Dan Marotta wrote, On 6/10/2013 9:04 AM:
Yes, I know that the MEL requires a lot of stuff. Still, what do you do
when it fails?

My argument is not so much about the equipment as it is about slavishly
relying on devices to bring you home. You WILL have electrical failure
some day and will have to actually read a map, land visually, respond to
light signals from a control tower, pick up a wing with rudder instead
of aileron. Your 99.9% argument omits the 0.1% and that's a lot higher
number than the number of accidents per 100,000 flying hours.

Aviation requires nothing but skill and attention in maintenance and
operation. Bells and whistles are mandated by the barn door closers.

Yes, devices fail, but so do people. If the device fails less often than
the people, would you accept the device as useful?

My experience is I fail more often than the devices, such as gear
warnings, slow speed warnings, automatic hookups, and more. My radios
have worked reliably, but I haven't always set the frequency correctly.
I made more mistakes with paper maps than I ever did because the GPS
failed, and I've flown more hours with GPS than with maps.

I think each device has to be evaluated for efficacy, not discarded
because it might fail some day. If we treated pilots the same way, there
would be no pilots, either.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl