Attitudes & Reality

Kirk

I don't think the New Scientist is a hoax website. There are many scientific studies as to why pilots ignore audio warnings:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25029890/

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/...arning-systems

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ts_in_Aviation

https://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&so...s7pE11AB 94Gy

I don't think any of these links can be accused as being hoxes - and yet all indicate that audio alarms and warnings are often ineffective.

I love gadgets - and will happily fill my glider with stuff. But I find the more sources of information I have - the less I focus on each one. And I am often happiest in a simple Bergfalke or Ka8 when there is the simplest instruments.
I then get to spend the time I was looking at all my fancy instruments rather looking at the incredible views and enjoying the simple pleasures of just staying up. And surprising - it's on those flights that I actually see more GA traffic.

Clinton.

On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 2:13:50 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Kirk

I don't think the New Scientist is a hoax website. There are many scientific studies as to why pilots ignore audio warnings:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25029890/

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/...arning-systems

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ts_in_Aviation

https://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&so...s7pE11AB 94Gy

I don't think any of these links can be accused as being hoxes - and yet all indicate that audio alarms and warnings are often ineffective.

I love gadgets - and will happily fill my glider with stuff. But I find the more sources of information I have - the less I focus on each one. And I am often happiest in a simple Bergfalke or Ka8 when there is the simplest instruments.
I then get to spend the time I was looking at all my fancy instruments rather looking at the incredible views and enjoying the simple pleasures of just staying up. And surprising - it's on those flights that I actually see more GA traffic.

Clinton.

Nice articles but in a glider you don't have a smoke in the lavatory alarm, etc., to contend with. Other than Flarm, what other alarms are there in a glider? And the Flarm warning changes as the threat gets more severe. I can't imagine anyone ignoring the max threat level warning it puts out (ask me how I know). Further, there is no head down time required to assess and respond to the threat, the audio is all you need. Evan and Kirk are right on here, IMO.

On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Kirk

I don't think the New Scientist is a hoax website. There are many scientific studies as to why pilots ignore audio warnings:

Clinton,
I did not mean to accuse New Scientist of perpetrating a hoax. What I meant was, with spurious reporting they are engaging in Hoax-like tactics. You are making a grievous mistake by linking to these old (In one case decades old) articles. The training at airlines is light years ahead of where it was when these stories were written. Never say never but the chances of a crew ignoring or misinterpreting a warning is vastly diminished with on going improvements in training. This does bring up a good point that without proper usage the benefits of safety equipment is marginalized.