Why Soaring's Safety Record Doesn't Improve

nafod40 wrote in message ...
JJ Sinclair wrote:
Ever ask yourself, why doesn't our safety record improve?

The best description I've ever came accross and fly by is 'Flying is
safe,untill you forget how dangerous it really is!' This would also
apply to skydiving I suppose.

I fly for my own challenge and enjoyment. I risk only myself
and the tow pilot (I also tow for my club).

The airline and military pilots fly a mission for the benefit of
the organization, using the organization's equippment.
Those pilots are not out for satisfaction, challenge or enjoyment.

Yes, you could increase safety in soaring by adding rules, policies
and procedures. You would also reduce the FUN of soaring so that
nobody actually flys anymore, that would also reduce the accident rate.

Todd Smith

While I know many airline pilots who fit your description, that is not true
for most military pilots. I loved flying fighters. I would do it again in a
heart beat if they would let me.

"Todd Smith" wrote in message
om...
I fly for my own challenge and enjoyment. I risk only myself
and the tow pilot (I also tow for my club).

The airline and military pilots fly a mission for the benefit of
the organization, using the organization's equippment.
Those pilots are not out for satisfaction, challenge or enjoyment.

Yes, you could increase safety in soaring by adding rules, policies
and procedures. You would also reduce the FUN of soaring so that
nobody actually flys anymore, that would also reduce the accident rate.

Todd Smith

Todd Smith wrote:
I fly for my own challenge and enjoyment. I risk only myself
and the tow pilot (I also tow for my club).

The airline and military pilots fly a mission for the benefit of
the organization, using the organization's equipment.
Those pilots are not out for satisfaction, challenge or enjoyment.

Just wanted to point out, as a former Naval Aviator, that it was all
about satisfaction, challenge, and enjoyment for me. And I got paid for
it too! Hard to believe...

In short, most mil pilots are into flying for the same reasons you are.

Robert,

I don't know if a program like this would be implemented
in the US, where I fly. But I would like to learn its
details hoping to learn something and apply it to my
own flying. This is the first time I read about hard
evidence of systematic safety improvement. Where can
I get more information?

Regards

Miguel

At 20:30 14 May 2004, Robert Danewid wrote:
Not true!

The Swedish Soaring Federation has been delegated all
authority over
gliding by the Swedish CAA. Since 1993 we have reduced
our accident rate
by 50%.

You do not need a lot of rules, you need a few good
rules, and the power
to enforce them!

Robert

Miguel;

If you are in the US. look at the Soaring Safety Foundations Site survey
program (http://www.soaringsafety.org). This program is modeled after
the Swedish program. The major points a

*) It's confidential, nobody but your club/school gets a copy of the
final report, even the SSF destroy's it's copy

*) It's free. The SSF is trying to address all safety issues and this
is one aspect of the fight to improve safety awarness.

Rich Carlson
V2Bx (1I)

Miguel Lavalle wrote:

Robert,

I don't know if a program like this would be implemented
in the US, where I fly. But I would like to learn its
details hoping to learn something and apply it to my
own flying. This is the first time I read about hard
evidence of systematic safety improvement. Where can
I get more information?

Regards

Miguel

At 20:30 14 May 2004, Robert Danewid wrote:

Not true!

The Swedish Soaring Federation has been delegated all
authority over
gliding by the Swedish CAA. Since 1993 we have reduced
our accident rate
by 50%.

You do not need a lot of rules, you need a few good
rules, and the power
to enforce them!

Robert

Before making or enforcing rules, it would be prudent
to get some real and up-to-date information. The SSA
annually publishes an abstract of US fatal accidents,
which may or may not be complete. But many accidents
and 'incidents' go unreported, or are reported but
not recorded or followed up. An accessible and reasonably
complete database of things that have gone wrong might
lead to useful and acceptable suggestions for future
accident abatement. When people are shown WHY rules
are made, with supporting evidence, they generally
self-enforce [Darwin had some thoughts on this].

However, in the end, we all accept a certain degree
of risk by choosing to fly, and that means that some
accidents will always happen either by bad luck or
bad judgment. Neither can be legislated or enforced
away.

Ian

At 22:12 14 May 2004, Miguel Lavalle wrote:
Robert,

I don't know if a program like this would be implemented
in the US, where I fly. But I would like to learn its
details hoping to learn something and apply it to my
own flying. This is the first time I read about hard
evidence of systematic safety improvement. Where can
I get more information?

Regards

Miguel

At 20:30 14 May 2004, Robert Danewid wrote:
Not true!

The Swedish Soaring Federation has been delegated all
authority over
gliding by the Swedish CAA. Since 1993 we have reduced
our accident rate
by 50%.

You do not need a lot of rules, you need a few good
rules, and the power
to enforce them!

Robert

At 20:48 14 May 2004, Todd Smith wrote:
I fly for my own challenge and enjoyment. I risk only
myself
and the tow pilot (I also tow for my club).

The airline and military pilots fly a mission for the
benefit of
the organization, using the organization's equippment.

Those pilots are not out for satisfaction, challenge
or enjoyment.

Yes, you could increase safety in soaring by adding
rules, policies
and procedures. You would also reduce the FUN of soaring
so that
nobody actually flys anymore, that would also reduce
the accident rate.

Todd Smith


In its logical extreme, this is quite true. On the
other hand, no one is going to miss out on any fun
by being required and double checked for control hookups.
I'm quite aware of the slippery slope of delegating
responsibilities and thereby abandoning self-reliance.
The launch is hardly an individual concern and I congratulate
FBOs and tow pilots who insist on this.

In addition to gliders, I fly helicopters (glide angle is not as good,
though). Before each flight, I spend 20 minutes pre-flighting it. After
pre-flight, no one checks my work. As the pilot, I must be and am the
person responsible for the safety of the helicopter. If something does not
check out right, I do not fly it.

Likewise, in a glider, the pilot must be the person ultimately responsible
for the connections of the controls, as well as other safety checks. The
suggestion of a "wing tape sign off", transferring some responsibility to
the tow pilot seems to raise at least a couple of issues. First, it would
create a potential legal liability upon the tow pilot, which does not
presently exist. That liability would be that if the sailplane crashed
because something went wrong with the controls or the signoff procedure, the
pilot would be a defendant in a multi-million dollar lawsuit - and this from
someone who may not be paid, or often underpaid. The second issue is that
it diverts responsibility from where it belongs - with the pilot.

Clubs are free to adopt rules and regulations to assure that controls are
properly connected. It would be easy to adopt a procedure to assure that
the controls are checked by someone other than the assembler.

On the other hand, I would leave the responsibility for the privately owned
ship with the owner.

I recall years ago flying into a private airstrip in Southern California.
The FBO owned the field. She denied landing permission to any pilot who had
a retractable gear ariplane and refused to state that his gear was "down and
locked". I do not know if safety was improved, but I do know of at least
one instance where the pilot landed gear up (not me).

Check lists are absolutely essential.

Colin


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/04

The
suggestion of a "wing tape sign off", transferring some responsibility to
the tow pilot seems to raise at least a couple of issues. First, it would
create a potential legal liability upon the tow pilot,

Come on Colin, the tow pilot isn't saying the controls are hooked up, he's just
checking that the sailplane pilot said it was done and a PCC was accomplished.
Just checking paper-work, so to speak, only make that tape-work. BTW, towing a
glider with controls not hooked up is hazardous to the tow pilot. He's just
being prudent in checking on something like this.

I don't want to even think about the number of accidents I know about caused by
unhooked controls, must be 20 in the last 30 years. At least 2 pilots are no
longer with us and another lives with daily pain in both legs. What are we
doing about it? NOTHING

We could do something, how about insurance companies refusing to insure
organizations (FBO's & clubs) that don't follow a few basic safety rules?

Can't wait to hear the howl and whine coming from the "I have a right to be
negligent" crowd on this proposal.
JJ Sinclair