Jay Beckman wrote:
He explained some interesting things that the FAA and the FAA Safety
Team (FAAST) are trying to accomplish:
- Get manufacturers to share information in order to quantify the types
and frequencies of common accidents/incidents.

I think they will have more success if they can figure out a good way to
keep this data from turning into lawyer food, but I'm not sure of a good
way to do that. Trying to keep it totally secret mostly defeats the
purpose of collecting the information. Maybe it needs to go to some
third-party organization - not the manufacturers, not the government -
that has some structure in place such that they can issue reports and
recommendations, but can't be legally compelled to turn over all their
files. (Having NASA collect some of the reports is in this direction.)
Another way, done by one organization I know of, is to accept detailed
incident reports, disseminate a public report (with most of the serial
numbers filed off) with the facts and lessons learned, and retain the
detailed reports for about a year. At the end of the year, they look
for any trends and write a yearly report, then destroy the original,
detailed reports.

- Get more pilots actively involved with pre-emptive safety training
related to risk aversion*. [...] (*Apparently only about one percent
of pilots regularly attend safety seminars)

Are there any incentives for this kind of "continuing education"? I am
thinking of something like: attend a safety seminar, get your attendance
signed off by the presenter, send the sign-off to your insurance company,
get a few bucks off your insurance. Or maybe get a few bucks off your
next tank of fuel at the local FBO, or whatever. There would have to be
some minimum requirements for the seminar for this to work, but I don't
think it has to involve a formal "class" that lasts for multiple days/
weeks.

- Get the insurance industry into this mix so that they make their
premium-related decisions based on facts and not generalizations/
guesstimates.

This could go both ways. One way would tend to stop things like "OMG!
99% of the planes that crashed last year had AIR in their tires! Put
100% helium in your tires or eat a $1000 premium increase!!1!" The other
way is "Gee, I've had two close calls since I got this new Acme-123 this
summer because the other guy didn't know I was turning, and I found out
that when I thought I put on the turn signal, I really turned on the fog
lights. * I've talked to a couple of guys at the FBO with 123s that had
done the same thing. I'd report it to Acme so they could maybe change
the switch lever, but last year when those guys said the flap handle was
too close to the cup holder in the Acme-456, their premiums went up $500,
so I'm not turning in a report."

The FAA theorizes that for every *one* incident/accident that generates
enough buzz to really "ping" the FAAs safety radar...there are roughly
**600** that do not!

Part of this is human nature; it's not easy or fun to admit you were a
dumb-ass. But I think a lot of it is also an aversion to costing oneself
money - higher insurance premiums, extra lawyer food, whatever. I think
that if the FAA works on convincing pilots that their reports won't be
used against them, they'll get more and better reports.

* Yes, I know airplanes don't have turn signals or fog lights.

Matt Roberds