Pilot Mindsets and Enhanced Safety

On 8/22/2011 1:22 PM, BobW wrote:
On 8/22/2011 2:08 AM, Bruce Hoult wrote:
On Aug 22, 8:02 am, wrote:
When I fly...."insurance, yes or no" does not enter my mind at
all....safety, for the sake of safety is on my mind...

I agree with you.

I think Tom has confused correlation with causation.

Always possible, but - in this case - IMO your supposition is not a very
good explanation for the group reality when human nature is factored in.
Those glider pilots whose flying would NOT change in any fundamental way
if they KNEW any/all damage they inflicted on their ships would be paid
for forcibly and exclusively from their own pockets a 1) a distinct
minority of glider pilots (in my observations over the years); and 2)
(IMO) less likely to have 'some stupid glider pilot trick' sort of
accident befall them (when compared to those whose reasons for 'not
thinking about' insurance realities does NOT 'somehow' actively factor
in their mortality).

Anyone is free to argue point #1 (which obviously is unprovable); we all
get to decide for ourselves.

In 'actionable' terms, I believe point #2 is crucial, though. Be honest
with yourselves about the actions/patterns/etc. you daily witness at
your home gliderport, and, if you're not already in the habit of
chatting with other pilots whose actions puzzle/concern/'whatever' you,
I encourage you to begin doing so. I predict it won't take more than 2
conversations for you to have an eye-opening experience (maybe even
revelation) about how (lots of!) your fellow glider pilots 'reactively
think.'

Here's a (very) short list of feedback I've had from doing so.

Incident A - was what I (with exaggerational humor editing my club's
newsletter) characterized as a 'drunken sailor' pattern to the sole
available, paved, runway at a winch camp following an ~700' snap of a
nose-hooked 2-33 on a no-brainer, unsoarable, late fall, late afternoon.
Not until the ship was near the 'teardrop pattern entry point' more or
less abeam the numbers, at ~250', did it become obvious to me what Joe
Pilot intended to do.

Response 1 - immediately afterwards (as part of the dragback crew), I
laughingly tweaked the pilot (a good friend) about his 'undecipherable
pattern' and literally asked him, "What were you THINKing?!?" His
unsurprising response was a mixture of embarrasment, chagrin, and a
non-answer.

Response 2 - (About a month later) he buttonholed me to express some
mild (but very real) disgruntlement at my characterization of his
pattern in the newsletter as a 'drunken sailor pattern.' (Neither he nor
the ship was identified, and only the few folks at the camp could
possibly have made the personal connection. My newsletter point had been
about 'thought patterns' and why they mattered.) I apologized for
unintentionally hurting his feelings, and once again probed to see what
I could learn about his thinking that day...since there was absolutely
nothing to be gained by flying the sort of meandering, 'random-ish'
pattern he had flown, short of incurring additional, entirely avoidable,
risk that is. He still could provide no sensible/understandable (to me,
anyway) explanation for it. This from someone I'd characterize as a
sober, deliberate individual, neither prone to showing off nor prone to
'granny flying'...IOW a responsible, intelligent, XC-skilled, 'normal
glider pilot.'

Incident B - a 2-33 with instructor and student (not in my club and
neither known to me [and vice versa]), flew a long, low, pattern to the
home field on a benign fall day. They entered low, flew the whole,
'normal sized' pattern low, throughout used the spoilers as if it was a
normal height pattern, and scared the living crap out of me because none
of it was necessary, and, I was fearful they were going to snag the
trees on the far side of the lake bordering the runway. Naturally, they
didn't reach that ship's 'normal tiedown position' near midfield, and
curiosity impelled me to become a member of their ground dragging crew
(our home field being a busy place, just then with traffic behind them
in the pattern).

Response - When I reached the ship still on the runway, the instructor
was outside, chatting with the student (still inside), about 'nothing
specific in particular'. It horrified me for two reasons: a) they were
blocking the main runway for the ship(s) behind them in the pattern
(shame on that instructor!), and b) in the time it took to motivate the
available manpower to move the ship off the runway, then listen in some
more, then notice some fresh, pale green, moisture/leaf sap on the left
wingtip (I went and looked - they had hit a tree on the base-to-final
turn!!!), not once did I hear the topic of a 'dangerously low pattern'
arise. Color me beyond dismayed. I showed a friend who was a respected
member of that club the wingtip (he, too, had seen the pattern), and
left the crew to their devices, hoping my friend would take it upon
himself to do the right thing.

Without exaggeration, I could easily write a fair-sized book about this
sort of horrifying (to me, anyway) crud - and include ONLY crud I
'investigated to my own satisfaction' - routinely seen at the many
gliderports throughout the intermountain U.S. west.

The takeaway point is NOT that I've seen lots of 'stupid pilot tricks,'
but that in digging into many of the ones I *have* seen, I've learned
lots...about pilot thought patterns (both under stress and not so), and
about human nature.

I've learned that 'doing things by rote' is a very common manner of
'thinking' for pattern-returning pilots. I've learned that the majority
of glider pilots do NOT seem to have 'thought through' the 2 or 3
obvious/possible consequences their doing things by rote might
situationally present them with when they return to a busy gliderport
presuming the pattern/runway WILL be clear when they need it to be. I've
learned a surprisingly large percentage of returning pilots chose their
pattern direction on the basis of 'what is normal' as opposed to actual
pattern conditions. I've learned many pilots initially get (and quite a
few remain) angry at the *other* pilots involved in obstructing 'their'
pattern, when - had they not come burning back to the pattern as if they
were the only ship around - they might actually have seen and been able
to more conveniently (not to mention safely) accommodate the other traffic.

Now it's possible I've managed to associate with only an 'abbienormal'
subset of humans and gliderpilots...but I think not. To me, from a
safety perspective, it makes the most sense to conclude the slice of
soaring pilots with whom I've interacted since late 1972 represent
'gliderport normalcy.'

Yikes.

Interestingly, only a very small fraction of 'stupid pilot tricks' I've
witnessed has come from folks with some admixture of showoff,
immortality, and 'world's greatest pilot' in their personalities. The
vast majority has come from 'normal-people' pilots. In other words, 'you
and me.'

In another post I mentioned my working conclusion is there's a very real
disconnect between 'mortality reality' and Joe Average Glider Pilot's
desire to 'learn enough to participate.' In my opinion/observation, how
JAGP defines 'enough' is key to their future accident risk. It strongly
influences to what level of safety he'll participate. Except for the
time he's a student pilot (or, perhaps pursuing additional ratings),
most JAGP's switch off the aspect of their learning process that
fundamentally focuses on 'my soft pink body's safety.' The rest of their
learning tends to focus on how do I *DO* this or that thing (e.g. fly
XC, fly ridges, maximize my XC speed, etc.)?

I was fortunate enough to have my private pilot-glider examiner comment
to me when he handed me my temporary certificate, "You DO know this is
primarily a license to learn, right?" I feel further fortunate to've
been able to take his insight to heart, and, to retain my sense of
mortality each and every time I get in a sailplane (as well as do things
which can easily kill me, such as driving, trimming trees, working on
ladders, etc.). But I don't think my attitude is 'typically average'
based on decades of incident-based brain picking.


Those who fly or drive safer than the average person who has insurance
won't long term benefit from insurance.

No disagreement, there.


I've never had insurance on my motorcycles (~400,000 km) or cars
(~200,000 km) and i'm way ahead.

This does not mean that those who are less safe than average will
suddenly become safe if they drop their insurance.

Here I disagree, to the extent that most people ARE monetarily limited
and to that extent WILL modify their behavior if they unequivocally KNOW
their wallet WILL be lighter after they cause a (survivable) accident.
Human nature is real...and evidently little changing over the millenia.
Ignore it to your own (frustration, peril, inaccuracy of thinking,
increased personal [if misplaced] comfort level!).

They may not ever KNOW (or admit) they've changed their behavior, but
change it likely will. Casino gambling aside, how many people do you
know who routinely (burn, give away great gobs of, tear up) cash from
their bank accounts? Why don't they?

Regards,
Bob W.
The biggest change in mindset might not be on the flying pilot, but on
other club members who will be much more focused on preventing accidents
and confronting and limiting the flight privileges of pilots they view
as accidents waiting to happen.

--
Mike Schumann

On 9/9/2011 6:41 AM, Mike Schumann wrote:
On 8/22/2011 1:22 PM, BobW wrote:
On 8/22/2011 2:08 AM, Bruce Hoult wrote:

Prolixity mostly snipped...


This does not mean that those who are less safe than average will
suddenly become safe if they drop their insurance.

Here I disagree, to the extent that most people ARE monetarily limited
and to that extent WILL modify their behavior if they unequivocally KNOW
their wallet WILL be lighter after they cause a (survivable) accident.
Human nature is real...and evidently little changing over the millenia.
Ignore it to your own (frustration, peril, inaccuracy of thinking,
increased personal [if misplaced] comfort level!).

They may not ever KNOW (or admit) they've changed their behavior, but
change it likely will. Casino gambling aside, how many people do you
know who routinely (burn, give away great gobs of, tear up) cash from
their bank accounts? Why don't they?

Regards,
Bob W.
The biggest change in mindset might not be on the flying pilot, but on other
club members who will be much more focused on preventing accidents and
confronting and limiting the flight privileges of pilots they view as
accidents waiting to happen.


Cogent observation. And it touches upon what's almost certainly a *very*
sensitive (in the U.S., anyway) point regarding clubs and club ships. I'd
argue U.S. club-members 'on average' are (sensitive to, touchy about, wary of)
anyone daring to tread upon ('safety nazi,' 'Who appointed YOU king,' etc.)
territory.

That noted, club cultures can - and do, even if usually slowly - change, and
not always for the safer. I'd further argue - if any(one in a) club is seeking
(to be an agent of) change toward the safer, that said change will - one way
or another - be psychologically trying (if not outright painful) to
initiate/endure. I suppose my blunt response to anyone pointing towards 'club
inertia' as a justification for NOT veering intentionally and consciously
toward the road of enhancing their club's safety culture by actively embracing
peer review - and 'where justified' peer pressure - would be: "Deal with it."
Better a self-chosen club path than one forced upon a club by 'accident trauma.'

As always...the devil is in the details. Simply achieving serious club
discussion of the issue would be a HUGE accomplishment, and major step toward
identifying and taming the devils, IMO. It would also almost certainly help
validate and enable motivated individuals in the club. Club members are going
to talk about SOMEthing in their non-flying moments; 'generic pattern
practices' (including the minefield of potential metrics coupled to the topic)
should-oughta be an active component of such discussions.

Philosophically,
Bob W.

P.S. Quite a few times over the years, my club's peanut gallery has humorously
expressed the wish for scorecards - a la 'Olympic skating-like' judging.
Naturally, the comments generally occur after particularly graceless - no
harm, no foul - landings. Personally, I think it's a great idea for multiple
reasons. Even better would be if we included *pattern* scorecard numbers, too;
these could be of a different color. Not all peer pressure has to be
unremittingly painful.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 12:38:56 -0600, BobW wrote:

On 9/9/2011 6:41 AM, Mike Schumann wrote:
On 8/22/2011 1:22 PM, BobW wrote:
On 8/22/2011 2:08 AM, Bruce Hoult wrote:

Prolixity mostly snipped...


This does not mean that those who are less safe than average will
suddenly become safe if they drop their insurance.

Here I disagree, to the extent that most people ARE monetarily limited
and to that extent WILL modify their behavior if they unequivocally
KNOW their wallet WILL be lighter after they cause a (survivable)
accident. Human nature is real...and evidently little changing over
the millenia. Ignore it to your own (frustration, peril, inaccuracy of
thinking, increased personal [if misplaced] comfort level!).

They may not ever KNOW (or admit) they've changed their behavior, but
change it likely will. Casino gambling aside, how many people do you
know who routinely (burn, give away great gobs of, tear up) cash from
their bank accounts? Why don't they?

Regards,
Bob W.
The biggest change in mindset might not be on the flying pilot, but on
other club members who will be much more focused on preventing
accidents and confronting and limiting the flight privileges of pilots
they view as accidents waiting to happen.


Cogent observation. And it touches upon what's almost certainly a *very*
sensitive (in the U.S., anyway) point regarding clubs and club ships.
I'd argue U.S. club-members 'on average' are (sensitive to, touchy
about, wary of) anyone daring to tread upon ('safety nazi,' 'Who
appointed YOU king,' etc.) territory.

Good point. My (UK) club is exactly the opposite.

Whenever we're flying there's a nominated duty instructor. He has an
unquestioned authority to ask any pilot waiting to launch about his
currency, even if he's intending to fly his own glider, and to require a
check flight in a K-21 if he's not satisfied with the answer. Most of us
touch base with the DI when we arrive at the launch point about the same
time as we write our intended task, retrieval crew and mobile number on
the sheet , tick the 'medical' and 'insurance' boxes and sign on the line.

I would expect to do a check flight if I hadn't flown for more than a
month and will maintain currency at this level over the winter in the
club Juniors as preparation for the annual proficiency check. As a
benchmark, I comfortably cracked 500 hours this year.


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