Your opinion on lives lost spending a lifetime in aviation

[Ploesti]

This may me a deep question but the Leeward tragedy, (among others) comes to mind. being a pilot myself and coming from a family of pilots, I have never thought about just how potentionally dangerous our profession or hobby actual is. I find driving a car to be far more in harms way than flying an airplane, but that's just me. My question is: does it surprise you when you hear of a long time, life long warbird or general aviation pilot losing his/her life in what they have chosen as a career? Are we more in shock when we read about someone passing away in a car accident or by some desease than we are by an air accident?

I bring this up because I had a person I knew that died in an air accident. He was a good guy and a great doctor who thought he was as good a pilot as he was a doctor. Didn't work out that way and he took two others with him. This happened a few years ago. tragic and avoidable.

You have to keep in mind that warbirds are extremely powerful and fragile. Add air and take offs and landings and you have an accident waiting to happen no matter how great a warbird pilot you are. I'm not sure what I'm asking here but I would like to hear some feedback. Respectfully or course.

[p51]

My uncle was a transport pilot in WW2, was araded the DFC for going over the "Hump" several times. He slammed into a mountain outside of Atlanta in the 50s while flying a charter aircraft. I never knew the man but I'm sure he'd have traded some of those experiences to be around to this day!
One thing's for sure, if I hear that tired comment of, "at least he/she died doing what they loved" nonsense one more time, I'm going to gag.
I've known two people who died while doing what they wanted to do. In each case, they were aware of what was happening and on both cases they made comments on how stupid it was to be dying from something related to a hobby.
I'd much rather live a long life filled with some degree of longing v/s a shorter one filled full of thrills. I think of most of the people who've died in airshow disasters could be asked in the hereafter, I'd bet most (if not all) would say they'd rather have lived a lot longer and not done a few of things they'd done.
If you ever get the chance of listen to the recording (or read a trasnscript) from the capsule in the Apollo 1 fire, you'll not find any of their last words to the effect of, "It's okay Houston, it was worth it for the chance to go to the Moon"

[51fixer]

This may me a deep question but the Leeward tragedy, (among others) comes to mind. being a pilot myself and coming from a family of pilots, I have never thought about just how potentionally dangerous our profession or hobby actual is. I find driving a car to be far more in harms way than flying an airplane, but that's just me. My question is: does it surprise you when you hear of a long time, life long warbird or general aviation pilot losing his/her life in what they have chosen as a career? Are we more in shock when we read about someone passing away in a car accident or by some desease than we are by an air accident?

I bring this up because I had a person I knew that died in an air accident. He was a good guy and a great doctor who thought he was as good a pilot as he was a doctor. Didn't work out that way and he took two others with him. This happened a few years ago. tragic and avoidable.

You have to keep in mind that warbirds are extremely powerful and fragile. Add air and take offs and landings and you have an accident waiting to happen no matter how great a warbird pilot you are. I'm not sure what I'm asking here but I would like to hear some feedback. Respectfully or course.

Its all in how the question is framed and asked.
We all have things we do and all activities can lead to some kind of an accident or event that goes wrong. Kids sports, driving, walking down the street are all pretty mundane activities but many injuries and deaths occur in those simple endeavors. Now throw more complex and higher performance activities in place the risks can grow depending on the preparation and training involved.
It is a balance of what we are allowed to do, how well we prepare ourselves to do those things and being smart in how we do them. If we minimize risk with training, maintenance and experience we work to have a positive outcome. But there isn't always a blueprint not to do a stupid thing nor are there requirements to be smarter than average.
From my time working on them I'd say that warbirds are not fragile, but quite the opposite. The fragile part is us more than these machines.
With freedoms there are many things that can't be done to protect all from every possible harm unless we remove the freedoms we have.

[Ploesti]

I'm thinking now that I would assume that taildraggers are far more fragile than tricycle landing gear warbirds. We all know this possibly, so I would assume that warbird pilots that fly taildraggers are at far more risk of harm than tricycle warbirds. That being said, as a whole I would assume "taildragger + high performance = far far more attention than tricycle warbirds i.e. P-39, P-38, B-25 etc. BTW I'm a traildragger.

[Trey Carroll]

From the somewhat short life I have lived, and practically all of it being involved in aviation, I view flying (not just warbirds) as:

When we go up and fly, we practice a few tasks revolving risk. It is risk identification, risk assessment, and risk management. If you can look at doing whatever we do (aerobatics, "Go-Arounds", shooting ILS's down to minimums in nasty weather, you need to assess everything as a risk, and decide whether you can safely make the airplane do what you want it to do.

In and of itself, there is quite a bit of being comfortable with what you are doing, experience, and reliable & safe equipment.

I remember being a kid, and going to airshows with dad. He explained the risks to me straight up, it's a life-or-death game when things go bad. Every time he straps a Citation on, I strap one on, T-6, Super Cub, it doesn't matter, you need to know what the risks are, or get your ass out of the seat. If you don't know what you are capable of doing *in terms of death&destruction, you are only a greater risk to you, passengers, shoe clerks, spectators, ect.

I guess when it comes down to short answer, every situation is going to be different if a long time pilot dies in a plane crash. I always tell people when I hear of accidents, "it's the nature of the business"

[Dudley Henriques]

I'm thinking now that I would assume that taildraggers are far more fragile than tricycle landing gear warbirds. We all know this possibly, so I would assume that warbird pilots that fly taildraggers are at far more risk of harm than tricycle warbirds. That being said, as a whole I would assume "taildragger + high performance = far far more attention than tricycle warbirds i.e. P-39, P-38, B-25 etc. BTW I'm a traildragger.

Flying a fighter or warbird trainer either tail wheel or nose wheel should simply be viewed from a professional approach that dictates proper procedure for whatever type is being flown. Pilots who possess this professional approach will see no difference whatsoever in any perceived "danger" or "attention required" factor between tail wheel and nose wheel airplanes.

As an instructor in high performance airplanes I've been aware since day one of the "emphasis" placed by many on the terrible price that can be paid for an instant's inattention during roll out for example when flying a tail wheel fighter as opposed to flying one with a nose wheel. I have always preferred to down play this mindset in favor of competency and currency in type. If a pilot is instructed correctly and properly, the result will be a pilot capable of handling the type airplane being flown regardless of where the small tire lives on the airframe.

I realize that there are many pilots who consider tail wheel aircraft to be more dangerous to handle than airplanes with a nose wheel.
I simply don't agree with this approach )))))

Dudley Henriques

[CAPFlyer]

I think that in aviation, like in any other "dangerous" occupation or hobby, loss is almost inevitable. I was on duty when Air Tahoma 185 went down taking the life of a guy whom I considered a friend and almost took the life of a guy I really looked up to, witnessed Jim LeRoy's crash at Dayton, was across the ramp when a guy I knew was killed in the BA fueling accent at Denver, and have witnessed or been on scene shortly after several other emergency landings, aborted takeoffs, and other incidents and emergencies that thankfully didn't kill anyone during my time in aviation. In all that, I know it's a risk, but it still doesn't stop the shock when it happens to someone you know just because you've been around them and you know them and in a lot of cases, it's not something you expected to see happen because of who they were. It's kind of like Scott Kalitta's crash a couple years ago now. I've met Connie. I've spent time around his aircraft and seen his drive to make things right. There was not a single person more concerned than Connie when his 747's lost several engines while inflight, and when Scott was killed, I know the family was devistated. Then I got into railroading and was nearly witness to the adage that is prevalent in that industry. It's not if you'll kill someone at a crossing, but when. I was thankful for my time working on the rails, but I'm glad I'm off of them now and don't have to worry about when that day will come because for everyone I know in the railroad industry who works a train crew, it comes eventually if you're on the job long enough. Same in aviation, it's a small community. You'll loose someone that you know in an accident one day and the likelihood of it happening goes up as time goes on. To me though, it doesn't make it any less shocking when it happens, but I think it helps you cope with it a little in some ways because you know that you've accepted the risk just as they did and you hope that everyone did what they could to mitigate those risks and what happened was just what happened and nothing more.

[Dan Johnson II]

You can choose to experience life by living it, or by being afraid of it. Sometimes bad things just happen anyway no matter how plan it.

My son would have turned 28 today. He died in a car wreck at 21. He wasn't racing or doing something wrong, he just missed a stop sign in the middle of nowhere and another car happened to be coming across and got him and his sister.

I'm not saying it looking for sympathy, or suggesting recklessness. But we'd plotted and planned it all just so and bad stuff still happened. I suppose we could have never let him learn to drive, or not let his sister ride with him. We could have cocooned them in and maybe they'd still be here. I doubt they'd have appreciated it though.

If your passion is aviation, and you get to live out that dream, then you have to go for it. As one who had the dream but never got to live out the flying part, I envy those guys. Like any thing, you plan it out the best you can, calculate the risks and go for it, knowing that something might break, or you might make a mistake. Life would be awfully dull if we could control everything that happened.

Remember that old "Twilight Zone" episode where the guy dies and goes to 'heaven'. Everything works. He enjoys it to start, but when he realizes that he can't lose he gets bored. He then asks the guy in the white suit if this "is really heaven?" The guy in the white suit says "who said anything about heaven?" or something like that.

[tinbender2]

No,

It doesn’t surprise me. Especially in aviation. It only takes a moment of inattention, an unrealistic view of their abilities, a twinge of get-home-itis, etc, to turn pilots and aircraft into piles of wreckage. Years of flying experience, and being a genuinely nice person, don’t mean a whole lot.


As a pilot, I thought I was Sierra Hotel and invincible. I’ll bet most pilots secretly believe that, even if they never say it publicly.

When I moved to the GA maintenance side, and after scraping up my 10th wrecked aircraft, I realized a LOT of pilots were pushing the limits of their flying abilities, regardless of how many flight hours or years in aviation.


I’ve seen guys with 20+ years of flying experience do really stupid things, from gear ups, to taking disabled aircraft up (and crashing), burning up turbine engines, taxi into all kinds of fixed objects, land too long, land too short, taxi out with a towbar still attached, fry all of the electrical components in their jet, etc.


In my 20 years in aviation, here are some highly experienced pilots, who managed to screw the pooch...

The retired 20-year U.S. Marine jet jockey, wearing his leather jacket, military insignias, and RayBans, slinging exaggerated war stories , who tried playing fighter pilot with a Piper Archer...

The 16-year corporate pilot, stuck flying a trashed twin Cessna, for arrogant executives, on the same routes, every day, staying in seedy motels, with no chance for advancement, getting grief for spending money on BADLY needed maintenance, who HATED his job and his zombie airplane...

The piston-twin freighter pilots, some furloughed with 15,000 hrs heavy commercial experience, trying to push through weather that their ancient aircraft could not handle...

The 10-year corporate pilot running a KingAir out of fuel...

The 12-year KingAir pilot who managed to hit the same tree on two different flights, while trying to impress his buddies on the ground...

The arrogant 10-year corporate pilots, who taxied out with a GPU still attached to their jet, or their nose torque links disconnected, or their parking brakes left on, etc., etc...

The furloughed airline pilots, now flying cargo caravans, all trying to impress the cute female ATC controller, by making successively more dangerous turns-to-final, almost acrobatic maneuvers...

I’ve seen a huge decline in systems knowledge of airline pilots. Apparently it is not taught much any more. The airlines were quite happy to pay $500 for me to do a 5 minute computer reset, because their pilots couldn’t refrain from touching anything for that 5 minutes. I’ve seen 10-year corporate pilots go to Flight Safety and fail on the aircraft they are currently flying.


Nothing surprises me any more. I don’t even argue with the gear-up pilots, who swear the handle was down. “SH_T” happens. I will play along with a pilot, blatantly lying to save his livelihood after he has made an expensive mistake, UNTIL he tries to shift blame onto an innocent person.

When I see a pilot, regardless of his experience, who has lost his respect for the dangers of aviation, I politely avoid flying with him. I do not fly with unknown pilots, unless recommended by other pilots, whose opinions I trust. I’m disheartened to see the vast majority of pilots, who treat an aircraft like a car. They pull off a few covers, get in and take off, with absolutely no effort to do any kind of a preflight check. When they finally discover a damaged aileron/elevator/nose strut, it could have occurred weeks earlier. I worked at a shop that did a video inspection for hangar rash whenever an aircraft entered the shop. We would find a dozen dings/dents/worse damage, and the pilots had no idea it was there.

I have no sympathy for pilots who kill their passengers because of their own stupidity. We had a USAF instructor pilot do severe acro in a loaded C-172, including flying under two adjacent railroad bridges, pull up into a hammerhead stall, and crash in front of dozens of beachgoers. He killed himself, a student pilot and their two girlfriends. His fellow USAF pilots publicly called him a murderer, and none of us went to his funeral.

[mustanglover]

I have no sympathy for pilots who kill their passengers because of their own stupidity. We had a USAF instructor pilot do severe acro in a loaded C-172, including flying under two adjacent railroad bridges, pull up into a hammerhead stall, and crash in front of dozens of beachgoers. He killed himself, a student pilot and their two girlfriends. His fellow USAF pilots publicly called him a murderer, and none of us went to his funeral.

Del Rio?

[wapeach]

I'm thinking now that I would assume that taildraggers are far more fragile than tricycle landing gear warbirds. We all know this possibly, so I would assume that warbird pilots that fly taildraggers are at far more risk of harm than tricycle warbirds. That being said, as a whole I would assume "taildragger + high performance = far far more attention than tricycle warbirds i.e. P-39, P-38, B-25 etc. BTW I'm a traildragger.

ESPECIALLY on an icy runway with a crosswind....OUCH

[wapeach]

[quote]I’ve seen a huge decline in systems knowledge of airline pilots. Apparently it is not taught much any more. The airlines were quite happy to pay $500 for me to do a 5 minute computer reset, because their pilots couldn’t refrain from touching anything for that 5 minutes. I’ve seen 10-year corporate pilots go to Flight Safety and fail on the aircraft they are currently flying. [quote]

You know why? Because it isn't taught. On the "steam guages" you had to know temperatures, pressures etc. as memory items. Now it's "red or green band" and do what the brain box tells you to do. However that's only 1/2 the problem, the other 1/2 is that the pilot has been engineered out of the loop. Even if s/he knew the systems, it would do no good. The pilot only put imputs into the brain box, the brain box flys the plane. However I do know of a situation that a guy tried to use VNAV to fly out of an RA. Now there's the 787...don't get me started. Can you say product liability lawsuit of the age???

[fritzthefox]

I once read about a motorcyclist who was killed when a small dog fell off an overpass and struck him, causing him to careen out of control into an oncoming truck. When it's your time, you go. We all die. We don't all live very well. I think risk is one of the very reasons people choose to fly (or skydive, or ride donorcycles, or do other inadvisable things that are likely to get you 15 minutes of fame on Youtube).

It is worth noting how many pilots have resisted the introduction of safety measures to aircraft...the stall-resistant Ercoupe, the ballistic parachute, etc...in favor of equipment that ups the ante. The view from a Warbird really isn't any different than the view from any other plane. Many warbirds, despite their gee whiz noise and appearance, don't perform all that well, have nasty handling characteristics and require intensive maintenance. But a lot of pilots want one. I think many pilots seek adrenaline and status as much as they seek the sky.

That's simply what it is to be human. And so is dying.

You place your bets, you take your chances. But if you spend all your time agonizing over the odds, you'll miss your chance to play.

[CoastieJohn]

Post subject: Your opinion on lives lost spending a lifetime in aviation

My perspective comes from my 30 yr CG career with 26 of that in aviation. We know the risks involved and you still voluntarily accept it. If you follow your check lists, risk managment, CRM, MRM, keep proficient, etc you can minimize the risk. However there will always be risks involving flight. If you're around long enough you will lose friends and co-workers in aircraft mishaps. No doubt other high risk jobs are like that.

[cooper9411]

There is inherent danger in any thing we do. Flying takes complete concentration and knowledge while driving a car takes even more concentration because there are thousands of other drivers on the road. And while they are on the road they are eating, drinking, shaving, putting on make-up, texting or a slew of other things that take away from their concentration. I'm not saying that flying doesn't involve risks because it does, all I am saying is up there, there is usually only one person to blame, while down here there are others who are to blame. A man I knew who owned Fremont Airport in Ohio and was a WW2 veteran pilot who flew Corsairs off of carriers and was well into is 80's and thought that he had all the answers., well he didn't. June 2008 the airport was having a fly-in which I attended and there were plane rides being given throughout the day, as I was walking to my vehicle I noticed one of the planes taking off with 6 people on board as I watched the plane it started a gradual turn to the left, I thought nothing of it because the WW2 veteran pilot was at the controls so I continued on my way. Not long after leaving the airport I received a call from one of the employees at the airport who asked if I was still around the airport, to which I said no. He proceeded to tell me that the plane went down and all 6 on board perished. This is a true story and the moral I got from this story is: Pride is a good thing, but have the courage to swallow the pride and admit that you shouldn't do this anymore. After the above mentioned happened, it came to light that the veteran pilot was involved in a couple car accidents shortly before the fly-in and did not have his medical and was legally blind. I flew with the pilot a couple of times and the first time was in a twin engine and while flying he reached over and started leaning out the right engine while I was at the controls, I immediately set the mixture back. The second time we went up in a single engine and instead of us landing into the wind the pilot who knew it all, landed with a cross wind and gusts of around 40 m.p.h.