Stress/Anxiety Driven Accidents

At 16:54 28 March 2018, Jim White wrote:
At 11:09 28 March 2018, wrote:
Mental and physical performance reduction does occur above a heart rat
of
=
@145 when that heart rate is stress induced. Equivalent or What doe
knowing that you have a high heart rate do to your stress levels?
Jim

Sympathetic arousal is a physiological response for all mammals.
Generally speaking, in humans the effects can begin at stress driven heart
rates above 145 bpm. It's onset is often insidious and the effects can be
catastrophically debilitating.

In my early years as a flight instructor, the almost universal (yet
questionable) reply from a student who I had just taken the controls from
would be to say "l was just going to do that". As I gained experience, I
gradually realized that most often I could comfortably allow things to
progress to the point where it should have been obvious to the student
that the recovery was well beyond their skill level. Interestingly you
would think that now their response would have been to openly admit
that "yes I was really screwed up there". However the almost universal
response now became "I thought I was okay". It never ceased to amaze
me how clueless they were at seeing the impending consequence in
caparison to their skill level.

I'm now retired from instructing, but knowing now what I didn't know then.
I will always wonder if their impaired perceptions were actually
attributable to the onset of sympathetic arousal. If I was still
instructing,
I would at least have the ability to know what their comparison heart rate
is.

My original intention was to write an article for soaring magazine.
My thanks to the serious replies on RAS. It show that at least some level
of awareness has been raised and that any future article would need to
reflect on that perspective.

Martin Eiler

An actually interesting thread on RAS.

My comment, when I was an active CFIG or letting a ride handle the controls, was, "I will let you get over your head, my goal is to NOT let you get over my head."

Thus far, over decades of rides and about a decade of instruction......no bent ships. Yes, I had a few "experts" get well into the hole, but I always kept a few "outs".
The goal, in general, was NOT to scare the other person, it was either to show how much worse it could get, or, how bad you messed up being an "expert".
As an instructor, the followup conversation was, "what did you see, how did it feel, how did it sound........followed by, what was your plan".

Sometimes that gets you an idea of what needs work.

I was checking out in a Piper Pacer with a CFI that flew with us. The field had an "interesting" approach way back when.
After one landing, I was asked, "how close to the tree tops were we?".
My reply, "maybe 10' "?

The CFI was happy, I knew where we were.
On short final, the towrope would tear the tops off trees and we were staged just beyond. So, being in the right spot at the right speed was paramount depending on weather. You would actually be even with tree tops on either side of final if it was correct, but had a bit below in "the slot".

Interesting subject, makes me think back to other things I have seen over the years and wonder if this topic was a factor.

On Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 11:15:06 AM UTC-4, soarin wrote:

My original intention was to write an article for soaring magazine.
My thanks to the serious replies on RAS. It show that at least some level
of awareness has been raised and that any future article would need to
reflect on that perspective.


Maybe you could team up with Dr. Dan Johnson MD AME who writes the Soaring Rx column for 'Soaring magazine'. Dan has the background in flight physiology and access to the peer reviewed research. http://www.danlj.org/~danlj/
You've raised an interesting idea. I would like to see a Soaring Rx column explore it with scientific rigor.

This whole thread is a pretty good discussion of the relevant factors.
I've thought about reviving SoaringRx now that I've retired, and the cognitive degradation during stress is petty complicated and interesting.
Like most other causes of inadvertent stupidity, the pilot never has the situation figured out initially.
The heart rate is seldom noticed, is not directly a cause, and is never a clue to the resolution of the crisis.
I agree that training for emergencies, both planned (and, after competence with those) unplanned, will contribute greatly to safety.
In this regard, we simply do not fly often enough.
If I ruled the soaring world, everyone would do about a dozen ground launches to a low pattern once a month or so, to get really used to the way things look down there, get used to a low approach, and to build sick-and-rudder skills. A dozen four-hour flights a year feel good -- but that's only a dozen landings.
Time, cost, and availability of equipment and instructors are all hindrances.
DrDan