From: marv@lancair.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: some thoughts on accidents
To: lml
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:44:18 -0400
Message-ID: <web-3090600@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <48aecd33.0603c00a.3030.4bd7@mx.google.com>
References: <list-3088377@logan.com>
 <48aecd33.0603c00a.3030.4bd7@mx.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1;format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


Posted for "Matt Hapgood" <matt.hapgood@alumni.duke.edu>:

  Jeff,
  
  
  My posts to the list seem to kick back, but I wanted to reply to your email 
–
  
  
  I Couldn’t agree more.  I’m in the business of pilot training, and I
regularly review, study and report accident data.  It’s not the airplane, it’s
the nut behind the wheel.
  
  
  I’ve had a ton of conversations with insurance underwriters in the past 
year,
and everyone has the same concern – the pilot.  It’s the attitude and training
that make the difference.
  
  
  There are lots of aircraft accidents – Kingair, Lancair, Cessna 172, etc –
and the fact is that over 75% of ALL accidents (over 80% of fatal accidents)
are attributable to the pilot.  Lancairs may be a bit more of a challenge than
some other high performance airplanes because we don’t have even a decent
training option.  Not to knock HPAT, but you just can’t do in an aircraft what
the professional pilots do very regularly in a simulator.  Where I work, our
recurrent programs include dozens of approaches with systems malfunctions,
engine outs, windshear, etc.  Most of these maneuvers cannot be safely
practiced in the airplane, and without a simulator it would take, literally,
30 or 40 flying hours to accomplish what we can do in 6 hours.
  
  
  I fly a 360, and I am truly envious of the training my Kingair customers (or
any bizjet pilot) have available to them.  It’s not cheap, but let’s not kid
ourselves, if the insurance companies didn’t mandate the training then even
jet pilots wouldn’t train…
  
  
  Matt