|
|
Posted for Dane Jasper <dane.jasper@gmail.com>:
Any safety improvement is worthy of a risk/reward analysis. One such
aspect is
an evaluation that includes the possibility of greater risk caused by
an attitude of
over confidence in the device itself.
Scott, this is a bit like saying that an on-screen weather display is
going to cause accidents or that any other backup system is a bad
thing because it is likely to cause bad decision making. By that
logic, we should skip dual-bus electrical systems, anti-ice systems
and a pile of other backups that we build into airplanes.
I fly IFR in IMC, in day and night conditions, and if an engine quits,
I'd certainly appreciate having an extra option to consider in the few
minutes (or moments) I might have before a forced landing of some
sort. If I were over a city, I'd try to glide away if possible, but
in any case, an airplane falling on a home from the equivilant of 14
feet above it is FAR better than one doing over 75mph in a glide. If
it's a coastal city, you could call for a rescue chopper and head a
little bit offshore. If you're over mountains and woods, just open
the thing and see where you land.
You mention the Cirrus recall to fix the inability to activate the BRS
- it's important to note that this issue has been fixed (it too far
too much force to pull the cable), and it's now easier to pull. No
reason to condemn the system for an early design issue that's
resolved.
As for maintenance errors and poor pilot decision-making, those things
will happen from time to time. Have you ever made an error? Clearly,
not one that put you in an extremely unsafe condition, but people make
mistakes. Do you want to potentially die (and kill passengers and/or
people on the ground) as a result of your error? Your response sounds
a bit like you think people who make mistakes (or who's mechanics make
mistakes) deserve to die for their failings.
I think as much awareness and as many safety features as possible are
wonderful. I'm interested in seatbelt mounted airbags as well - am I
going to do something stupid because I have them? Nope.
Another way to look at it: If someone spends years and hundreds of
thousands of dollars building an airplane, will they want to make a
bad decision that will cause them to severly damage it by pulling the
parachute?
You also asked about analysis of Lancair accidents, and could a
parachute have helped. In cases where people got into stall/spin
conditions at reasonably high altitudes, likely it could have helped
if they were quick to deploy. In cases where thunderstorms caused
massive altitude deviations and people lost control, it could have
been useful. And, in cases where a simple engine failure caused the
inability to make a safe landing, it certainly would be useful.
In any case, I'd like to manage risk, and attempt to keep the
airplanes that I fly on a regular basis well maintained, well built,
and myself well trained. With these fundamentals plus a few features
like AOA, TAWS, TCAS/Skywatch, XM Weather and a backup handheld GPS
and Nav/Comm, I hope to keep flying a long time.
-Dane
|
|