29 RA-Aus deaths in 29 months

[John Brandon]

In the 29 months from January 2013 to May 2015 inclusive, the fatalities within the RA-Aus sector of sport and recreational aviation have reached the very disturbing total of 29 persons i.e. one death per month. The answer to the question — "Does it look like recreational aviators are now getting safer and that there is less chance of fatal accidents?" — is that they are most certainly not getting safer, despite the 2008 introduction of human factors training and the more recent managerial measures — and despite some recent board member statements. Assuredly, we are not improving; perhaps the adage 'The more things change, the more they stay the same' is appropriate?

 

Read the June 4 update of the document 'Recent RA-Aus fatal accident history' at http://www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/safety/intro2.html

 

John Brandon

 

RA-Aus life member

 

 

[Guest asmol]

Its good reading but it seems obvious that trikes are dangerous in the statistics and perhaps if the RA-Aus want to instantly get a better safety record then we sent the trikes back to the HGFA and 2/3rds of our problems are solved

 

 

[Litespeed]

Thankyou John for bringing this up- safety is not by accident.

 

Having read your above-mentioned article- I agree- RAAus really needs to get its act together regarding safety for the benefit of us all. It beggars belief that so little attention is given to it, that it borders on sheer negligence. We should all be made aware of any accident and its possible causes ASAP with followup post coroners report.

 

To have to wait years for any mention and then only by searching ourselves is clearly placing our community at risk. I have always been a keen reader of the GA reports sometimes called "crash comics" and found them very helpful and full of lessons to learn. It would appear our magazine, website and administration do not consider such reporting in a timely and detailed manner is important. Are they afraid of scaring away potential pilots?

 

As a flying community we must do much better, we must celebrate quietly what we do well, and scream about what we do wrong, accept we make mistakes and make every possible effort to learn from them. We should be always ready to call out fellow pilots and ourselves on our shortcomings. If a design of aircraft is less safe than other similar designs - we should be all told and why- as soon as it becomes apparent. If a particular design is more of handful to fly or has a lower margin of safe speed range- we should as a community be well informed. If a particular type of aircraft- for example Airborne Edge have particular issues due to the way they are often flown or their inherent design- we should all know and training in that type must be strictly enforced with this in mind.

 

We as pilots need information in a timely manner and not with rose coloured glasses. All accidents should be clearly and concisely reported in the magazine, the web sites and via mail to all flying that aircraft type and all instructors. This should also include photos so we learn what happens when gravity bites- shock value is a great aid to learning we are mortal. Pilots are human and thus extremely fallable, sometimes we need a smack around the ears to wake up and great real about our safety and that of our passengers.

 

Our administration is sorely lacking in this area, it is good to teach human factors to pilots as a critical issue but the biggest human factor affecting our safety would appear to be the humans in charge of our organisation. We need leadership from the top as a safety culture not a token approach. We need to be willing to break some eggs or heads to get the right approach to airmanship and foster a safety culture. If egos are dented, people upset, manufacturers annoyed then so be it.

 

This may seem strongly worded to some- but we all only have one life.

 

Phil

 

 

[dazza 38]

Thankyou John for bringing this up- safety is not by accident.Having read your above-mentioned article- I agree- RAAus really needs to get its act together regarding safety for the benefit of us all. It beggars belief that so little attention is given to it, that it borders on sheer negligence.

 

[Our administration is sorely lacking in this area, it is good to teach human factors to pilots as a critical issue but the biggest human factor affecting our safety would appear to be the humans in charge of our organisation. We need leadership from the top as a safety culture not a token approach. We need to be willing to break some eggs or heads to get the right approach to airmanship and foster a safety culture. If egos are dented, people upset, manufacturers annoyed then so be it.

 

This may seem strongly worded to some- but we all only have one life.]

 

Phil

I disagree, we all ready have more hoops to jump through than GA AKA Human factors. Plus we are in the progress of hiring yet another dude in a safety role.

 

The way we're going, we will have zero deaths because our membership renewals will get that expensive that people will stop renewing.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Thanks John, as usual you bring reality into the situation.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I believe a large part of the problem lies in culture/attitude/airmanship/professionalism.

 

This doesn't apply to me type attitude is too prevalent.

 

Just sit back and listen to comments made at fly-ins and it makes me shake my head at times.

 

Low flying, beat-ups, close flying (defacto formation), unstading W&B, fuel calculation, understanding weather, current documentation, flight planning. One could debate how much of this is/is not being covered in much of the training for a licence - as opposed to what is in the syllabus.

 

People can carry on about HF courses as much as they like but you can't teach commonsense in a structured course. Load of rubbish IMO, giving lip service to "appear" to be addressing a perceived problem, the correct attitude needs to be instilled from day one. Some of the questions asked in the HF course I attended (all pilots) makes me wonder how some of their mothers taught them to drink milk.

 

Recreational flying is a sport, a great sport, but it still needs to be approached with a professional attitude to be done safely - there will always be incidents, that's life, but many can be avoided - more regulations and courses will not change that, sufficient regulations already exist.

 

 

[AllanBendigo]

You can teach and preach safety all you like but there are 2% of idiots out there the will not put their brain into gear and don't give a rats backside about things so there will deaths and accidents forever.

 

The other 98% just keep having to pay the price in new rules and new costs because the idiots at CASA, Air Services and others think there can be 0 accidents. We all know drink driving is wrong and against the law but every day someone is killed or a drunk kills someone and they the 2% of fwits still drink and drive so know matter how much safety is out there, people will continue not to follow the rules and kill themselves that is a fact

 

My 2 cents worth

 

 

[turboplanner]

You can teach and preach safety all you like but there are 2% of idiots out there the will not put their brain into gear and don't give a rats backside about things so there will deaths and accidents forever.The other 98% just keep having to pay the price in new rules and new costs because the idiots at CASA, Air Services and others think there can be 0 accidents. We all know drink driving is wrong and against the law but every day someone is killed or a drunk kills someone and they the 2% of fwits still drink and drive so know matter how much safety is out there, people will continue not to follow the rules and kill themselves that is a fact

My 2 cents worth

The solution starts with analysis, then taking action based on that analysis, using education and compliance and enforcement.

 

RAA unlike other high risk sports has a glaring omission with no Compliance and Enforcement network of volunteer members.

 

I haven't seen these new rules that people keep mentioning, but certainly I see a contempt every day for the CARs which have been around for many years. Maybe to solution to that is some edcuation, firstly during training on just what rules apply to a Pilot in Command.

 

Drink driving action has progressed from the point where, in Victoria, the statistics indicated that in 50% of fatalities the driver was drunk. Good advertising, an exceptionally good effort by Police, and a matching attention the detail by Magistrates has helped reduce the death and injury toll by a massive amount. The action taken on drink driving has been a massive success.

 

 

[AllanBendigo]

I live in Vic and yes the toll fron 1034 to the current level is great

 

The point that I was trying to make was the the 2% of idiots don't care about the rules or other people

 

No amount of training / education will make that 2% change their ways

 

Cheers

 

 

[turboplanner]

There is that little rump, yes; that's where compliance and enforcement methods are used.

 

There are no single fixes, it requires a complex approach.

 

 

[alf jessup]

Its good reading but it seems obvious that trikes are dangerous in the statistics and perhaps if the RA-Aus want to instantly get a better safety record then we sent the trikes back to the HGFA and 2/3rds of our problems are solved

asmol,

 

Trikes are far from being dangerous mate!!!

 

Some pilots are dangerous, flying in bad weather is dangerous, flying in to obstacles is dangerous, beat ups are dangerous, showing off is dangerous, low flying is dangerous.

 

You can't spin a trike but you can tumble one but to do that you have to be doing something very very dangerous and well outside the trikes flight envelope.

 

IMO I actually think they are pretty darn safe like any aircraft if flown within the design parameters.

 

Humans pilots kill themselves mate in some shape or form, the aircraft what ever it is will not get in the air by itself (obviously)

 

Alf

 

 

[fly_tornado]

those graphs are 3.5 years out of date.

 

that being said, the RAA doubled in size from 2003 to 2015

 

 

[Cosmick]

It would be interesting to see what percentage of serious incidents occur in School/Hire aircraft as you would expect that the majority of these users would be low hour Pilots with less experience.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

If the mining industry had this accident rate it WOULD be shut down. Every day, tens of thousands of people (maybe hundreds of thousands) go to work in the mining industry and come home safely, due to effective safety management programs. Every day (for many days of the week), a couple of dozen RAA pilots go flying and we get this abysmal result.

 

There is an urgent need for top-down attention to the problem. The miners at the coal face didn't and couldn't fix their problem, it was done by professional analysis and management. Same will be essential for RAA.

 

The alternative will be an end to our activities, brought on by community pressure.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

No more dangerous than rock fishing.

 

http://www.surflifesaving.com.au/news/rock-fishing-leading-cause-of-coastal-drownings-in-nsw

 

Some activities are inherently dangerous, flying light aircraft is one of them.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

That's what they said about mining when I started. We used to kill one miner per thousand per year in 1970. Turns out it wasn't inherently dangerous at all, it is safer than the construction industry, logistics and many other activities. But we needed to knuckle down and fix it.

 

 

[M61A1]

For a start, we're not industry. The people dying are not paid to go out there and do dangerous things, it's hobby. The only person that can stop you killing yourself is you, so demanding that RAAus pay more attention to your safety is just shifting blame. Go out, fly safe, and stop blaming others for your own failings. There are enough rules and you have been taught enough about what will kill you.

 

 

[turboplanner]

That may be FT, but let the rock fishermen solve their problems. You would be surprised at the threats to their sport.

 

These statistics are a sword hanging over OUR heads.

 

 

[Camel]

As merely a different way of looking at things, my thoughts are and would not be surprised if statistics support this, low hour pilots are always at risk, pilots without current flying that is only fly after a months break are more at risk and those who should fly with an instructor to get them up to speed on a different aircraft but choose to think they can handle it !

 

I believe pilots who fly regular and can choose the better days a less likely to come to grief unless they come complacent or overconfident.

 

A recent over a month without flying I found myself not being able to put the plane down where I wanted it and resulted in two go a rounds as my strip requires a landing at the correct point.

 

My remedy is when any pilot has a long break or does not fly regular they should have a few flights with an instructor, compete in aero club comps or fly with an experienced buddy.

 

Old aviation sayings are very true too,

 

There are old pilots and bold pilots but there are no old bold pilots !

 

 

[fly_tornado]

2nd pilot, 2nd engine would stop a lot of incidents...

 

 

[red750]

2nd pilot, 2nd engine would stop a lot of incidents...

This news item from the home page may go some way to addresing this.

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/new-backup-electric-motor-for-light-aircraft-designed-for-more-power-and-safety-the-green.135703/

 

 

[turboplanner]

It would be interesting to see what percentage of serious incidents occur in School/Hire aircraft as you would expect that the majority of these users would be low hour Pilots with less experience.

I haven't seen any RA statistics, but the GA statistics indicate that the student phase is by far the safest.

That may be because the student has training fresh in his mind, is generally adhering to regulations, is operating out of good airfields, doesn't have ratbag peer pressure, and has the oversight of instructors and the CFI to keep him on the straight and narrow.

 

 

[Cosmick]

I haven't seen any RA statistics, but the GA statistics indicate that the student phase is by far the safest.That may be because the student has training fresh in his mind, is generally adhering to regulations, is operating out of good airfields, doesn't have ratbag peer pressure, and has the oversight of instructors and the CFI to keep him on the straight and narrow.

So do some high hour pilots get complacent, is that pre-flight check just a rehearsed procedure. I hear some say RAA need to do something to address the level of incidents of which a large percentage do appear to be caused by Human error. Does there need to be some reeducation at timed intervals.

 

Question: Did your last BFR include a Supervised Pre-flight check

 

 

[facthunter]

Pilots react differently to spells from flying. If you like to react instinctively you fly the SAME plane regularly and your standard very much relates to familiarity. Move some control to another spot, and you have a bit of a problem in that case.

 

Often as an instructor/ charter person in GA, you might fly 5 or more different aircraft in a day so it requires a different approach... (In your mind).... More deliberate... and analytical. You put more work into it and you might go around where you wouldn't have if you had been doing a lot of flying, but you are still safe because of that decision.

 

Your confidence must be related to your performance. Under or over are both bad.

 

IF you really doubt yourself, go with an instructor and do some limit flying. A couple of fluke greasers on a calm day, don't a champion make. You need to push the limit of your comfort zone in manoeuvering the aircraft at low speed for instance. Accurate figure 8's will show good coordination. Steep gliding turns etc. Have height and clear other traffic in the proper training area. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

So do some high hour pilots get complacent, is that pre-flight check just a rehearsed procedure. I hear some say RAA need to do something to address the level of incidents of which a large percentage do appear to be caused by Human error. Does there need to be some reeducation at timed intervals.Question: Did your last BFR include a Supervised Pre-flight check

The best answer to that is in a book called "The Killing Zone" by Paul A.Craig which is available on Amazon. It's a 300 page analysis.

 

Apart from that, as you study accident reports, a lot of the same stuff ups are made, a lot of corners are cut, and recency is everything.