X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 19:10:41 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [64.12.143.100] (HELO imo-m12.mail.aol.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.10) with ESMTP id 3282827 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 09:48:41 -0500 Received: from VTAILJEFF@aol.com by imo-m12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v39.1.) id q.d01.42be077d (37163) for ; Sun, 9 Nov 2008 09:48:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from webmail-mf05 (webmail-mf05.webmail.aol.com [64.12.88.218]) by cia-ma04.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.6) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMA042-912b4916f8452c5; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 09:48:37 -0500 References: X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Safety in our Community of Lancairs X-Original-Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 09:48:38 -0500 X-AOL-IP: 71.85.153.156 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: vtailjeff@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CB109162848EF7_D58_327D_webmail-mf05.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 39598-STANDARD Received: from 71.85.153.156 by webmail-mf05.sysops.aol.com (64.12.88.218) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sun, 09 Nov 2008 09:48:38 -0500 X-Original-Message-Id: <8CB1091627640C3-D58-183D@webmail-mf05.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO ----------MB_8CB109162848EF7_D58_327D_webmail-mf05.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Michael, The intent of my posts is not to frighten but to educate people with the fac= ts. Fear has no place in the cockpit. Fear interferes with your ability to p= rocess information and makes for poor piloting. Instead=C2=A0the information= should cause one to ponder the "why" did this event happen or that one happ= en. Who is at a higher risk and who is not. Most of all the information shou= ld tell us (as you suggest) to respect the machine we fly, stay within the o= perating envelope and to also respect our own abilities and limitations. We=20= should not be whistling in the dark. Jeff -----Original Message----- From: N66mg@aol.com To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 8:51 pm Subject: [LML] Re: Safety in our Community of Lancairs To All Concern, I'm just finishing a Lancair IV kit from someone who lost his medical and al= l this concern about flying mishaps is very=C2=A0frightening.=C2=A0Private= =C2=A0vs commercial vs IFR is showing great ideas for safety, but some of th= ese accidents come from over confidence and not following the numbers that a= pply to the planes.=20 Flying into adverse weather, trying to fly slower that the aircraft was desi= gned, showing off and just plain stupid and all the above measure up to acci= dents. Good plain judgement can help to prevent most of these and better tra= ining, but over confidence probably plays a big part of all these=C2=A0accid= ents.=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=20 I have about 1000 hours in a Glasair and every time that I go up I think abo= ut how lucky I am to be able to fly and still pay attention to the numbers t= hat make this plane safe. I don't push the envelope, the speeds are what the= y are and I follow them very close and always on the side of safety. High pe= rformance aircraft are what they are and you can't follow a Cessna 152=C2= =A0 down wind, after all you are the pilot in command and tell the controlle= r "NO" when you need to. In my 6 decades of life, I still am able to learn f= rom others and we are all in the same boat or should I say a plane! That's m= y two cents. Michael n66mg In a message dated 11/8/2008 7:11:40 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, vtailjeff@a= ol.com writes: Kevin,=20 I am not saying anything. I am just doing the math. Once I have finished the= math I will=C2=A0let everyone know... I did address the hour thing in the o= ther graph. Put the two together and you have a picture. Private pilot + low= time in type=3D higher risk of accident.=20 I agree that training reduces accidents.=C2=A0=C2=A0As I said earlier in my=20= ten recommendations to become a safer pilot is if you are going to spend the= money training you might as well get a new rating. ;)=20 Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Stallard To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 5:37 pm Subject: [LML] Re: Safety in our Community of Lancairs Jeff, =C2=A0 >While Private Pilot certificates comprise 35% of total U.S. pilot populatio= n.=20 >Private pilots account for almost 55% of the Lancair accident population an= d 48% of the GA accident population =C2=A0 I think you are trying to say is =E2=80=9CIf you only have a Private Pilot c= ertificate, you are more likely to have an accident.=E2=80=9D=C2=A0 And that= you probably mean to imply=20 that if you hold some other advanced rating, that you have a less chance of=20= having an accident. =C2=A0 The propblem is (at least for me) is that 100% of GA accidents are caused by= , well, =C2=A0pilots, and half of those accidents (or thereabouts) are cause= d by folks with higher ratings than a private pilot (according to your numbe= rs). =C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m not convienced that a rating is the thing that is indicative of=20= the likely hood of an having an accident, however, I think that the amount o= f practice and training are, and unfortunalty ratings don=E2=80=99t accuratl= y reflect this quantity.=C2=A0 However, a logbook usually does.=C2=A0=C2=A0=20= Maybe that=E2=80=99s were we need to look. =C2=A0 Kevin =C2=A0 =C2=A0 -- or archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html Instant access to the latest & most popular FREE games while you browse with= the Games Toolbar - Download Now!=20 AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday need= s. Search Now. ----------MB_8CB109162848EF7_D58_327D_webmail-mf05.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Michael,

The intent of my posts is not to frighten but to educate people with the fac= ts. Fear has no place in the cockpit. Fear interferes with your ability to p= rocess information and makes for poor piloting. Instead the information= should cause one to ponder the "why" did this event happen or that one happ= en. Who is at a higher risk and who is not. Most of all the information shou= ld tell us (as you suggest) to respect the machine we fly, stay within the o= perating envelope and to also respect our own abilities and limitations. We=20= should not be whistling in the dark.

Jeff


-----Original Message-----
From: N66mg@aol.com
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 8:51 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: Safety in our Community of Lancairs

To All Concern,
I'm just finishing a Lancair IV kit from someone who lost his m= edical and all this concern about flying mishaps is very frightening.&n= bsp;Private vs commercial vs IFR is showing great ideas for safety, but= some of these accidents come from over confidence and not following the num= bers that apply to the planes.
Flying into adverse weather, trying to fly slower that the airc= raft was designed, showing off and just plain stupid and all the above measu= re up to accidents. Good plain judgement can help to prevent most of these a= nd better training, but over confidence probably plays a big part of all the= se accidents.   
I have about 1000 hours in a Glasair and every time that I go u= p I think about how lucky I am to be able to fly and still pay attention to=20= the numbers that make this plane safe. I don't push the envelope, the speeds= are what they are and I follow them very close and always on the side of sa= fety. High performance aircraft are what they are and you can't follow a Ces= sna 152  down wind, after all you are the pilot in command and tell the= controller "NO" when you need to. In my 6 decades of life, I still am able=20= to learn from others and we are all in the same boat or should I say a plane= ! That's my two cents.
Michael
n66mg
In a message dated 11/8/2008 7:11:40 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, vtailjeff@aol.com writes:
Kevin,

I am not saying anything. I am just doing the math. Once I have finished the= math I will let everyone know... I did address the hour thing in the o= ther graph. Put the two together and you have a picture. Private pilot + low= time in type=3D higher risk of accident.

I agree that training reduces accidents.  As I said earlier in my=20= ten recommendations to become a safer pilot is if you are going to spend the= money training you might as well get a new rating. ;)

Jeff


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Stallard <Kevin@arilabs.= net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 5:37 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: Safety in our Community of Lancairs

Jeff,
 
>While Private Pilo= t certificates comprise 35% of total U.S. pilot population.
>Private pilots acc= ount for almost 55% of the Lancair accident population and 48% of the GA acc= ident population
 
I think you are trying= to say is =E2=80=9CIf you only have a Private Pilot certificate, you are mo= re likely to have an accident.=E2=80=9D  And that you probably mean to=20= imply
that if you hold some=20= other advanced rating, that you have a less chance of having an accident.
 
The propblem is (at le= ast for me) is that 100% of GA accidents are caused by, well,  pilots,=20= and half of those accidents (or thereabouts) are caused by folks with higher= ratings than a private pilot (according to your numbers).
 
I=E2=80=99m not convie= nced that a rating is the thing that is indicative of the likely hood of an=20= having an accident, however, I think that the amount of practice and trainin= g are, and unfortunalty ratings don=E2=80=99t accuratly reflect this quantit= y.  However, a logbook usually does.   Maybe that=E2=80=99s w= ere we need to look.
 
Kevin
 
 




Instant access to the latest & most popular FREE games while you b= rowse with the Games Toolbar - Download Now!
----------MB_8CB109162848EF7_D58_327D_webmail-mf05.sysops.aol.com--