A disturbing statistic

Dane Spearing wrote:
I've had many non-pilot friends and co-workers ask, "Is flying a small plane
more or less dangerous than driving a car?", to which my response has always
been "It depends on who is piloting the plane." However, in order to get
a firmer answer from a statistical standpoint on this question, I decided
to do a little homework:

It has so much to do both with pilot experience level and type of operation.

Day VFR, Night VFR, Day IFR, and night IFR.

Only Day VFR has the potential for being *very* safe in small,
single-engine aircraft.

No, I cannot pin down what "ver" means exactly in this context. But, my
observations over 50 years of being around this stuff tells me that
experienced pilots seldom crash on good VFR daytime operations.

Sam Spade wrote:
But, my
observations over 50 years of being around this stuff tells me that
experienced pilots seldom crash on good VFR daytime operations.

True enough. However, my observation is that pilots who limit
themselves to nothing but good VFR daytime operations never do become
experienced (they quit after a few hundred hours because flying just
isn't useful under those restrictions), so that doesn't help.

Michael

Michael wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:

But, my
observations over 50 years of being around this stuff tells me that
experienced pilots seldom crash on good VFR daytime operations.


True enough. However, my observation is that pilots who limit
themselves to nothing but good VFR daytime operations never do become
experienced (they quit after a few hundred hours because flying just
isn't useful under those restrictions), so that doesn't help.

Michael

Depends whether the self-imposed limit is imposed going into the game or
much later on after the cat has shed several lives. ;-)

Sam Spade wrote:
True enough. However, my observation is that pilots who limit
themselves to nothing but good VFR daytime operations never do become
experienced (they quit after a few hundred hours because flying just
isn't useful under those restrictions), so that doesn't help.

Depends whether the self-imposed limit is imposed going into the game or
much later on after the cat has shed several lives. ;-)

True enough. My point is that you don't get to be an experienced and
capable pilot without taking some significant risks somewhere along the
line.

Michael

Michael wrote:

Sam Spade wrote:

But, my
observations over 50 years of being around this stuff tells me that
experienced pilots seldom crash on good VFR daytime operations.


True enough. However, my observation is that pilots who limit
themselves to nothing but good VFR daytime operations never do become
experienced (they quit after a few hundred hours because flying just
isn't useful under those restrictions), so that doesn't help.

Michael

The OP stated,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've had many non-pilot friends and co-workers ask, "Is flying a small
plane more or less dangerous than driving a car?", to which my response
has always been "It depends on who is piloting the plane."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your observation is from the pilot perspective. A better answer to the
OP would include both pilot experience and type of operation.

I have always admonished my non-flying friends and relatives to only fly
with an experienced pilot and only during solid Day VFR conditions.
That will fit them into the safety slot I feel they deserve to be in.

If the pilot who they fly with chooses to fly at other times during the
night in IMC, dodging TRWs in the Rockies with his XM weather display,
that risk is not imposed upon those I am advising.

Only Day VFR has the potential for being *very* safe in small,
single-engine aircraft.


I got my Instrument rating when a couple of Day VFR flights turned
really wormy because of weather. I've had far less stress and no bad
situations flying conservative IFR compared with the vagaries of trying
to stay VFR in the midwest.