alf jessup Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Your never going to stop people killing themselves in aviation, you can bring in all the rules you want and go blue in the face preaching them and people will push the boundaries like they have in the past and like they will in the future and end up dead. What you as an individual pilot have to do is fly as safe as you possibly can, as disciplined as you can and minimize the risks, bail out at the earliest option for bad weather, don't say "i'll just push on that little bit further because it might be clear" plenty of dead pilots have just done that. Shipload of ways to kill yourself in our sport as the stats have proved that, if you end up dead you can only blame yourself in most cases. As I have said often in the past on these forums, it always happens to someone else doesn't it, well no we all can be that someone else, end of story. Alf 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Beware of stats. and how they can be interpreted. You can prove almost anything you wish to. People with agenda's use them all the time. Statistics show that the biggest fires have the largest number of firemen in attendance. Nev 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 it always happens to someone else doesn't it, To someone else, you are someone else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 2nd pilot, 2nd engine would stop a lot of incidents... Sure..... That'll prevent all our IMC, beat up and stall turning final problems. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Second engine can cause a lot of problems in handling and fuel management. Much more training required. This game is supposed to be about simple and affordable flying. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 If the mining industry had this accident rate it WOULD be shut down. Every day, tens of thousands of people (maybe hundreds of thousands) go to work in the mining industry and come home safely, due to effective safety management programs. Every day (for many days of the week), a couple of dozen RAA pilots go flying and we get this abysmal result.There is an urgent need for top-down attention to the problem. The miners at the coal face didn't and couldn't fix their problem, it was done by professional analysis and management. Same will be essential for RAA. The alternative will be an end to our activities, brought on by community pressure. You are talking about an Industry with a great deal of money to spend on such systems vs a recreational activity. Not a fair comparison and a whole different duty of care. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Where is this community pressure apart from secondary airports the developers want to get their hands on and ramp up the safety issues any time they can.? Over many populous areas there are NO suitable forced landing areas at all. Pilots should be concerned about operating into these aerodromes as well as the people below. Perhaps we need more golf courses and horse racing tracks. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terryc Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 That's what they said about mining when I started. We used to kill one miner per thousand per year in 1970. Turns out it wasn't inherently dangerous at all, it is safer than the construction industry, logistics and many other activities. But we needed to knuckle down and fix it. We can fix it but not on a yearly fee of $220.00. Now if we were serious a fee around $5000.00 per year would give raa the needed fund to set out on an education program that would fix it completely. As has been mentioned it's been done in mining but notice no mention of the cost. The mining industry could afford it, rec flying cannot, at lease I can't and won't. If I go flying and come to grief I won't blame you I'll blame myself. I'll wear the pain and I'll wear the cost. The idea that we as a collective pay is only true to a very small degree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Where is this community pressure apart from secondary airports the developers want to get their hands on and ramp up the safety issues any time they can.? Over many populous areas there are NO suitable forced landing areas at all. Pilots should be concerned about operating into these aerodromes as well as the people below. Perhaps we need more golf courses and horse racing tracks. Nev The community pressure right now is lying dormant, but can explode at any moment. If there is a bad crash, for example with Dash 8, killing 20 or so people, the second paragraph is likely to read "Twenty nine people have been killed in twenty nine months in this dangerous, and unnecessary part of aviation" followed by "the Minister has said he will take immediate action to ensure this can never happen again etc." Those are the times when draconian decisions are made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Today someone flew 70nm to where I am in weather I thought would be unflyable when I said I didn't know how he did it he said he had done a lot of it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmick Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Doesn't/shouldn't a BFR include a review of each of your endorsements i.e. Prefight briefing to PAX, Radio calls and check quality of Radios TX and RX, X (fuel management, track planning (yes on paper) AP (inches of Mercury etc ) etc ............................ , HF ?? I'm trying to discuss about what can be done better within our current check system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Today someone flew 70nm to where I am in weather I thought would be unflyable when I said I didn't know how he did it he said he had done a lot of it. That can be a bit subjective. I know people who fly comfortably when I won't, and I know that I fly when some others won't. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happyflyer Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 In 2013, 1194 people were killed on Australian roads. Think of the hundreds of million dollars spent on road safety. I think aviation is doing ok. What we don't have is the cop on the corner keeping and eye out for the 2%. Please don't go for more regulation. We have plenty. I read the ATSB reports and try to learn from them. Pilot error is the greatest threat. I do my best to minimise those errors and am quite happy to accept the remaining risks. Perhaps the best thing we could do as an aviation sector is to not accept the bad behaviour or our fellow flyers. Those that blatantly and repeatedly do foolish and dangerous things should not be welcome amongs us or at our airfields. 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 You are talking about an Industry with a great deal of money to spend on such systems vs a recreational activity. Not a fair comparison and a whole different duty of care. The duty of care is exactly the same, the payouts are exactly the same. Get involved in one, and that's nearly a decade of your life gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 What we don't have is the cop on the corner keeping and eye out for the 2%. and eventually we are going to pay for that. Self administering means self administering. Please don't go for more regulation. Who is saying this? Perhaps the best thing we could do as an aviation sector is to not accept the bad behaviour or our fellow flyers. Those that blatantly and repeatedly do foolish and dangerous things should not be welcome amongs us or at our airfields. Agreed, there have been some doosies in that toll; people who got away with it for decades, who everyone in their district knew about, but did nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 I hark back to mining because I have lived through the whole experience of fixing a serious problem. We used to say that these people are paid very well and they are paid very well because they work in a hostile environment, they know and accept that, and take the risk. It didn't wash with their families or with the community. I don't believe that saying we aviators accept the risk will wash either. We must fix it. The community used to accept that they had to pay for flying safety. Hence well maintained airfields, the crash comix, free ERSA and other publications, lots of FSUs and so on. Now all that is gone. I don't have the answer and I don't know how to fix it or what it will cost to fix. But anyone who says this is OK, we accept the risk of a risky sport, is in la la land. It isn't about what we wish or think, it is about what the community will do if we don't fix it. And by community I mean CASA, legislators, the courts and the newspapers. The Australian is already running an air safety theme. I bet one of their journalists is already working up the story on the sport aviation sector. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happyflyer Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 and eventually we are going to pay for that. Self administering means self administering. Who is saying this? Agreed, there have been some doosies in that toll; people who got away with it for decades, who everyone in their district knew about, but did nothing. We may not need to pay if we can police ourselves a little more. No one is saying we need more regulation yet but as you said in post #34 that if we have a big incident the minister would order action. That normally means more regulation. We have plenty of regulation and in many of our accidents those regulations have been ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 We may not need to pay if we can police ourselves a little more. I agree, and the recent board action to recruit a specialist is a positive move. No one is saying we need more regulation yet but as you said in post #34 that if we have a big incident the minister would order action. That normally means more regulation. We have plenty of regulation and in many of our accidents those regulations have been ignored. A big incident often produces knee jerk reactions from the politicians who have no idea what the technical issues are, but know enough not to upset the electorate. The greyhoudn racing industry in Victoria is a good example. As far as fatalities from ignoring regulations, that is something RAA could work on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDQDI Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 But how do you police it without seriously hampering the few freedoms we have left? I believe education is a key point but you can't teach someone who thinks they know it all or someone who has a blatant disregard for common sense laws. Lately I have done a few hours towards getting my ll endo and have been amazed at how much I have learnt in such a short time (I certainly don't know it all but I am amazed at how much my skill set has improved) not only has my skill set improved but even though I haven't got my endorsement yet (I plan on continuing as soon as time and money allow) I feel I am even less likely to do 'beat ups' now than I ever was. So IMHO education also does help prevent incidents, if we all did an instrument rating, a ll endo and a formation endo we would be a lot safer BUT how many would that exclude from being able to afford to fly? We need a balance and I think it is close to being right, there is the base level to get our PC/RPL and then we are free to continue to expand on that as we can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 I hark back to mining because I have lived through the whole experience of fixing a serious problem. We used to say that these people are paid very well and they are paid very well because they work in a hostile environment, they know and accept that, and take the risk. It didn't wash with their families or with the community. I don't believe that saying we aviators accept the risk will wash either. We must fix it.The community used to accept that they had to pay for flying safety. Hence well maintained airfields, the crash comix, free ERSA and other publications, lots of FSUs and so on. Now all that is gone. I don't have the answer and I don't know how to fix it or what it will cost to fix. But anyone who says this is OK, we accept the risk of a risky sport, is in la la land. It isn't about what we wish or think, it is about what the community will do if we don't fix it. And by community I mean CASA, legislators, the courts and the newspapers. The Australian is already running an air safety theme. I bet one of their journalists is already working up the story on the sport aviation sector. I don't think it's about accepting that what we do is risky....it's about accepting responsibility for your own safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Doesn't/shouldn't a BFR include a review of each of your endorsements i.e. Prefight briefing to PAX, Radio calls and check quality of Radios TX and RX, X (fuel management, track planning (yes on paper) AP (inches of Mercury etc ) etc ............................ , HF ??I'm trying to discuss about what can be done better within our current check system. A BFR/AFR would take a long time to complete for some people if that was the case. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slb Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Attitude plays a big part in all this. Those with a good attitude will always seek out more information, keep up their training/skills etc and fly within their abilities and competency. If they haven't flown for a while they would fly 'carefully' until their skills were up to speed again. Those with a less than good attitude ... well, I guess this is what we're talking about. 'She'll be right attitude' just doesn't work with flying and Human Factors should be an intrinsic part of the training and not a separate subject, or module. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 If someone isn't flying well it doesn't take very long for it to show in a flight test. The A/BFR has become a lot more of a big deal than it used to be. Much more is just another extra cost you must cover. Before we go deciding what to do, there would need to be a lot more analysing of the data. One bus accident kills more than the total in the period under consideration. What is a BIG incident? The only BIG incident I could see happening is a mid air with a Jumbo. That's why I don't believe in a qualification for controlled airspace. Transit clearances yes . We could never cover the liability, and the country under CTA is not suitable often either. OUR liability is limited to the pilot and sometimes ONE other person. THAT is the essence of this matter. It's not exactly a people mover. Do I like people being killed. NO I don't. I have had about enough of it. Do I have confidence that doing a lot of what is often proposed will change things much? NO I have virtually none. Perhaps a lot of the people who fly shouldn't. Schools don't turn many away. I've made it clear we don't teach flying properly. We did Human Factors, but really what a joke!. You never stop doing human factors. That effort wasn't done properly. We expect to cross one of the biggest continents in the world with sparse population and weather from dust storms willy willy's thunderstorms that test the de icing systems of aircraft from all over the world. Temperatures nearing 50 degrees to coastal fogs and standing waves near mountain ranges. We've got the lot here.. Quad bike and trikes are probably just as dangerous. Of course there's room for improvement, but you make your OWN luck. The more careful and knowing you are the luckier you get. Nev 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 I hark back to mining because I have lived through the whole experience of fixing a serious problem. We used to say that these people are paid very well and they are paid very well because they work in a hostile environment, they know and accept that, and take the risk. It didn't wash with their families or with the community. I don't believe that saying we aviators accept the risk will wash either. We must fix it.The community used to accept that they had to pay for flying safety. Hence well maintained airfields, the crash comix, free ERSA and other publications, lots of FSUs and so on. Now all that is gone. I don't have the answer and I don't know how to fix it or what it will cost to fix. But anyone who says this is OK, we accept the risk of a risky sport, is in la la land. It isn't about what we wish or think, it is about what the community will do if we don't fix it. And by community I mean CASA, legislators, the courts and the newspapers. The Australian is already running an air safety theme. I bet one of their journalists is already working up the story on the sport aviation sector. The mining industry have turned their injuries around, but the cost has been prohibitive. We regularly go to mining sites and have been doing so for the last 5 to 6 years or so. It is normal to do a 6 hour induction just to follow an escort vehicle onto the site then get out of our trucks and stand in a driver safe area whilst the truck is unloaded. (these a simply shipping containers, 4 twistlocks and 1 lift). To most people including myself it is a farce. To the wives of the men who come home every 10 days I am sure it is money well spent. When I quote to a mine site, I quote to the nearest town and then hourly rate back to the same town. I work in the industry that has the highest work related fatality rate in the country so I see friends and associates die every week. I would happily impose mining type safety standards on Road Transport but it would bankrupt the country in 5 mins flat. Everything in life is a compromise, we need to ask where the comfortable level between a perfect safety record and affordability stops. Because as harsh as it may sound, a life does have a quantifiable value, we just need to decide the value of a recreational pilots life. I think in the long term, society will set that value. ps. As an aside truck drivers deaths in road accidents are not classed as workplace fatalities by any of the state authorities. If the road is not my workplace then I am stuffed if I know what is. 4 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 You guys do duty times that are too long. Trouble is you involve others.. Others go to sleep and hit you too...... Generally U/Ls don't involve any one but the occupant(s) Max TWO. who can choose when and where they fly, and how long for. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now