X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:07:22 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [64.98.42.167] (HELO smtprelay.b.hostedemail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6038492 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 08:55:37 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.98.42.167; envelope-from=bknotts@buckeye-express.com Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (b-bigip1 [10.5.19.254]) by smtprelay01.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B1BA41ACE88E for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:55:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Panda: scanned! X-Spam-Summary: 50,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,bknotts@buckeye-express.com,:,RULES_HIT:2:4:21:72:355:379:509:599:601:800:854:901:945:946:960:962:966:967:972:973:976:983:988:989:1187:1189:1208:1212:1221:1260:1261:1313:1314:1345:1359:1431:1436:1437:1516:1517:1518:1575:1588:1589:1592:1594:1605:1608:1617:1685:1730:1776:1792:2068:2069:2194:2196:2197:2198:2199:2200:2201:2202:2377:2378:2380:2525:2527:2553:2568:2627:2682:2685:2693:2731:2740:2829:2859:2902:2906:2917:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3027:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3636:3653:3770:3865:3866:3867:3868:3869:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956:3959:4051:4078:4081:4250:4321:4385:4429:4433:4605:5007:6117:6119:6657:7576:7652:7679:7901:7903:7974:8556:8583:8599:8603:8957:9010:9025:9038:9040:9121:9159:9177:9388:9416:9545:10004:10049:10128:10848:10967:11027:11233:11253:11257:11658:11805:11854:11914:12043:12049:12438:12517:12519:12555:12663:12679:12740:12776,0,RBL X-Session-Marker: 626B6E6F747473406275636B6579652D657870726573732E636F6D X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 14965 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (cblmdm72-240-126-144.buckeyecom.net [72.240.126.144]) (Authenticated sender: bknotts@buckeye-express.com) by omf04.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:55:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-Message-ID: <510A77BD.5070705@buckeye-express.com> X-Original-Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 08:55:09 -0500 From: "F. Barry Knotts" Reply-To: bknotts884@earthlink.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050006060105030601000009" X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130130-0, 01/30/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050006060105030601000009 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Very common and well documented concept. At least well known in the medical trauma community. Trauma (injuries of all kinds; burns, crashes, falls, etc.) are not equally distributed among the population. There is a continuum of personal risk tolerance from very adverse to "watch this." If you are risk adverse, you will do certain things that demonstrate this adversity in much of what you do. A good example comes from the auto industry from a decade or two ago when seat belts were introduced into cars but not worn universally. Several studies designed to prove the value of seat belts in a crash easily proved that they were effective. The un-looked-for result of the analysis of the data was that if you chose to buckle your seat belt you were less than half as likely to have a crash at all compared to those who chose not to buckle up. If you are familiar with auto crash data you would know that most, though not all, crashes involve someone taking a significant risk in driving technique (passing unsafely, driving drunk, driving fast on snow covered roads, etc.). Buckling up and not taking driving risks are linked through our own risk taking behaviors. I contend that choosing to fly in general aviation and flying a Lancair already puts you in a less risk adverse category. When a portion of the "at risk" population participates in risk mitigation activities, that probably sub-selects a group that is slightly more risk adverse and therefore less likely to be involved in an incident. Risk mitigation in the Lancair crowd includes a lot of things; training, recurrent training, practice, wearing your seat belt, maintaining your aircraft in perfect working order, participating in learning devices (like LML), etc. LOBO provides a number of these risk mitigating activities in a pretty attractive and fun "package." The above is not a secret. The insurance companies know all about it. That's why they ask you if you participate in any risk taking activities (skiing, scuba, piloting, etc.) when you apply for life insurance. Personal health choices also reflect on your risk taking behavior. Having said all that, I'm not sure why I survived into adulthood. Barry Knotts On 1/30/2013 8:27 AM, marv@lancair.net wrote: > > Posted for Scott E Keighan : > > So let me get this right. If I pay you $40 to join the LOBO I will be a > better pilot then a non-LOBO member, cool. > How exactly does that work? > Other then someone getting $40 richer, I don't see it. Is this like a > pyramid > scam? > > Don't insult non members and get a life. As a matter of fact. If the > LOBO is > so great, why are you even on the LML? > I think the LOBO members should go to their own blog. I am sure they have > one. > Scott keighan > 905 262 5997 > > [Whoa... lighten up. Since the LML had been operating successfully > for a number of years prior to the founding of LOBO and the LML would > likely already be in touch with most folks who would be interested in > joining and participating in LOBO, an agreement was forged which > allowed LOBO to use the LML as its communications arm. It was a > logical decision which would benefit both entities. Both > organizations exist for the benefit of the Lancair community, > especially where safety is involved. As for cost... if $40/year is > too much to pay to an organization dedicated to your safety and > actively working to help getting the Lancair fleet insured at better > rates then don't join. Also, don't participate in their discussions or > learn anything from their shared knowledge... at least that way you'll > get what you paid for. But don't throw stones at folks who are trying > to help... that doesn't get us anywhere. ] > > > From: colyncase@earthlink.net > Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:31:05 -0500 > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members > > Dico, > That's a good point. That's one reason we would like to get as many > Lancair > pilots on the LML and into LOBO as possible. It's largely a word of > mouth > process to get let people know about these two resources. Getting the > word > out to everyone is one of the "things we can do as a community" to > improve the > situation. > LOBO membership is $40 at www.lancairowners.com. > (Marv would love contributions to keep the LML site going too!) > Colyn > On Jan 29, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Dico Reijers wrote:If the accident rate for > Lancairs is 500x that of commercial aviation... do we have a break > down of > what the rate is of LOBO members vs. Non-members. I would hope that > by just > being a LOBO member and reading/learning from this group that the > accident > rate for us is more in line with the 300x experimental or even better > than > that. > > Have we gone through the Lancair accidents to see if the PIC was a LOBO > member. It would be interesting. > -DIco > > -- > Regards, > > Dico Reijers > > InternetWorks Ltd. > > 300 University Avenue > Charlottetown > PE, C1A 4M4 > > 902-892-4671 (T) > 888-368-9484 (F) > > www.internetworks.ca > www.apartmentspei.com > > > > -- > > For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --------------050006060105030601000009 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Very common and well documented concept.   At least well known in the medical trauma community.  Trauma (injuries of all kinds; burns, crashes, falls, etc.) are not equally distributed among the population.  There is a continuum of personal risk tolerance from very adverse to "watch this."  If you are risk adverse, you will do certain things that demonstrate this adversity in much of what you do. 

A good example comes from the auto industry from a decade or two ago when seat belts were introduced into cars but not worn universally.  Several studies designed to prove the value of seat belts in a crash easily proved that they were effective.  The un-looked-for result of the analysis of the data was that if you chose to buckle your seat belt you were less than half as likely to have a crash at all compared to those who chose not to buckle up.  If you are familiar with auto crash data you would know that most, though not all, crashes involve someone taking a significant risk in driving technique (passing unsafely, driving drunk, driving fast on snow covered roads, etc.).  Buckling up and not taking driving risks are linked through our own risk taking behaviors.

I contend that choosing to fly in general aviation and flying a Lancair already puts you in a less risk adverse category.  When a portion of the "at risk" population participates in risk mitigation activities, that probably sub-selects a group that is slightly more risk adverse and therefore less likely to be involved in an incident.  Risk mitigation in the Lancair crowd includes a lot of things;  training, recurrent training, practice, wearing your seat belt, maintaining your aircraft in perfect working order, participating in learning devices (like LML), etc.  LOBO provides a number of these risk mitigating activities in a pretty attractive and fun "package."

The above is not a secret.  The insurance companies know all about it.  That's why they ask you if you participate in any risk taking activities (skiing, scuba, piloting, etc.) when you apply for life insurance.  Personal health choices also reflect on your risk taking behavior.

Having said all that, I'm not sure why I survived into adulthood.

Barry Knotts

On 1/30/2013 8:27 AM, marv@lancair.net wrote:

Posted for Scott E Keighan <scottekeighan@sympatico.ca>:

So let me get this right. If I pay you $40 to join the LOBO I will be a
better pilot then a non-LOBO member, cool.
How exactly does that work?
Other then someone getting $40 richer, I don't see it. Is this like a pyramid
scam?

Don't insult non members and get a life. As a matter of fact. If the LOBO is
so great, why are you even on the LML?
I think the LOBO members should go to their own blog. I am sure they have
one.
Scott keighan
905 262 5997

[Whoa... lighten up.  Since the LML had been operating successfully for a number of years prior to the founding of LOBO and the LML would likely already be in touch with most folks who would be interested in joining and participating in LOBO, an agreement was forged which allowed LOBO to use the LML as its communications arm.  It was a logical decision which would benefit both entities.  Both organizations exist for the benefit of the Lancair community, especially where safety is involved.  As for cost... if $40/year is too much to pay to an organization dedicated to your safety and actively working to help getting  the Lancair fleet insured at better rates then don't join. Also, don't participate in their discussions or learn anything from their shared knowledge... at least that way you'll get what you paid for. But don't throw stones at folks who are trying to help... that doesn't get us anywhere.  <marv>    ]
 


From: colyncase@earthlink.net
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:31:05 -0500
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Accident rate for LOBO members vs non-members

Dico,
That's a good point.   That's one reason we would like to get as many Lancair
pilots on the LML and into LOBO as possible.    It's largely a word of mouth
process to get let people know about these two resources.  Getting the word
out to everyone is one of the "things we can do as a community" to improve the
situation.  
LOBO membership is $40 at www.lancairowners.com.
(Marv would love contributions to keep the LML site going too!)
Colyn
On Jan 29, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Dico Reijers wrote:If the accident rate for
Lancairs is 500x that of commercial aviation... do we have a break down of
what the rate is of LOBO members vs. Non-members.  I would hope that by just
being a LOBO member and reading/learning from this group that the accident
rate for us is more in line with the 300x experimental or even better than
that.

Have we gone through the Lancair accidents to see if the PIC was a LOBO
member.  It would be interesting.
-DIco

--
Regards,

Dico Reijers

InternetWorks Ltd.

300 University Avenue
Charlottetown
PE, C1A 4M4

902-892-4671 (T)
888-368-9484 (F)

www.internetworks.ca
www.apartmentspei.com


     
--

For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

--------------050006060105030601000009--