WAS: How safe is it, really?

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:11:42 -0500, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

"zatatime" wrote in message
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:05:47 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 03:59:48 GMT, tony roberts
wrote:

BUT:
Most light aircraft accidents are caused through continued flight into
IFR (read - don't even attempt to fly there there) weather.

To be more clear: The accidents of this type are for VFR (good
weather) pilots without training on how to effectively operate an
aircraft in IFR (bad weather) conditions. For June's understanding,
these are people that only have the license your husband got first.
Since he is now working toward his instrument ticket these statistics
are greatly reduced.

Just don't want you to think that the added training he is going for
makes this far more dangerous. It will actually make him safer
overall.

I don't believe statistically IFR rated pilots have a better safety
record.
It is a false assumption.

IFR pilot's have a better safety record in IFR conditions than VFR
pilots do in IFR conditions, which is all I was trying to say. I may
not have been perfectly clear.

VFR pilots don't legally fly in IFR conditions.

Exactly.

Your statement "To be more
clear: The accidents of this type [continued illegal flight into IMC] are
for VFR (good weather) pilots without training on how to effectively operate
an aircraft in IFR (bad weather) conditions." is quite clear and
substantially incorrect.

Do you have any statistics to back this up? You're saying VFR pilot's
who continue into IFR conditions have a better safety record than IFR
pilot's operating legally in IFR conditions?

I'd love to see the facts to back this one up.

z