모두
← Back to Squawk list
Will you take the PLEDGE?
The PLEDGE program, launched by the Texas Aviation Association Foundation, aims to reduce the general aviation accident rate. "Although the accident rate for scheduled commercial operations has fallen in the past decade, the rate for GA continues at what TXAA Foundation, Inc. considers unacceptable," according to the organization's monthly newsletter. PLEDGE is an acronym to remind pilots to perform a few simple steps to avoid accidents. (www.txaa.org) 기타...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Such is life and the law of numbers. The amount of people getting involved with GA on the pilot side of things has increased exponentially. A very large percentage should just simply not get involved do to the inherent risk they will put themselves and others in even after all the qualifications are met. There are many people you probably would not get into a car with or allow them to drive yours ...but you do...and so it goes with aviation...there is nothing shocking here. The probability for incidents and accidents just get higher as we water it all down...Aviation is a lot of fun..until the one day,..when aviation becomes a chore and no fun at all..the numbers will go down.
As a pilot I would have loved to talk about standards and training and checklists but its all pointless. You can only make your training count and if your training somebody, you can only instill in your student the seriousness of finality. When taking to the air if "the ground Comes up to smite thee" at some point..? who's responsible...? The system? training? Its like smokers...everyone knows the risk but many are just to casual about it all until too late.
I review NTSB's monthly accident reports quite often, and am amazed at the amount of those reports that stack up every month. In my opinion most GA accident fall into two categories. . those who push their airplane's limits with poor planning . . .and those who suffer mechanical failures that escalate into disastrous results. I believe general aviation maintenance is simply not as good as that of pt 121, especually with aged airplanes owned by those who can barely afford them.
Looking at the most recent Nall report (http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/11nall.pdf), only 15% of accidents and 10% of fatal accidents are attributed to mechanical failures or errors in maintenance. In contrast, 31% of accidents occurred on landing.
It's dangerous down there close to the ground!
I just read the pledge; The word silly comes to mind, Is this the language we now need to speak in? If the authors of the Pledge's language is any indication of the future., buckle up, Its going to be a bumpy ride" Last time I checked 10 year olds were not allowed a ticket yet.
I suppose that I should be more specific as I was referring to personal flights by those who do not fly for a living. General Aviation of course is all encompassing. A sub category of “personal flights of those who do not fly for a living” probably account for much of the high numbers reflected by NTSB’s monthly aviation accident report. Stall / spin after engine failure. . . mechanical or pilot error?
NTSB only gets involved in fatals , usually, so if that is what you are looking at as far as accidents and incidents you are falling far short of the mark. BCA and Pro Pilot, Flying Mag. AOPA, monthly publish accidents that read like the who's who of GA. They range from very technical to oh Duh. So the good news is most don't die, the bad news is they wiped out another GA airplane.
The data was referring to above was from page 32 of the report which is Non-Commecial Fixed-Wing. Interesting enough, "Mechanical problems were the single leading cause of Part 135 accidents in 2010, accounting for one- quarter of the total (seven of 28); none, however, were fatal. " (quoting from the Nall report)