Frans wrote:
I try to ‘sell’ GA usually with the risk reduction argument. As long as we pilots make rational decisions based on facts, checklists and common sense, we can reduce a lot of potential risks. Technical failures are rare compared to pilot errors. I’m sure this has been discussed many times before, but I’m convinced that GA can be as safe as driving, as long as we stay professional and humble.
Fully agree.
Rather like the much-discussed risk of dying of Covid, the key point to understand is that whatever the headline statistical risk, that risk is not equally distributed throughout the population. With Covid, almost all of the risk lies with those who are already very unwell with something else. With GA flying, almost all of the risk lies with a particular subsection of pilots who are careless, impulsive, reckless, think they are invincible, etc.
Stay humble and stay careful. But know that being such pulls your own personal risk well below the headline average, and do not be afraid to explain that to those who want to discuss the risks. There is a lot of ignorance about statistical risk.
There are many things I do to reduce my own personal risk in GA, but three of the major ones are as follows:
Those three things probably reduce my own personal risk considerably below the statistical average. Importantly, they are decisions made on the ground. Decisions made on the ground are often decisions not to fly, which tend to have a very desirable effect of the probability of you dying in an aircraft crash that day. I like to stay humble and stay careful, but it’s good to know this.
A good recent one to read is this one: G-LAMI
I know little about the PA-46 and have never flown one, but my simple brain tells me without looking anything up or doing any calculations that six men plus any non-trivial fuel load will put it overweight and that the 730m available at Wycombe won’t be enough for it. That such an accident should happen to a commander with 31,000 hours is mind-boggling – they simply never stood a chance from the moment they climbed aboard.
Frans wrote:
Please don’t take this as a personal attack, my words are meant for everyone, including myself. I think most of us here on EuroGA archived his/her dream of flying, which is absolutely great!
I don’t, don’t worry and I agree to an extent. When you are young and while it’s realistic, dreams are neccessary and vital, not to turn into a “no future” generation. What I was talking about are people who are past that age, let’s say in their 40ties and 50ties and still hang onto the impossible dreams they know won’t come true anymore, in particular airline flying. For airline flying, the train leaves the station in the mid 30ties and even then it’s difficult. If you have not made it then, if you’ve even gone the distance and paid up for your ATPL because nobody in the schools will tell you that you don’t have what the airlines want. If I see folks in their 50ties (which is past retirement age for most airlines) still trying to rush after that and get angry because they failed, then it’s time to pull the plug.
Same goes for those unrealistic ideas about big house, boat, plane, e.t.c. if time and money don’t fit. That is what fuels our anger and envy politics. People should be happy they live in a country which can feed them if they apply themselves, not moan about what others have they have not. Not to speak of the deplorable creatures who think they are still 18 on the mating game while the only bait they may have is money.
I am happy and comfortable in what I’ve achieved, family, steady work with 5 years to retirement, house and airplane I can afford. Yet I see many who at my age of 60 still think their career is before them. It’s not. And no, life is not perfect, while some things are ok, others are not, such as lack of time and overwork. But so what.
That is why when people ask me about buying planes the uncomfortable truth I will tell each and every one of them is to talk to their families and make sure they are ok with it. If not, walk away now. My opinion and what I would have done at the time. Right now, no I have practically no time but it is my wife who tells me not to sell. We’ll see. For me, 2023 is the make or break year. Moving the plane to Speck might relax the cost and availability for short notice flying quite a bit.
Frans wrote:
Without a doubt: Remaining realistic is important in life. But also a strong will and seeing glasses half-full, instead of half-empty.
True. And the older you get, the more realism has to set in. It’s frightening how many of my friends in the same age do nothing but bitch about everything these days. And it’s contageous too….
(Talking full glasses, let’s have coffee at Speck once? I see you are there?)
Graham wrote:
I am extremely conservative about weather. I am of the belief that ‘sudden surprise weather changes’ (as frequently cited by accident pilots in reports) are almost non-existent, but ignoring information that conflicts with your desire to fly and wishful thinking about the forecasts is very common indeed.
It has happened to me. And it was not due to ignoring information. I hade spoken to a real, breathing, meteorologist before the flight simply because I was concerned about the possibility of a sudden change which was not covered by the regular forecasts. And the sudden unexpected change that actually did happen was not at all the one I was worried about. And in all honesty, I don’t see how the meteorologist should have managed to forecast it either.
I don’t mess around with runway length. I only operate where the distance available is comfortably within that required by the type at MTOW. Doing the calculation and then knocking bits off to account for being under MTOW, the headwind, slightly lower OAT etc so as to get the answer you want is not a space I want to play in.
That I don’t understand. If you don’t adjust runway requirements for mass under MTOM, then you are essentially accepting a higher risk when you do fly at MTOM. But maybe you never do?
An old man is dying in his bed, surrounded by his family: wife, kids, and grandkids. He starts talking:
– Dear family, when I was young, I was fast and furious. I had money, beautiful women, friends, airplanes.
Then someone told me, “Get married, have a family. Otherwise, nobody will hand you a glass of water on your deathbed.”
So I did. I replaced wild parties by watching soap operas with my wife. I sold my airplanes and invested my time and money in family life and my kids’ education.
And now, lying on my deathbed, do you know what’s the worst part of it?
Goddamn, I am not thirsty!
Airborne_Again wrote:
It has happened to me. And it was not due to ignoring information. I hade spoken to a real, breathing, meteorologist before the flight simply because I was concerned about the possibility of a sudden change which was not covered by the regular forecasts. And the sudden unexpected change that actually did happen was not at all the one I was worried about. And in all honesty, I don’t see how the meteorologist should have managed to forecast it either.
I didn’t say it cannot happen. I said it’s very, very rare (almost non-existent), as opposed to the alarming regularity one might assume if the only source of information on the subject was accident reports.
Airborne_Again wrote:
That I don’t understand. If you don’t adjust runway requirements for mass under MTOM, then you are essentially accepting a higher risk when you do fly at MTOM. But maybe you never do?
Perhaps I was unclear. Anytime the runway is not very obviously long enough for the type (i.e. anytime I actually have to look up the numbers) I calculate based on MTOW, even if I will not be at MTOW. My reasoning is that if I need to calculate at actual weight rather than MTOW just to make the distance required less than the distance available, then that is closer to the margins than I wish to be. I aim to miss the obstacles by a large margin, so large that the outcome is obvious. Departures where the numbers say it will just work but the observer on the ground will be sucking their breath in through their teeth as it happens are not something I wish to be involved in. I appreciate it would be unnecessarily restrictive for heavier aircraft, but for light SEPs it works well for me. Precision can sometimes be an enemy – there are circumstances where I don’t want to be precise because I want to stay safe by a large and obvious margin. Call me a chicken.
OK, but you will still get into trouble if you start flying with any of them 
Graham wrote:
I appreciate it would be unnecessarily restrictive for heavier aircraft, but for light SEPs it works well for me.
That makes a lot of sense, yes.
Graham wrote:
I am extremely conservative about weather. I am of the belief that ‘sudden surprise weather changes’ (as frequently cited by accident pilots in reports) are almost non-existent, but ignoring information that conflicts with your desire to fly and wishful thinking about the forecasts is very common indeed.
They are almost non-existent, after 22 years in Meteorology I’d sign on to that statement.
The question is always what the expected and actual situations are. “Expected” phenomena can be hugely “unexpected” in terms of where and what intensity.
Personally I find the most challenging of those convective situations. They can blow up any minute, basically anywhere and almost every time you predict where, it will “listen in” and pop up somewhere else. I’ve often seen pilots trying to get home from someplace asking where the TS are gonna be and I always refrained from giving exact locations or even areas. My answer there was always: There is a xx% risk of TS and if they are isolated or if we are talking squall line kind of thing.
The good thing about convective situations is that they are quite avoidable usually. If they are isolated, go around them and find a place to land and wait, if it’s a squall line or big cell, land in a safe place and wait for it to pass.
The other one is fog or low stratus. Not so much “will it happen” but “when” will it lift or when will it become a problem.
Both can be a major nuissance. If fog does not go away within the period we said it would in the TAF, people will start to divert or they are stuck on the ground (VFR). If it comes faster and more intense as predicted, they can find themselves over a cloud layer and the next open airport 100 NM away.
As for most of the rest I fully agree with you. They are predictable, the more you know about it the better. There are dozens of known gotchas (such as pre-frontal TS or WS in front of cold fronts) which people should know about, it is well enough known what happens in a warm front and what are stable conditions to fly over a said period of time. I’d add, if you are unsure of something, ask a meteorologist on duty. They have means to see stuff which none of our tools can and often enough they also know the local area to the point where it gets frightening. I’ve been able to complete flights I thought not to be completable more than once with their help.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Personally I find the most challenging of those convective situations. They can blow up any minute, basically anywhere and almost every time you predict where, it will “listen in” and pop up somewhere else. I’ve often seen pilots trying to get home from someplace asking where the TS are gonna be and I always refrained from giving exact locations or even areas. My answer there was always: There is a xx% risk of TS and if they are isolated or if we are talking squall line kind of thing.
Yes – there is basically the locally-predictable type (like a front or a band of rain coming through) or the unpredictable (convective) type.
It became relevant when I had another spell of playing cricket a few years back. Without going into details about cricket, it can be a major tactical advantage to know fairly accurately when is going to rain (which stops play and changes the dynamic), assuming that some rain is forecast. When a band of rain was passing across the country, cricket captains I played under found it incredibly useful to be told “it will start to rain in about 45 minutes and will rain for an hour or so” which I could easily tell them from looking at a radar feed. On other (convective) days when it might rain or not, they were puzzled why I couldn’t consult my phone and tell them what would happen. I was left saying well it’s just sort of popping up at random and it might rain here or it might not. There appeared to no appreciation that some sorts of weather were highly predicable at a local level and others were not.
I just don’t fly when it’s convective, unless the area I want to fly in is free of ‘organised IMC’ and the convective activity can easily be avoided visually.
