"Frank Olson" wrote in message
news:Uaftk.124355$nD.38043@pd7urf1no...
a wrote:
A recent thread reminded me it might be worth discussing an personal
flying practice. When en route, as a way of reducing the likelihood
of a midair by about a binary order of magnitude (that's a factor of
two for the non mathematically inclined) I fly the nominal altitude
less 100 feet VFR, or the assigned altitude less 50 feet IFR. The idea
of course is if the unseen/unreported converging traffic is at the
correct altitude or on the high side of it, we'd miss. I chose lower
because I fly a low winged airplane, and of course I would agree this
makes a very unlikely event only slightly less likely. On the other
hand, I don't see that I've significantly increased other in-flight
risks much by doing this, What (if anything) might I have overlooked?
To the wiseguys, yes I in fact do hold altitude pretty closely when
flying.

Do any of you have similar odd real life habits you think enhance
safety?


I fly at the assigned altitude, period. I put my trust in the controllers
and would hope that the PIC's sharing the airways with me are just as
trustworthy (and professional). Someone that thinks deviating from an
assigned altitude by as much as 100 feet (plus or minus) is "OK" should
spend a few hours with an instructor that's going to rap your knuckles
with a ruler when you try pulling something like that in the name of
"safety".

I would say that would be a good instructor to have. It's important to
remember that IFR mid-airs are practically unheard of (at least in the US).
Many times the verticle separation between aircraft is 1,000'. If you're
purposely flying above or below, you've just effectively reduced that margin
for safety. You're also making the controller's job harder, because he has
to keep an extra eye out for someone who can't hold his assigned altitude.