![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the warm welcome and vote of confidence Larry.
The point is, that maybe some people , and maybe you're included in this group, should not just blindly assume that because something is written in a book that is is almighty and the absolute very best way to do things. I offered a logical approach that made sense to me to be a much more effective catchall for runway incursion type accidents. Newps, demonstrating his clear understanding of both sound logic and in depth knowledge of the regulations as well as real life operations has shed light on how it works in the real world. So it seems clear to me that there's always a compromise , if you do things the absolute safest way , you lose a lot in terms of delays and inefficient use of time. but if you are too loose with the regs , then you start having more accidents statistically. So the FAA has come up with what is probably the best balance between the two to keep us moving and keep the potential for accidents at a low level. So the way things are , I can see sequences of several things that come together which would still cause an accident. for example, the pilot in the light aircraft leans for taxi and accidently stalls the engine on the runway at the same time the heavy with a newbie first officer has a checklist problem that gets the captain funbling around the panel as he starts the roll and the tower controller spills his coffee. etc. etc. My proposal would probably keep us away from accidents caused by this scenario , but , it would also slow us down greatly in day to day normal operations.... so we have to decide after crunching some numbers that the probability chance that all these bad things will come together for an accident does not balance the benefit we get on a regular basis. So I guess the moral of the story is that the law of large numbers says that given enough time there WILL be accidents caused by various different scenarios like the one I described above so PAY ATTENTION to what you're doing at all times. "Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:02:50 +0900, "donzaemon" wrote in : I'm not sure what the regulations technically say Then perhaps you might consider looking up the appropriate regulation/order instead of admitting your ignorance publicly in an a worldwide forum. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Don't Want to be Screwed | [email protected] | Home Built | 5 | May 22nd 04 06:58 AM |
Screwed by Helicopter Support Inc. | Becky DeWind | Owning | 3 | May 18th 04 01:14 PM |