will this fly?

Dan Thompson wrote:
"I tend to think this IS a sound argument" This is about the flimsiest
"argument" I've ever seen written, that additional safety equipment, on
balance, makes people less safe because they become more cavalier about
taking risks. It assumes that the people involved are not intelligent
enough to understand the scope of safety benefit and risk reduction being
provided. You must hang around a dumber group of pilots and airplane owners
than I do.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is a documented fact. The
insurance companies found this out with antilock brakes. They initially
gave discounts for cars so equipped ... until they found that the loss
rate was actually higher for ABS equipped cars. A study determined that
the issue was that drivers were driving more aggressively in poor
weather as they thought the ABS would save them.

Now, I tend to think the average pilot is a cut above the average
driver, but we're all still human and all too often do crazy things.
Just look at the most significant causes of accidents: fuel exhaustion,
flight into IMC for VFR pilots, buzzing, etc. Almost all are due to
poor judgement and, yes, simple stupidity in many cases. If all pilots
were as intelligent as you claim, then accidents in these categories
would be near zero, and mechanical failure would be the predominant
cause of accidents. Just isn't so my friend.


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Dan Thompson wrote:
They initially
gave discounts for cars so equipped ... until they found that the loss
rate was actually higher for ABS equipped cars. A study determined that
the issue was that drivers were driving more aggressively in poor
weather as they thought the ABS would save them.

I still contend the root cause here is the misinformation created from a
lack of proper training. In addition, the ABS may have been able to effect a
different outcome, even despite the reckless behavior, if the driver
actually knew how to use it. To me, drivers treat ABS like airbags: 'I know
I have it, but I don't need to know how to use it because it functions on
its own for my safety.'

As such, perhaps we should conclude that it's not the ABS or the parachute,
it's the a priori behavior that creates the situation in the first place
(including proper training in addition to good, up-to-the-moment ADM) that
deserves the attention.

Robert Henry wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Dan Thompson wrote:
They initially
gave discounts for cars so equipped ... until they found that the loss
rate was actually higher for ABS equipped cars. A study determined that
the issue was that drivers were driving more aggressively in poor
weather as they thought the ABS would save them.


I still contend the root cause here is the misinformation created from a
lack of proper training. In addition, the ABS may have been able to effect a
different outcome, even despite the reckless behavior, if the driver
actually knew how to use it. To me, drivers treat ABS like airbags: 'I know
I have it, but I don't need to know how to use it because it functions on
its own for my safety.'

That may well be the case. However, it still supports the point that
often additional safety equipment doesn't have the desired effect for a
variety of reasons that can't always be anticipatd.


As such, perhaps we should conclude that it's not the ABS or the parachute,
it's the a priori behavior that creates the situation in the first place
(including proper training in addition to good, up-to-the-moment ADM) that
deserves the attention.

I think that was the basis of the argument. I don't think anyone said
that the parachute wouldn't work as advertised, the argument was that
the behavior of the pilot might increase the chances of needing the
chute or of getting into situations where it can't help.

I agree that training and an emphasis on using good judgment and knowing
the limitations of your equipment is extremely important to safe flight.


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I think that was the basis of the argument. I don't think anyone said
that the parachute wouldn't work as advertised, the argument was that
the behavior of the pilot might increase the chances of needing the
chute or of getting into situations where it can't help.

Yes, the assertion is also on the table that the chute might not work in
icing conditions, and that it might not have worked in the NY accident. To
your point, we'll also never really know if in addition to stalls they
decided to attempt, or inadvertently entered, a spin.


I agree that training and an emphasis on using good judgment and knowing
the limitations of your equipment is extremely important to safe flight.

Agreed.

Bob

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Dan Thompson wrote:
"I tend to think this IS a sound argument" This is about the flimsiest
"argument" I've ever seen written, that additional safety equipment, on
balance, makes people less safe because they become more cavalier about
taking risks. It assumes that the people involved are not intelligent
enough to understand the scope of safety benefit and risk reduction
being
provided. You must hang around a dumber group of pilots and airplane
owners
than I do.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is a documented fact.

If this is a "documented fact" you wouldn't mind providing links to the
documents then?

Dashi

Dashi wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Dan Thompson wrote:

"I tend to think this IS a sound argument" This is about the flimsiest
"argument" I've ever seen written, that additional safety equipment, on
balance, makes people less safe because they become more cavalier about
taking risks. It assumes that the people involved are not intelligent
enough to understand the scope of safety benefit and risk reduction

being

provided. You must hang around a dumber group of pilots and airplane

owners

than I do.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is a documented fact.


If this is a "documented fact" you wouldn't mind providing links to the
documents then?

These two address mainly the facts, but not the causes, other than rough
speculation. There are many more similar statistical studies. I can
show you how to use a search engine if you'd like and then you can check
it out yourself.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/framed...6/pr121096.htm

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html

This one addresses a theory for the cause. As with all theories, there
are those who question it, but it seems to be pretty well supported by
the evidence.

http://www.drivers.com/article/164/


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...


http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html


Most interesting, to me. It supports my contention about controllability,
and states that stopping distance is actually better in all situations
except gravel (which is a rather uncommon road surface). It is plausible to
infer that the ABS vehicles were driven more recklessly based upon the
rollover and off-road accident statistics, but proving/disproving this
remains the issue.

Robert Henry wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...


http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html



Most interesting, to me. It supports my contention about controllability,
and states that stopping distance is actually better in all situations
except gravel (which is a rather uncommon road surface). It is plausible to
infer that the ABS vehicles were driven more recklessly based upon the
rollover and off-road accident statistics, but proving/disproving this
remains the issue.



Gravel AND snow. Snow is quite common for about 5 months of the year
here in PA! My only really bad ABS experience was in snow.


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Robert Henry wrote:

Gravel AND snow. Snow is quite common for about 5 months of the year
here in PA! My only really bad ABS experience was in snow.

Well, actually, I have quite the opposite - which is not an argument - just
an experience relayed. I learned to drive in New England. Tangentially,
I've always wanted a bumper sticker that read "Graduate: Boston School of
Driving" I think fewer people would tailgate me...when I cut them off. just
kidding

I rear-ended someone once (not even any scratches) on a road covered newly
by snow over a span of about 10 minutes. The white snow was heated by the
warm engines at the intersection in the minutes before I got there. I almost
fell when I got out of the car because the white glaze was extremely slick.
It was extremely thin white ice (like glaze), not black. Moreover, I
couldn't stop and I couldn't steer. If I had ABS, the outcome might have
been different, and it could have been worse as I steered around the car and
went right through the intersection into crossing traffic. I'll never know,
but I do know I couldn't steer and braking was of little effect. I can
actually remember looking at the speedometer going back and forth from 12-15
to 0, 10 to 0.... I was already in first gear in the automatic for
conditions.

Later, in the mountains of NY at 1am, there was an inch of snow on the road
and snowing. A deer was in the middle of the road, there was oncoming
traffic, and I was going about 40. As I got closer and the cars converged on
the deer, the deer ran in front of me. I was able, somehow, to steer left
into oncoming traffic as the deer went to my right, and steer back into my
lane to avoid the oncoming traffic. When we finally came to a stop, I
stalled the car, and couldn't restart it until I got a grip on what almost
just happened. I know without ABS, I would have hit something.

On another occasion, I was entering an intersection during a downpour. The
intersection was wide and unfamiliar. The two stop signs were four lanes
apart; there are two dedicated turning lanes, one for each right and left
and two through lanes. I was in the left through lane. As I realized there
were cars entering from stops into the crossing intersection, I looked and
found the stop signs for me well out of the visibility restricted peripheral
vision. It was daylight and the pedestrian crossing lines added the
rainwater obscuring the stop line. Honestly, in hindsight, I was driving too
fast for conditions. As I slammed the brakes, I estimated the stopping
distance would put me well into and maybe through the intersection. It
occurred to me also that if I made a right turn into the intersection, I
would have the possibility that vehicles crossing from the left would steer
left of me if I stayed as far right as possible in the breakdown/parking
lane as I turned right onto the crossing street. This also increased the
stopping distance available before the intersection. The car stopped about
30 feet from the corner of the intersection after making the right turn.
Without ABS, I am sure that I would have skidded straight through the
intersection and t-boned the police car (no exaggeration) turning left.
Most likely because of conditions, the police officer didn't come back
around and issue a ticket for failure to stop.

FWIW.

("Robert Henry" wrote)
snip
Later, in the mountains of NY at 1am, there was an inch of snow on the
road
and snowing. A deer was in the middle of the road, there was oncoming
traffic, and I was going about 40. As I got closer and the cars converged
on
the deer, the deer ran in front of me. I was able, somehow, to steer left
into oncoming traffic as the deer went to my right, and steer back into my
lane to avoid the oncoming traffic. When we finally came to a stop, I
stalled the car, and couldn't restart it until I got a grip on what almost
just happened. I know without ABS, I would have hit something.


We drill this into the heads of our high school age nieces: ALWAYS HIT THE
DEER!!!

Hit the deer at the slowest speed possible, sure ...but don't go nuts trying
to avoid contact. Hell, I've had the nieces out practicing hitting deer.
Look! A (real) semi is in the oncoming lane and a (real) huge pickup is
behind you, there's an (imaginary) deer wandering out on the 2 lane road,
and you're doing 50 mph. What do you do?...right now!

Our Answer: Slow down - "thud", watching carefully your rearview mirror AND
for that semi to cross into your lane ...trying to avoid hitting the second
damn deer that just darted out on the other side of the road.

We tell them hitting the deer is about 4th on the list of what's important -
right now. Who's behind you, who's in front of you, and how's your car
moving down the road are all that matter for the next 10 seconds. Drive the
car!! (Hmm. Sounds familiar, like I've heard that somewhere before)

To some of their friends, I'm "the uncle guy" that says always hit the deer.

BTW, congrats on missing that mountain deer. I've only hit one deer in over
25 years of driving, but I was on my motorcycle - so it's worth more points.
g

--
Montblack
http://lumma.de/mt/archives/bart.gif