How dangerous is soaring?

Number of fatalies and serious injuries per year divided
by the number of participants. I don't think horse
riders are required to log their time in the saddle!


Incidentally, actor Christopher Reeves (aka Superman)
was an active glider pilot, but was paralysed from
the neck down and ultimately died at an early age as
the direct result of a horse riding accident. I guess
that sort of proves my point on a non statistically
significant sample of 1.

Del C

At 14:12 03 November 2007, Andy wrote:
On Nov 3, 5:07 am, Del C wrote
Gliding is actually statistically considerably safer
than Horse Riding,
which does not generally seem to be regarded as risky.

What are the horse riding statistics and what are they
based on based
on? Hours in the saddle or something else? Do horse
riders log and
report the hours they ride to some controlling authority
that compiles
the statistics? Are the statistics broken down into
the many types of
horse riding?

I suspect there is very poor data on the time exposure
to most of the
risks that kill people, except of course total hours
lived prior to
the fatal event.

Andy

Years ago, I remember reading of accident and fatality figures for
occupational hazards in Great Britain. At the time, professional jump
jockeys were top of the list, with flat race jockeys not far behind.
Both were ahead of deep-sea fishermen. The advent of North Sea oil
rigs put some of their workers at the top (divers, as I recall).

I don't recall any piloting professions anywhere near the top of the
list.

My conclusion - horses are dangerous and aircraft much less so.

Mike

No one has addressed the real danger of soaring; its
addictive properties.

I've never tried cocaine or crack or any sort of drugs,
but I know it is more addictive than tobacco, caffeine,
colas, or sugaars (all of which I have abandoned and
am free from), and that it is disruptive to work, careers,
families, and every sort of productive endeavor. Who
cares?! Can't and won't quit.

At 18:18 04 November 2007, Mike The Strike wrote:
Years ago, I remember reading of accident and fatality
figures for
occupational hazards in Great Britain. At the time,
professional jump
jockeys were top of the list, with flat race jockeys
not far behind.
Both were ahead of deep-sea fishermen. The advent
of North Sea oil
rigs put some of their workers at the top (divers,
as I recall).

I don't recall any piloting professions anywhere near
the top of the
list.

My conclusion - horses are dangerous and aircraft much
less so.

Mike

Hi Nyal

Entirely agree on the addictions side.

On the other hand I must take issue with the theory that soaring is disruptive
of family life. Apparently , since I took up soaring seriously, as opposed to
the occasional flight, I am a much better person to be around. My general mood
is better, and family life is smoother. Should I neglect to go flying on more
than one weekend in a row, I am reminded pointedly that my soaring is suffering
neglect...

My 13 year old daughter is an air scout, and loves to be involved occasionally
as does my son. Can't do it too often at present, because they can get bored
easily, and there was a lack of nice two seaters to fly them in. I want to fly
XC, the club crates are , well CRATES. So I was forced to order a two seater.

According to my insurance company, soaring is less dangerous than being a hobby
handyman. They load your premium if you use power tools in your garage, but not
if you admit to flying gliders. Maybe I got lucky, but one assumes the quants
have checked the risks. My guess is that - while active soaring is a higher
risk,than being sedentary, the skills of observation and situational awareness,
and self assessment learned all lower risk in other activities. Overall the
insurers see no material change in risk for an active glider pilot. It would be
fascinating to discover why a hand drill is more likely to cause an insurance
loss. Anyone involved in the actuarial side?

Bruce

Nyal Williams wrote:
No one has addressed the real danger of soaring; its
addictive properties.

I've never tried cocaine or crack or any sort of drugs,
but I know it is more addictive than tobacco, caffeine,
colas, or sugaars (all of which I have abandoned and
am free from), and that it is disruptive to work, careers,
families, and every sort of productive endeavor. Who
cares?! Can't and won't quit.

At 18:18 04 November 2007, Mike The Strike wrote:
Years ago, I remember reading of accident and fatality
figures for
occupational hazards in Great Britain. At the time,
professional jump
jockeys were top of the list, with flat race jockeys
not far behind.
Both were ahead of deep-sea fishermen. The advent
of North Sea oil
rigs put some of their workers at the top (divers,
as I recall).

I don't recall any piloting professions anywhere near
the top of the
list.

My conclusion - horses are dangerous and aircraft much
less so.

Mike

Yep, I've been told to go to the airport on more than
one occasion!

Are you speaking of life insurance or medical insurance?
I've not bought insurance since 1970 and I don't know
the 'drill.' I did run a drill into my thumbnail building
a set of flaps for a Capella about six or seven years
ago.


At 18:54 04 November 2007, Bruce wrote:
Hi Nyal

Entirely agree on the addictions side.

On the other hand I must take issue with the theory
that soaring is disruptive
of family life. Apparently , since I took up soaring
seriously, as opposed to
the occasional flight, I am a much better person to
be around. My general mood
is better, and family life is smoother. Should I neglect
to go flying on more
than one weekend in a row, I am reminded pointedly
that my soaring is suffering
neglect...

My 13 year old daughter is an air scout, and loves
to be involved occasionally
as does my son. Can't do it too often at present, because
they can get bored
easily, and there was a lack of nice two seaters to
fly them in. I want to fly
XC, the club crates are , well CRATES. So I was forced
to order a two seater.

According to my insurance company, soaring is less
dangerous than being a hobby
handyman. They load your premium if you use power tools
in your garage, but not
if you admit to flying gliders. Maybe I got lucky,
but one assumes the quants
have checked the risks. My guess is that - while active
soaring is a higher
risk,than being sedentary, the skills of observation
and situational awareness,
and self assessment learned all lower risk in other
activities. Overall the
insurers see no material change in risk for an active
glider pilot. It would be
fascinating to discover why a hand drill is more likely
to cause an insurance
loss. Anyone involved in the actuarial side?

Bruce

Nyal Williams wrote:
No one has addressed the real danger of soaring; its
addictive properties.

I've never tried cocaine or crack or any sort of drugs,
but I know it is more addictive than tobacco, caffeine,
colas, or sugaars (all of which I have abandoned and
am free from), and that it is disruptive to work,
careers,
families, and every sort of productive endeavor.
Who
cares?! Can't and won't quit.

At 18:18 04 November 2007, Mike The Strike wrote:
Years ago, I remember reading of accident and fatality
figures for
occupational hazards in Great Britain. At the time,
professional jump
jockeys were top of the list, with flat race jockeys
not far behind.
Both were ahead of deep-sea fishermen. The advent
of North Sea oil
rigs put some of their workers at the top (divers,
as I recall).

I don't recall any piloting professions anywhere near
the top of the
list.

My conclusion - horses are dangerous and aircraft
much
less so.

Mike

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Hi Nyal


According to my insurance company, soaring is less dangerous than being a
hobby handyman. They load your premium if you use power tools in your
garage, but not if you admit to flying gliders. Bruce


Unfortunately, it may be that they just include a disclaimer in your
insurance policy (assuming it's life insurance), stating that you are not
covered while acting as air crew or while piloting or passenger in GA
aircraft. This is common in the US and would likely be the case unless you
have policy that specifically covers you while partaking in flying
activities.

I understand there is no such exclusion of coverage for home handymen (g).

bumper

On 11/4/07 10:28 PM, in article
, "bumper"
wrote:


"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Hi Nyal


According to my insurance company, soaring is less dangerous than being a
hobby handyman. They load your premium if you use power tools in your
garage, but not if you admit to flying gliders. Bruce


Unfortunately, it may be that they just include a disclaimer in your
insurance policy (assuming it's life insurance), stating that you are not
covered while acting as air crew or while piloting or passenger in GA
aircraft. This is common in the US and would likely be the case unless you
have policy that specifically covers you while partaking in flying
activities.

I understand there is no such exclusion of coverage for home handymen (g).

bumper



For what it's worth:
The last time I applied for a life insurance policy, the company did not
include a war exclusion (I was in the military at the time, and subject to
deployment), but balked at covering me when flying gliders. It required a
significant amount of discussion and negotiation to get them to cover me
(they finally did).

Admittedly this company caters to the military, and they wouldn't sell many
policies if war were excluded from coverage, but their perception of the
relative risks of soaring versus war surprised me.

Bullwinkle

bumper wrote:

Unfortunately, it may be that they just include a disclaimer in your
insurance policy (assuming it's life insurance), stating that you are not
covered while acting as air crew or while piloting or passenger in GA
aircraft. This is common in the US and would likely be the case unless you
have policy that specifically covers you while partaking in flying
activities.

The only policy I've seen that excludes gliding is travel insurance. It
lumped gliding in with rock climbing and skiing.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

Admittedly this company caters to the military, and they wouldn't sell many
policies if war were excluded from coverage, but their perception of the
relative risks of soaring versus war surprised me.


Just a guess but maybe it was not the "perception of the relative
risks", but rather the unknown risk of soaring. I suspect that their
actuaries can tell you to the nth decimal place their risk of a claim
due to war. Probably not so when it comes to soaring.

Tony V.

Martin Gregorie wrote:

The only policy I've seen that excludes gliding is travel insurance. It
lumped gliding in with rock climbing and skiing.

To me, it seems perfectly reasonable to lump gliding in with rock
climbing and skiing.