On Sunday, November 24, 2019 at 6:05:37 AM UTC-8, RR wrote:
Tom,this is why I asked for your definition of airmanship. If it is both stick and rudder skills and judgment then all that is left is mechanical failure and hand of god. It makes sence to me that the last two are small contributors. If we asume our skills are superior and will keep us out of trouble, how do we explain the "**** poor airmanship" of highly skilled contest pilots how have been killed. To me is seems to be erosion of margins. Over time we get more bold, get away with it time and time again until it becomes the new normal. In my effort to keep from being a stistic, I try to reset my margins from time to time.

I have known 3 pilots that have hit trees on the ridge. All resulted in minor damage and flew on. 2 of the 3 were excellent pilots, one a world record holder. All fly a little higher off the ridge now. And without hitting a tree, so do I...

RR,

Being a highly skilled contest pilot does not make you immune from a momentary lapse, and that is all that it takes if it happens at exactly the wrong time. Flying too close to the trees on a ridge and hitting them is also known as a CFIT, and CFIT is likely the best example of ****-poor airmanship as it is totally preventable.

I am not a holier than thou type - it's happened to me, but I was lucky enough to have survived, twice. One was when I failed to hookup my elevator on an ASW19, the other where I botched the engine restart of a DG400 and landed in a plowed field with the engine extended.

In general, I fly with pretty wide safety margins, especially concerning weather. Thunderstorms are a very real possibility where I do most of my flying, and airports are few and far between. So the decision to fly or not is critical. I regularly repeat a very simple axiom to fellow pilots, "I would rather be down here wishing I was up there, than be up there wishing I was down here."

Tom