![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|