At 05:12 30 April 2004, Graeme Cant wrote:
Dave Martin wrote:

Whatever happened to teaching good look out and airmanship?


Nothing. It's still taught and practiced as effectively,
efficiently and thoroughly as it ever was - and has
been for many years. And it's just as ineffective
as it ever was.
Are you one of those who see it as simply a problem
of laziness and complacency? You're probably right
but they're both endemic in human nature and won't
change now. For jobs as important as this, monitoring
systems designed with built-in tendencies to distraction
and complacency and with multiple duties just to top
it off - are simply inadequate
and always will be.

All forms of training in lookout are doomed to fail
because of basic human limitations. Not just optical
limitations. Humans are simply bad at continuous alertness
and monitoring for a very low probability threat over
a long period. That's why we no longer have engineer's
panels in the flight decks of large aeroplanes. There's
as much or more to monitor than there always was -
we've just accepted that humans don't do it well and
found other solutions.

Gliders have the highest rate of midairs of all forms
of hard wing aviation. I'm happy with the collision
threat and the things I do to minimise it and I'll
go on flying gliders. If you're not happy, Dave, you
need to accept that it won't be improved without electronic
assistance.

Isn't 50 or more years enough?

Graeme Cant

Graeme

Where did I say I wasn't happy with the present situation
?

Adding an electronic device will not ease the problem,
in the majority of cases it could compound the problems
faced by the average pilot.

Large aircraft do not fly in close proximity to others
in great numbers such as a thermal gaggle. They also
have such things as transponders, outside radar support
from control towers and other sophisticated equipment
plus the electronic power to support all the devices.
In the main they fly in regulated airspace, where everyone
has the same equipment

Flying in isolation such a device may help but in crowded
skies I suspect the information supplied would overload
the equipment and pilot, as you say above, 'Humans
are simply bad at continuous alertness and monitoring
for a very low probability threat over a long period.'


How does this equate with a large competiton gaggle
who must monitor high probability threats over long
periods say several hours and during their flight will
meet others not in their competition on their flight
path. I suppose someone will say they train for this
type of flying.

Fitting units to gliders in isolation will also give
the pilot a false sense of security.

You ask, 'Isn't 50 or more years enough?'

1 year is too long!

Dave