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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 11:05:05 -0400, "Skylune"
wrote in outaviation.com:: Should there be any shenanigans at OSH, I will report the unvarnished details. I'm not interested in shenanigans; I'm interested in the number of aviation mishaps occurring as a result of EAA's AirVenture. If the airman community can't stand the public airing of its laundry, it doesn't deserve the right to exercise its skills. I am appalled to find that flying to and from the nation's largest aviation event kills a number of airman each year. I'd like to know what the EAA is doing to mitigate the carnage that results from their AirVenture event. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
soapbox on
One thing I've written more than my share of letters with no apparent action taken is the concept of funneling 100% of the approaching aircraft into a small pipe between Ripon and Fisk and then splitting them into two streams for the light wind procedures for 18/36 and 9/27. That maximizes the concentration of aircraft into a small pipe and increases the chances for trying to occupy the same space with two aluminum masses. That also means that aircraft approaching Ripon from the north and east make a belly-up turn to follow the railroad tracks from Ripon to Fisk, notwithstanding a rather tall steel antenna structure 300' below your belly coming over Ripon. People that say "Why change? Fisk has been working all these years." obviously haven't shot that approach all that often. And, before you say that I don't have the chops to criticize, this is the first Oshkosh I've missed flying myself from California since 1973. There are excellent alternatives to the Fisk arrival, most of them involving the main freeway from Milwaukee to Green Bay. It would be a lot easier and less hassle to join the gaggle somewhere between Milwaukee and Fond Du Lac or Green Bay and Appleton than everybody doing the dipsy doodle over Ripon. And, rather than 2 hour "holds" over a couple of nondescript lakes, there are a dozen airports to land and refuel when the inevitable gear-up happens and the airport closes. Of course, everything is easy for the troops who are already at home during the Show and never have to mix it up with the hoi polloi who travel several thousand miles to make the Show what it is. If everybody at Headquarters who has a say-so about the Fisk approach had to do it at noon every day during the show, I guarantee you there would be changes. soapbox off "Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... I am appalled to find that flying to and from the nation's largest aviation event kills a number of airman each year. I'd like to know what the EAA is doing to mitigate the carnage that results from their AirVenture event. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
Larry Dighera wrote: I am appalled to find that flying to and from the nation's largest aviation event kills a number of airman each year. I'm not appalled at all. I've worked as a controller at many airshows, all much smaller than OSH. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid so many pilots are. They have no clue how to operate in controlled airspace. The fact that there's only 10 or so deaths at OSH is remarkable. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:14:06 -0600, Newps wrote
in :: Larry Dighera wrote: I am appalled to find that flying to and from the nation's largest aviation event kills a number of airman each year. I'm not appalled at all. I've worked as a controller at many airshows, all much smaller than OSH. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid so many pilots are. They have no clue how to operate in controlled airspace. The fact that there's only 10 or so deaths at OSH is remarkable. It saddens me to hear that depressing news coming from an experienced Air Traffic Controller. Their misdeeds reflect badly on the rest of their fellows in the eyes of the public. What can be done to increase their level of competency? Would an FAA crackdown on the CFIs who signed off on errant airmens' last flight review help motivate CFIs to provide them with the training they apparently need? Don't get me wrong. I don't advocate sicking the Administrator's minions on any airmen, but I'm unable to conceive of a better way to sharpen up those airmen who really need it to be safe. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:14:06 -0600, Newps wrote in :: I'm not appalled at all. I've worked as a controller at many airshows, all much smaller than OSH. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid so many pilots are. They have no clue how to operate in controlled airspace. The fact that there's only 10 or so deaths at OSH is remarkable. It saddens me to hear that depressing news coming from an experienced Air Traffic Controller. Their misdeeds reflect badly on the rest of their fellows in the eyes of the public. Frankly, I'm a bit surprised at yours and Newps's surprise. Especially his, since he goes around calling practically everyone stupid anyway. The truth is, most people are stupid. Half have two-digit IQs. Even among the supposedly smart people, there's a consistent lack of common sense. And in spite of those who would like to think we pilots are an elite group, there's about the same proportion of stupidity in aviation as in the general population. Now, it would surprise me if the "10 deaths per year", or even the "6 deaths per year" claim is supported by historical data. But even so, with fatalities running around 2000/year (a little less recently), given the huge amount of GA traffic at Oshkosh, I'm not even convinced that 6 or 10 deaths per year is all that out of line with the overall GA population. What's really annoying is that this sort of predictable outcome is somehow considered unusually bad by those outside aviation (or those within, for that matter). People kill themselves doing stupid things all the time. The only reason we don't have more motor vehicle fatalities each year is that the vehicles themselves have been made so much safer. We have more accidents than ever (due to rising population), but fatalities have remained roughly level at around 50,000 per year. But is that because people have gotten smarter? Nope...they're just as dumb as they've always been. We've just engineered some of the risk out of driving. Similar advancements have not made it to aviation, and of course there are a variety of reasons that aviation accidents tend to involve higher forces anyway (airplanes need airspeed to fly, helicopters don't glide very well, especially if there's been some kind of severe mechanical failure, etc.). But if the accident rate at Oshkosh, or in GA generally, reflects poorly on pilots specifically, then it reflects poorly on humanity in general. Those who look down upon all the people causing accidents forget just what kind of animal a human is after all. As long as humans exist, there will be a significant number of them finding ways to kill themselves. Most of the time, those ways won't even be new and unique or interesting in any way. They'll just be plain dumb. Pete |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
... [...] Now, it would surprise me if the "10 deaths per year", or even the "6 deaths per year" claim is supported by historical data. But even so, with fatalities running around 2000/year (a little less recently), given the huge amount of GA traffic at Oshkosh, I'm not even convinced that 6 or 10 deaths per year is all that out of line with the overall GA population. Sorry...I misread the AOPA article I was looking at. 2000/year is the accident rate, not the fatality rate. The fatalities are about a third in number of the total accident rate. Still...6 or 10 doesn't sound that out of line, especially when you consider the high-risk environment (naturally, you will see a higher accident and fatality rate in higher-risk environments, by definition). In any case, I still hold to my assertion that no one should be surprised that there are stupid pilots. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... [...] Now, it would surprise me if the "10 deaths per year", or even the "6 deaths per year" claim is supported by historical data. But even so, with fatalities running around 2000/year (a little less recently), given the huge amount of GA traffic at Oshkosh, I'm not even convinced that 6 or 10 deaths per year is all that out of line with the overall GA population. Sorry...I misread the AOPA article I was looking at. 2000/year is the accident rate, not the fatality rate. The fatalities are about a third in number of the total accident rate. Still...6 or 10 doesn't sound that out of line, especially when you consider the high-risk environment (naturally, you will see a higher accident and fatality rate in higher-risk environments, by definition). In any case, I still hold to my assertion that no one should be surprised that there are stupid pilots. A couple of thoughts: 1) For the Saturday flyer, Oshkosh is one of few times each year when s/he'll load up the airplane to the max, then have to fly the airplane well in a tight pattern. This greatly increases the risk factor. 2) Beyond that, lots of aircraft arrive at the fly-in with legal CG's, but loaded well aft of where the pilot is accustomed to flying the aircraft. Both of these issues are proficiency related, and I'm not sure anyone but Darwin can address that one. Next, there is the idiot factor. I believe the FAA can address some of this. For example, the person who flys the approach completely wrong, doesn't follow the NOTAM, etc. Those folks should get pulled aside after their hopefully safe arrival, and the FAA should politely make sure they have their stuff together... - Show me your copy of the NOTAM. - Why didn't you follow the procedures? - etc. I'm not calling for this for the guy who bounces a landing, but for the people who obviously don't have a clue, there should be some remedial action taken. KB |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
"Morgans" wrote:
There has already been a double fatal crash, today. At around 8:45 this morning, an experimental came down short of 9/27, and both of the occupants died. The Oshkosh papers had no more details, but I was able to find one source that said they were from Washington state. No other details, as to why they came down short, or what kind of plane. It appears to have been a Europa XS with a married couple from Washington state. There are more details on some of the messages posted to the Matronics Europa forum. Just for the record on the safety record of Oshkosh, this news story, http://wfrv.com/topstories/local_story_204183942.html claims: "EAA spokesman Dick Knapinski says the homebuilt airplane landed short of the runway at Wittman Regional Airport. This is the first fatal crash at the air show in a long time. "The weather conditions were just about perfect, It was perfectly clear, Very little, if any, wind at the time. It has to be at least 15 years, just a considerable length of time since something like this occurred at the airport," said Knapinski." Also, one message on the Matronics list from someone who claimed to know the couple well said this was the third Oshkosh trip for them (among other fly-ins), so the pilot was probably familiar with the demands involved. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:42:30 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in :: And in spite of those who would like to think we pilots are an elite group, there's about the same proportion of stupidity in aviation as in the general population. I find that statistic difficult to accept; perhaps I don't exactly understand what you mean by "the same proportion." (Are you saying that 50% of airmen have two digit IQs?) The vast majority of the general population would find mastering the art and science of aviation beyond their ken. Even metrology alone is incomprehensible to most folks. Now, it would surprise me if the "10 deaths per year", or even the "6 deaths per year" claim is supported by historical data. I thought the time period under discussion was the week or so during AirVenture, not per year. 2005 Nall Report information: http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/nall.html Total Fixed-Wing GA accidents in 2004: 1,413, 290 fatal. (pp 2) Personal Flying Accidents: 748 total/ 168 fatal Personal flying (for example: visiting friends or family, traveling to a vacation home or for recreation) represents about half (50.1 percent) of all GA flying (involving fixed-wing general aviation aircraft weighing 12,500 pounds or less), but accounts for 73.8 percent of fatal and 70.6 percent of nonfatal accidents (Figure 25). This type of flying accounted for nearly three-quarters (72.9 percent) of all weather-related accidents, and 75.6 percent of weather-related fatal crashes. Fuel management is another challenge for pilots on personal flights; three out of four of the total, and 87.5 percent of the fatal fuel management accidents occurred during this type of flying. Personal flights also accounted for 72.1 percent of all descent/approach accidents (77.1 percent of the fatals), and 72.9 percent of landing accidents (88.9 percent of the fatals). But even so, with fatalities running around 2000/year (a little less recently), Where did you get that figure? The total number of GA ACCIDENTS in 2004 was 1,413, and the total number of fatal accidents was 290 totaling 510 fatalities. given the huge amount of GA traffic at Oshkosh, I'm not even convinced that 6 or 10 deaths per year is all that out of line with the overall GA population. First, we should be discussing the number of FATAL ACCIDENTS occurring at AirVenture, not the number of FATALITIES (for it is an accident that generates a news story or NTSB report). That error (290 vs 2,000 [your figure]) is probably the source of your lack of concern at the appalling rate of fatal accidents that occur as a result of AirVenture. In any event, one would have to have statistics about the AirVenture accidents to validate your assertion against the Nall Report. What's really annoying is that this sort of predictable outcome is somehow considered unusually bad by those outside aviation (or those within, for that matter). The general public bestows a smattering of god status on pilots; after all, we do hold human lives in our hands to a much greater extent than say, a bus driver. When we fail to meet those expectations, it shakes the public trust they have placed in us. People kill themselves doing stupid things all the time. The only reason we don't have more motor vehicle fatalities each year is that the vehicles themselves have been made so much safer. We have more accidents than ever (due to rising population), but fatalities have remained roughly level at around 50,000 per year. But is that because people have gotten smarter? Nope...they're just as dumb as they've always been. We've just engineered some of the risk out of driving. That, and the fact that the velocities involved and unforgiving nature of aviation tend to make what would be a routine matter to a motorist (say engine failure), a life and death emergency for air travel. Similar advancements have not made it to aviation, With the obvious exception of the ballistic parachute, XM real-time weather information, GPS navigation, .... But if the accident rate at Oshkosh, or in GA generally, reflects poorly on pilots specifically, then it reflects poorly on humanity in general. Those who look down upon all the people causing accidents forget just what kind of animal a human is after all. Like I said at the beginning of this follow up article, the general population doesn't have to pass a written and practical examination that airmen must. I believe that sets airmen apart from the general population, just as college grads are a considerably unique group compared to the general population. But, my point is, that here we have pilots making a rather large national statement (AirVenture), but killing themselves in the public view while doing it. That can't be good PR for GA. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Oshkosh arrivals
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 19:23:06 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
wrote in :: A couple of thoughts: 3. The proportion of aircraft building airman who attend AirVenture is much larger than the general population of pilots. While piloting requires certain skills and knowledge, home building skills and knowledge do not significantly contribute to good airmanship. I would think it would be difficult to MASTER BOTH arts. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
You're Invited to the 4th Annual Rec.Aviation Oshkosh Party(s)! | [email protected] | Home Built | 5 | July 6th 06 10:04 PM |
You're Invited to the 4th Annual Rec.Aviation Oshkosh Party(s)! | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 0 | June 27th 06 04:58 AM |
Oshkosh Reflections | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 54 | August 16th 05 09:24 PM |
Oshkosh Reflections | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 45 | August 7th 05 02:31 PM |
How I got to Oshkosh (long) | Doug | Owning | 2 | August 18th 03 12:05 AM |