Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site orca.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!tektronix!orca!graham From: graham@orca.UUCP (Graham Bromley) Newsgroups: net.aviation Subject: is general aviation safe? (long) Message-ID: <1243@orca.UUCP> Date: Thu, 13-Dec-84 12:35:20 EST Article-I.D.: orca.1243 Posted: Thu Dec 13 12:35:20 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 15-Dec-84 02:07:17 EST Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR Lines: 46 Having thought about learning to fly for a few years, I've sometimes wondered whether general aviation is reasonably safe or really quite dangerous. The three main issues seem to be: 1. The mechanical reliability of the aircraft. 2. The ability of the average pilot to cope with a real emergency (landing on trees, control surface failure etc. as has been dicussed recently). 3. The survivability of a typical crash. For 1., I have the impression that the typical light plane e.g. a 152 or 172 is pretty reliable mechanically, but I wonder how well the typical airplane is maintained. I'd hate to think a mechanic hadn't done something quite right in a plane I was flying. Quite a few disasters with big jets have been caused by sloppy maintenance. Someone on the net recently mentioned a pilot who had one flap drop while he was flying, and this occurred again after it was "fixed". That kind of thing sounds very scary to me. (I'm amazed it was controllable). So: how reliable and how well maintained is the average airplane? For 2., well everyone likes to think they are the best and could handle just anything. It's the same on the roads. However we who realize that most of us must by definition be of about average ability need to be more realistic. Is the average lightplane pilot adequately trained to cope with serious, possibly multiple emergencies the way military and airline jocks presumably are? Surely it would cost too much, and besides you would need those very expensive simulators. Sure, some guys can handle their control surfaces locking up while flying at 50 feet inverted. But how many times do you hear of a fatal accident involving something as simple as engine failure in a single? They just keep hauling back on the stick (or wheel) 'till they run out of knots, then down they go (real steep). So: has the average pilot really been trained to cope? For 3., I read a lengthy article in the Wall Street Journal (of all places) on this subject a while back. It said that the average lightplane is flimsy at best, having very little in the way of an impact resistant cabin. Obviously you can't expect to survive hitting the side of a mountain at 150kt, but do the designers of these airplanes really consider survivability? Apparently Beechcraft once built a twin to survive almost anything, but the plane wasn't a success. Too heavy I would guess. Any comments guys? I'd be interested to hear from all you experienced pilots out there.