What Kills Pilots: The Most Common (with examples)

TriGear28 said:
Also, most scheduled air carrier pilots I know often complain about the opposite. That dispatchers have done things, over the years, that they feel compromise the safety of the operation. Things like 'Move some bags from the baggage area inside the a/c cabin because a carry-on weighs less than checked on paper.' in order to avoid being over weight. These kinds of things have happened over the years.
Click to expand...

In airline flying the "dispatcher" doesn't "control" the flight, the dispatcher and the Captain have a joint responsibility and one can over rule the other. And as always the Captain has the final authority.
 
RotorAndWing said:
In airline flying the "dispatcher" doesn't "control" the flight, the dispatcher and the Captain have a joint responsibility and one can over rule the other. And as always the Captain has the final authority.
Click to expand...

True, but it appears the suggestion is that the 'final authority' be given solely to the dispatcher. This I disagree with.
 
Skylane81E said:
I don't know, but I know the boss likes to get paid, and that only happens when the plane flys, sure smoking holes are bad for the boss, but it is arguably worse for the pilot
Click to expand...

Yep, exactly. I've never heard of a 135 for which the boss was telling pilots not to fly when the pilots wanted to. Nor a 121.

The boss also never checked my fuel to make sure it was sufficient. The only thing I ever had to do was submit my W&B to the boss before taking off.
 
SCCutler said:
While it may not be the same thing is a true dispatcher, I have taken to consulting with experienced and trusted pilots when faced with a challenging weather flight decision. Quite frequently, after having obtained a briefing and reviewed the various other sources of information, I find it very useful to talk through the situation with one of these pilots (I will call them "mentors"). It can be very useful, and interestingly enough, while I rarely find myself changing my mind as a result of the conversation I often find affirmation of the reasoning I used to make my decision.

Most, if not all, of the people I rely upon as mentors can be found on these pages. The exchange of ideas, without insult, can be a powerful force for safety.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: Good advice for the weekend warrior. :yes:
 
What kills pilots? Automobiles! ;)

I was originally posting this in jest, but I would love to see the statistics comparing how many pilots die in auto accidents versus planes.

Fortunately I've never had a car wreck that was my fault, but I have had three people run into me over the years. Maybe it's unfounded, but I'm more concerned about the trip to the airport than my flight. I've never had anything close to a plane wreck.
 
I always thought it was jealous husbands.....
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Training is the real reason pro pilots are safer.
Click to expand...

What about recency/currency of experience? I think that does play a part. I suppose some of that fits into training because pro pilots have more ongoing training. Along these lines programs like WINGS seem like a good idea to me.

I also agree that mentor pilots are an excellent idea. I wish I had a better local network to tap into for this. Personally I've found that there are a lot of aspects of the pilot community that scare me (unsafe practices) or desire to talk endlessly at me about things unrelated to aviation (no matter the politics, always unpleasant). So my attempts to find other more experienced pilots that I enjoy and can learn from has been challenging. I don't know the solution to this other than hiring a real professional (who acts like it) mentor pilot which is something I can't afford to do.

Study of accidents is very important IMHO and if I ever become a CFI I would spend some ground time with my student discussing various NTSB accident reports relevant to the upcoming flight and how the accident could have been avoided.
 
The question of recency is definitely important as well. I used to fly 500 hours a year. I'm coming up on my renewal for insurance and it'll probably be 100 hours or less for the past 12 months. Without a doubt, I feel rustier.

So I'm going to go out for more recurrent training.
 
Interestingly, I'm going the other way. I've flown more legs during the the past 90 days than in most full years of recent, and the rust is almost gone. I could almost be cool again if I had any hair left to slick back.

Ted DuPuis said:
The question of recency is definitely important as well. I used to fly 500 hours a year. I'm coming up on my renewal for insurance and it'll probably be 100 hours or less for the past 12 months. Without a doubt, I feel rustier.

So I'm going to go out for more recurrent training.
Click to expand...
 
I have noticed that the leading cause of decay in my own proficiency is recency. Even just one hour per day every three or four days keeps me sharper than the equivalent number of hours in a month if those are one or two long XCs.

A variation on the theme may be cycles rather than flight hours. Maybe we're using the wrong metric (flt hrs) to measure the concept of "experience".
 
wabower said:
Interestingly, I'm going the other way. I've flown more legs during the the past 90 days than in most full years of recent, and the rust is almost gone. I could almost be cool again if I had any hair left to slick back.
Click to expand...

Maybe you can join me on my next trip to Belize. I can slick back enough hair for both of us.
 
DrMack said:
I have noticed that the leading cause of decay in my own proficiency is recency. Even just one hour per day every three or four days keeps me sharper than the equivalent number of hours in a month if those are one or two long XCs.

A variation on the theme may be cycles rather than flight hours. Maybe we're using the wrong metric (flt hrs) to measure the concept of "experience".
Click to expand...

Oh indeed. When I was a lowly college student non-IR PPL and all I could do was rent a Cessna 2-3 times a month, I would strictly make the flight a training flight. Slow flight, steep turns, stalls and then back to the pattern for touch n goes, especially in crosswinds. All that under a 1.0. Every other month I'd rent at night and knocked out the night requirements. It wasn't fun at times. It was like working out. But it kept me proficient enough to be safe on a non-existent budget. I did the same thing after completing the IR.

Cycles are more valuable than flight time.
 
Cycles are typically used for airplane counts, but legs flown rather than hours flown is a better indicator of activity.

DrMack said:
I have noticed that the leading cause of decay in my own proficiency is recency. Even just one hour per day every three or four days keeps me sharper than the equivalent number of hours in a month if those are one or two long XCs.

A variation on the theme may be cycles rather than flight hours. Maybe we're using the wrong metric (flt hrs) to measure the concept of "experience".
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top