Robert Henry wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Dan Thompson wrote:
They initially
gave discounts for cars so equipped ... until they found that the loss
rate was actually higher for ABS equipped cars. A study determined that
the issue was that drivers were driving more aggressively in poor
weather as they thought the ABS would save them.


I still contend the root cause here is the misinformation created from a
lack of proper training. In addition, the ABS may have been able to effect a
different outcome, even despite the reckless behavior, if the driver
actually knew how to use it. To me, drivers treat ABS like airbags: 'I know
I have it, but I don't need to know how to use it because it functions on
its own for my safety.'

That may well be the case. However, it still supports the point that
often additional safety equipment doesn't have the desired effect for a
variety of reasons that can't always be anticipatd.


As such, perhaps we should conclude that it's not the ABS or the parachute,
it's the a priori behavior that creates the situation in the first place
(including proper training in addition to good, up-to-the-moment ADM) that
deserves the attention.

I think that was the basis of the argument. I don't think anyone said
that the parachute wouldn't work as advertised, the argument was that
the behavior of the pilot might increase the chances of needing the
chute or of getting into situations where it can't help.

I agree that training and an emphasis on using good judgment and knowing
the limitations of your equipment is extremely important to safe flight.


Matt