intro flight question

roundout

roundout

VNAV monitor
i've rounded a prospect up for PPL training and we're taking a discovery flight tomorrow. he's real enthusiastic but yesterday he approached me kind of worried and said "i've been paying more attention to aviation news lately and it seems like there's been a lot of planes going down in recent weeks." i was caught kind of off-guard by this and, while i understand a bit about what can cause airplanes to go down and that there are crashes dang near every day, or at least every week, i didn't come up with a very solid explanation of my belief that flying GA is safe. anybody have any ideas on how to alleviate this prospect's concerns before we go flying tomorrow?
 
Someone will likely have a better response than me, but...

People die in car accidents all the time, it doesn't stop anyone from driving.
People die in vending machine accidents and getting struck by lightning. That doesn't stop me from not buying a Coke or hiding during thunderstorms.

You just have to look at it rationally. There's inherent risk in everything. I could die tomorrow after falling down the stairs. You shouldn't let that stop you.
 
Chris_Ford said:
Someone will likely have a better response than me, but...

People die in car accidents all the time, it doesn't stop anyone from driving.
People die in vending machine accidents and getting struck by lightning. That doesn't stop me from not buying a Coke or hiding during thunderstorms.

You just have to look at it rationally. There's inherent risk in everything. I could die tomorrow after falling down the stairs. You shouldn't let that stop you.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

People whizz down the freeway at 80mph, just inches from the next car - potentially moments from disaster - and don't think twice about it.
 
The way I see it is the only reason your seeing this on the news or reading it in a paper other than you local paper is because the US media has absolutly nothing interesting to talk about right now. Its news to them until a " busy " season starts. Flying is still and always will be the safest way to go. Compare 50 crashed a year in an airplane to 10,000 + in a car. No worries. Enjoy your flight.
 
Just to play devil's advocate, if you compare percentages, how many millions of cars are on the road each day and how many deaths, then compare that to the number of GA planes in the air and then the deaths.

Probably a good way to set his mind at ease would be to explain that we have procedures for failures, and that just because we have an engine out or some other failure, it doesn't mean we're going to die. I think a general conception is that if the engine quits, then the plane is going to drop like a rock and everyone inside is toast.

At least that's the way I explain it to mom :)
 
Before the intro flight I ask them if their life insurance is paid up and their will is up to date.
 
I get that question a lot-- and I always say this: GA flying and flying in general is dangerous IF you don't approach it with some degree of maturity and safety. As a student pilot you will learn how to become responsible for the safety of you, your passengers and the aviation community.

This way, you are acknowledging their fears but also empowering them to be safety-conscious from the start.

Good luck!
 
Flying is =not= safe. The stats apparently put non-business GA flying somewhere with motorcycle riding. John and Martha King have taken the view that when we say that flying is "safe" we in fact do a disservice to aviation safety. Personally I think they are right.

There are obvious risks to flying. But, if you look at the types of accidents that are common to GA, most reflect poor judgment and poor decisions by the pilots involved. The three most common GA accidents, running out of fuel, running into bad weather, and running into things are pretty obvious, but even a crosswind landing accident usually involves a pilot who made a bad judgment about what he was capable of.

But, the good news is that since most accidents are caused by us, this also means that we have more control over our own destiny. That makes it very different than things like car accidents. In fact one of the allures of flying is this self-reliance aspect.

So, yes there are risks. But the vast majority of them are under the pilot's control. When we teach someone to fly, we are trying to teach a set of skills; but more important we are giving them the knowledge and the tools to learn to manage the risks properly.

It's not for everyone. The pilots personality type is self-reliant if nothing else. Some people would rather rely on others. We call those people "passengers."

That's sort of the sentiment I try to convey when asked the question. The words I use depend on the person I am talking to.

Which reminds me.... I need to return a call about an introductory flight.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
There are obvious risks to flying. But, if you look at the types of accidents that are common to GA, most reflect poor judgment and poor decisions by the pilots involved. The three most common GA accidents, running out of fuel, running into bad weather, and running into things are pretty obvious, but even a crosswind landing accident usually involves a pilot who made a bad judgment about what he was capable of.

But, the good news is that since most accidents are caused by us, this also means that we have more control over our own destiny. That makes it very different than things like car accidents. In fact one of the allures of flying is this self-reliance aspect.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

A lot of times car accidents happen because somebody else screwed up. Somebody else fell asleep at the wheel, somebody else drove drunk, somebody else didn't check their blind spot, etc.

With flying, it's up to the pilot. I've told my family, the sad fact is, if I die in a plane crash, there's a good chance I screwed up. But I'm perfect, so I'll live forever ;)

Seriously though, explaining that idea to a new passenger can help. You've taken a lot of training, you're a mature, responsible person, and you'll keep them safe.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Which reminds me.... I need to return a call about an introductory flight.
Click to expand...


hijack - i still need to send you an e-mail. i'll work on it tomorrow after i get back from the airport

(how many people hijack their own thread?)


thanks for the responses, folks. we'll see what happens in the AM.
 
We talk about accidents and how pilots usually cause them by trying to do something that exceeds the capabilities of the pilot or airplane. Since we know this is fact, why do pilots continue to do this when there is plenty of evidence this will most likely result in an accident? We profile those pilots who have caused accidents and say the pilot lacked skill or judgement. While skill can be taught, judgement can not. We can determine through scenario based questions a person's trend towards judgement, and we can determine a person's skill through flight testing.

What I find shocking is the FAA isn't more proactive in trying to weed out those who are more than likely going to create a situation that causes an aircraft to crash. How can the FAA weed these potential pilots out? It should be a requirement to pass a Psychology exam to determine a person's trends towards the known personallity types that have had accidents in the past. The FAA should also require a drug screen for anyone who applies for a medical. Remeber that just like driving, flying is a privilage and not a right. Therefore, I would be more than happy to be submitted to these exams to prove that I am not part of the problem, but part of the solution.
 
Sorry, Bob. Can't go along with you on that. Psychological testing by the government so that it can decide what I can and cannot be permitted to do is a little too Big Brother-ish for my tastes.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Sorry, Bob. Can't go along with you on that. Psychological testing by the government so that it can decide what I can and cannot be permitted to do is a little too Big Brother-ish for my tastes.
Click to expand...

No more Big Brother-ish than an airline who conducts these tests to determine whether or not you are a good candidate to be pilot employed by that airline. As I previously posted, flying is a privilage extended too you by our government. The same government can revoke your license after you have given them cause to do so, or can issue an emergency order to suspend or revoke all of your licenses and ratings. Having said all of this, how do we reduce or prevent the same causes of accidents that continue to occur and be reported by the media. We have come up with scenario based training, it has helped some, but the accidents continue.

We know that a person's personality traits lend themselves to a higher probability of accidents. We know that an anti-authority will do as they please, dispite of the antidote. We know that a person who is a risk taker will have a higher probability of trying to operate an aircraft beyond it and his capability in weather beyond his capabilties. We know that an airplane with a 5 hour endorance can't fly for 6 hours, yet the same personality tries to do this on a regular basis. Remember that we know this only because of the accident reports. Those who push the limits of fuel and weather and didn't have an accident are unreported, so the numbers of people who do this are much higher.

The problem I have with these personality types has nothing to do with the way they make aviation look, although their actions do give us a black eye. It has more to do with the people who trust their lives to these pilots only to have their lives taken away from them. The passengers have no control over the situation once they get in the plane with them. This is not fair to them and is why I support drug testing and psychological testing of pilots.
 
bob loblaw said:
No more Big Brother-ish than an airline who conducts these tests to determine whether or not you are a good candidate to be pilot employed by that airline.
Click to expand...
We have a very different view on this. I will accept things from an employer I choose to work for that I absolutely do not want the government involved in. Leaving an employer I don't like is a much easier option to exercise than leaving the country.

I don't want the government in my bedroom, my phone conversations, definitely not in my head. Some people don't care whether the government is involved in every single aspect of their lives; in fact they prefer that the government decide what schools they go to, what career they choose, what jobs they get, who they marry, whether they have children or not, etc, etc.

Others don't like the idea at all.

To each his own I guess.
 
Yes, but the government dictates how healthy you have to be while flying... So, should they eliminate medicals? I think that the point Bob is trying to make is that since they check physical health, why not mental health?
 
Chris_Ford said:
Yes, but the government dictates how healthy you have to be while flying... So, should they eliminate medicals? I think that the point Bob is trying to make is that since they check physical health, why not mental health?
Click to expand...

That is exactly my point Chris. If we know a certian personality type is a higher probability of the "what or why did he do that" kind of accident, why should we sit by and watch them kill their loved ones or other innocent people. We can stop those types of people from flying airplanes, and doing so will reduce the accident rates. Now please understand, the accidents I am talking about are fuel exhaustion, VFR into IMC, and other "preventable accidents" related to poor judgement.
 
Chris_Ford said:
Yes, but the government dictates how healthy you have to be while flying... So, should they eliminate medicals? I think that the point Bob is trying to make is that since they check physical health, why not mental health?
Click to expand...
Because this is America, not "Brave New World."

You really don't see a difference between a disease that may make you pass out in an airplane and a personality that you don't happen to like? So if I get into a position of power and decide that I don't like your personality type, I can get rid of you? Cool!

Amazing what people in this country are willing to put up with. Some of them even recommend it.
 
Chris_Ford said:
Yes, but the government dictates how healthy you have to be while flying... So, should they eliminate medicals? I think that the point Bob is trying to make is that since they check physical health, why not mental health?
Click to expand...

Valid point here, yet still flawed logic.

A third class medical dosen't rule out much. Just a handfull of medical conditions that could incapacitate a pilot (epelipsy, ect). Heart disease and/or bypass surgery aren't even completely disqualifying.

To fly gliders, ballons, or ultralights you don't even need that.


Physical health is fairly easilly determined (history of seizures, ect.), whereas mental health is much more subjective. Ask 5 different pshrinks and you will get 10 different answers.

Also any given personality trait can be dangerous in the cockpit depending on the situation, that same personality trait can be a lifesaver under different circumstances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top