If pilots made for better drivers, then average pilots should have fewer
accidents in airplanes, relatively speaking, than average drivers do in
autos.

I think this is faulty reasoning. Unless you hide behind "relatively
speaking", it may be simply that flying is more dangerous than driving.

If anything, they wreck planes more often
relatively speaking than drivers wreck autos

Per mile? Per hour? Per trip? The statistic is not meaningless, but
it can easily be made to be so. Again I see "relatively speaking",
which suggests some normative calculation whose definition is left,
well, undefined.

In the areas where pilots do a better job avoiding wrecks (commercial,
business, air transport), one can readily point to regulations that lead to
that. The pilots aren't any better, though they are better trained, they
are just as inclined to have an accident. But the regulations, assuming
they follow them (which they generally do), are what lead to the improved
safety statistics. Not pilot ability.

Is this borne out by the relative accident rates of ATPs in GA aircraft,
vs the run of the mill GA pilot?

I think I agree that pilots are not in general better drivers than non
pilots, but I have no data to back this up. However, your reasoning is
not compelling.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.