Richard]

In my twisted view of reality safety is a dynamic condition that varies with mental fitness (the level to which your judgement is impaired, either through ignorance or physical debilitation). Training, experience (a form of training), physical health, and environmental pressures can affect that fitness.

When assessing risk it is a given that the idea of absolute safety is unachievable, so what one ends up doing is making a judgement call on the margin of safety perceived to exist and whether that is acceptable to them, imho. That judgement can be based on facts or beliefs, or a mixture of both. As a pilot, one has the option to modify the perceived margin of safety in flying. The choices available are limited by the same factors that affect mental fitness.

That is beautiful, man. That is a superbly cogent description of the truest nature of safety. I only wish you would have expounded on those modifications of perception.

 

[Everskyward]

As a professional pilot safety is always at the top of the list with customer satisfaction nipping at its heels trying to bring it down.

While I understand what you're getting at here, I don't think the customer is going to be very satisfied if you crash, or even if they realize they've been put unnecessarily at risk. Maybe I've been lucky, but a big majority of the passengers understand an explanation of why we are unable to do something, especially if you are able to offer them some alternate proposal. The few others aren't worth having as customers anyway. Of course it always helps if the company you work for and the people around you take safety seriously.

I think that reflecting on and learning from your past flights is enlightning, but the hour that really counts is the next one. And no matter how many times you've done something you need to realize that you have the capacity to do something monumentally stupid. Keeps you honest, right?

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Always have checked things out thouroghly, weather & aircraft & pilot, by the book before flights and still reflect on all past flights even from years ago as well as the latest and what was learned.

 

[Steve]

I'm no expert on the subject. But I'll offer that I believe everyone processes information differently. The difference can be due to any number of reasons, primarily one's experience base and skill at using that experience base to interpret the information at hand . The most "unsafe" person is one that doesn't recognize (i.e., their perception) that he/she is initiating an activity with reduced margins, either through ignorance or arrogance. The more "safe" person has gone from the "unconcious incompetent" to the "unconcious competent" by practicing decision-making which yields desired and/or survivable outcomes. Although there are basic techniques for decision-making, no one person does it exactly the same as another. If it could be quantized with precision and endowed on humans equally, the accident rate in all human activity would diminish significantly if not be eliminated completely. You can change the outcome of a decision by acknowledging the risk factors involved and making choices to address each, actively or passively. But that assumes you are able to recognize a risk factor in the first place, which takes learning or luck to accomplish. The items mentioned previously that affect judgement could be considered general risk factors, each encompassing many specifics.

There's an explanation the "competence" model at
http://www.businessballs.com/consciouscompetencelearningmodel.htm for those unfamiliar with the concept.

That is beautiful, man. That is a superbly cogent description of the truest nature of safety. I only wish you would have expounded on those modifications of perception.

 

[Stache]

I am not currently flying right now, however from the maintenance guy in me I wake up at nights wondering did I do something totally right. The next morning I go and recheck it maybe I am anal, but when you have been to a crash sight like I have you always have doubts that eat at you.

I suppose this is why I have so many checklists that I follow. I try to lower the risk because with everything there is risk and luck. Needless to say luck has nothing to do with safety. If I were to not tighten a fuel line B-nut was it careless or not being lucky I missed it. Rick management says to run the engine up and check for leaks, which I do and find the B-nut leaking I have just lowered the risk of not missing the loose B-nut.

It all boils down to chain of events when it comes to safety. If I did not perform a run up inspection the chain would extend to the pilot. Now the pilot doesn’t perform a complete preflight and misses the fuel dripping or doesn’t notice the fuel pressure gauge on take off. Again the chain extends because the pilot doesn’t perform a post flight inspection and again misses the dripping fuel, how many times will the chain extend before something serious happens. This may sound like it would not happen, but it did and I was lucky not to be the mechanic.

Seems the older we get the less risk we are willing to accept or the safer we get. I would like to believe GA is safer than commercial, but its not the NTSB numbers prove this every month. But if you look at the type of persons involved in accidents it is the same type and human factors that keep popping up.

I for one believe human factors plays the biggest part of safety and is the least taught or under stood by pilots and mechanics. I know the FAA is pushing human factors with the hopes this will reduce GA accident rates, but change is hard to accept.

Stache