SKEWED REPORTING ON US

[Guest Macnoz]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24303299-5007191,00.html

 

I am not sure where best to post this link.

 

Interestingly the headline in the printed version is DICING WITH DEATH

 

I’m sure this is going to provoke much discussion amongst us.

 

The RAA is getting plenty of mention albeit headlined by terrible tragedy outside the ranks of the association. It’s a pity the officers or board did not see fit to answer queries by this reporter (assuming they were given the opportunity as reported)

 

 

[Flyer]

 

what a load of

 

Geez there are some tossers in the media...

 

 

[Mick]

what a load of

 

Geez there are some tossers in the media...

YEAH!!! What he said!

 

 

[Geoff]

what a load of

 

Geez there are some tossers in the media...

Yep me to Mick

 

 

[vk3auu]

Perhaps someone should do some research on the number of motor bike and car fatalities over the same period and raise a bit of hysteria in that arena too. It is amazing how we take those accidents so calmly without any remark at all.

 

David

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Let's face it, those who think this type of flying is inherently dangerous always will. They will scaremonger at every opportunity and there will be no changing their minds.

 

On the other hand this article highlights to those interested parties that RAA is a cheap way to engage in what they may have otherwise thought was an expensive hobby. People interested in flying will read it and see that some sort of interest in a plane can be had for as little as $3900 and they can get a 'licence' to fly it in just 20 hours.

 

Good piece of advertising if you ask me. :)

 

 

[Flyer]

Perhaps someone should do some research on the number of motor bike and car fatalities over the same period and raise a bit of hysteria in that arena too. It is amazing how we take those accidents so calmly without any remark at all.David

Awww, C'mon David, dont bring me other favourite sport of motorcycling in for another caneing, we cop enough bloomin crap as it is....:black_eye::hittinghead:

 

I guess I live my dreams and don't quite comply with society...;):devil:

 

 

[MrH]

At least we try to learn from our accidents to improve our knowledge for safer flying:big_grin:

 

H

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

I'm going to take a slightly different tack.

 

I hate the media: In general I think they are lazy and will do anything to sensationalise. This is getting worse and indeed influential figures within the media are starting to comment. There is a view that the large press barons are a key driver in this trend.

 

With that background I went and looked at this article with a view to seeing if it warranted a complaint to the Press Council or Media Watch.

 

The bottom line is that this article is both lazy and sensationalised BUT it has enough facts in it to get away with it.

 

There are both sins of omission as well as sins of commission in the article but it is close enough that it is likely to be defensible.

 

Some of the accidents are not RAA accidents - the Hempel accident; having said that however there are a largish number of RAA style accidents in the last year to 18 months and I suspect that Queensland and northern NSW are over-represented. Probably quite by chance.

 

There is also good evidence that if you over-communicate about problems then you will come out better in the public arena. Whether they effectively tried to contact RAA (4:50pm on Friday is the most likely stunt) we need to be on the front foot. I suspect that is anathema to our organisation at the moment. This needs to change.

 

Bottom line is: If we don't have accidents then we don't attract the media.

 

Maybe an unpopular view but my view nevertheless.

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

 

 

[octave]

"The most basic recreational plane can be constructed from hand-hewn lengths of aluminium tubing and sail cloth".

 

Adj.1.hand-hewn - cut or shaped with hard blows of a heavy cutting instrument like an ax or chisel; "a house built of hewn logs"; "rough-hewn stone"; "a path hewn through the underbrush

 

So thats how you build an ultralight!

 

 

[Ben Longden]

Why not comment on the story? I did.

 

Ben

 

A very poorly written 'article' with little research. An excellent example of bad journalism. F minus.

 

Now, how about a story with the facts and no bias? Don't forget to research how many people are killed each year in road trauma, drug overdoses and dare I say it; coronary disease from smoking.

 

Regards,

 

Ben Longden

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Why not comment on the story? I did.Ben

 

A very poorly written 'article' with little research. An excellent example of bad journalism. F minus.

 

Now, how about a story with the facts and no bias? Don't forget to research how many people are killed each year in road trauma, drug overdoses and dare I say it; coronary disease from smoking.

 

Regards,

 

Ben Longden

G'day Ben,

 

I assume you are commenting on my post.

 

I did comment on the article, having read it most carefully.

 

With that background I went and looked at this article with a view to seeing if it warranted a complaint to the Press Council or Media Watch.The bottom line is that this article is both lazy and sensationalised BUT it has enough facts in it to get away with it.

 

There are both sins of omission as well as sins of commission in the article but it is close enough that it is likely to be defensible.

 

Some of the accidents are not RAA accidents - the Hempel accident;

Kind regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest Michael Coates]

Then contact the 'author' directly (07) 5451 7212 [email protected] and give her the real facts !

 

Lets all spare 10 minutes tomorrow on the phone and really STUFF UP HER DAY !

 

or if you dont have the time send her an email :devil:

 

 

This is the same fantastic reporter who brought us stories of Pyshic's reuniting Steve and Teri Irwin, UFO's are here!, UFO sightings are up!, Meeting Gods musscle men, Bikies relax in luxury etc, etc..

 

 

[Flyer]

After boiling away for sometime, I thought I'd take Bens suggestion onboard and respond.

 

Feel free to pass comment as I think this will be what I send the reporter.

 

Some points on this badly written article.

 

The article is in italics and my responses are in standard print.

 

THEY'VE been described as the motorcycles of the sky . . . lightweight planes bought for a pittance and requiring only the most basic pilot's licence to fly.

 

They might well be the motorcycles of the sky but I haven’t seen too many motorcycles with wings.

 

I don’t know what you call a pittance but I’d thing that 60,ooo dollars plus doesn’t quite fit the pittance category.

 

A basic license to fly. Yes a lot more basic than a jet pilot and I would expect so. A car license is a lot more basic than a B-Double truck license.

 

In a dangerous trend, a growing number of ageing thrill-seekers are taking to Queensland skies in home-made and second-hand ultralights – one of the most dangerous planes available – as well as powered gliders and light aircraft.

 

Ageing thrill seekers? At 40 years of age I don’t quite class myself as old just yet and I have been flying since I was a 26 year old.

 

It's an inexpensive aviation experience for adrenalin junkies.

 

Really? A hobby that costs over $120 an hour is not quite what I’d call inexpensive.

 

Pilots can fly with a minimum 20 hours' experience and, according to Recreational Aviation Australia, which is responsible for matters relating to ultralight aircraft, students have to pass only two multiple-choice exams and a formal flight test before receiving an RAA Pilot Certificate. No medicals are conducted.

 

The syllabus states that you MUST have 20 hours minimum experience. Minimum. Most people will not meet the minimum criteria and continue to train for much longer.

 

Even after you pass that first test wether it be at minimums or sometime after that you still don’t have a cross country endorsement, just a local area privelliges. Cross country endorsements require further training.

 

People don’t need a medical to drive a car either.

 

Crashes involving ultralights have claimed 10 lives in the past 16 months in Queensland.

 

Not having researched the figures I cant pass comment.

 

The dangers of flying small aircraft were highlighted again last week with the death of two men when their powered glider crashed in southeast Queensland.

 

A most unfortunate accident which is under investigation. This aircraft was NOT an ultralight and is in this article merely to sensationalise it.

 

Less than a day earlier, another two men had died in a light plane crash.

 

Once again, this accident does NOT involve an ultralight. The facts have been distorted in order to sensationalise a badly written article.

 

Queensland ultralight enthusiast Shane Winter, 49, died when a German-built glider crashed at an airstrip in the Brisbane Valley on Monday. He was a passenger in the craft piloted by a 45-year-old Victorian man, who also died in the incident at Watts Bridge Memorial Airfield at Toogoolawah, 80km northwest of Brisbane.

 

See previous comments. This aircraft is NOT an ultralight aircraft but a Glider.

 

The double fatality occurred the day after experienced aerobatic pilot Barry Hempel, 60, and his passenger Ian Lovell, 35, crashed into the ocean off South Stradbroke Island.

 

Mr Lovell was celebrating his birthday with a joy ride in a Russian-built Yak-52 warplane when the incident occurred.

 

Once again the article needs correcting. The aircraft flown by the late Mr Hempel was registered as a GA (general Aviation) aircraft, not an Ultralight.

 

Last month, the pilot of an ultralight walked away after his craft crashed on Little Goat Island, in Pumicestone Passage, 60km north of Brisbane.

 

Out of the 3 accidents referred to sofar, this one qualifies as an ultralight and the pilot WALKED AWAY. Sofar I would be thinking that I’ve got a better chance of survival in an Ultralight.

 

Richard Saint, an ultralight enthusiast and staunch defender of recreational planes, knew both Mr Winter and Mr Hempel.

 

He said the men were well known and highly regarded, and that their deaths had shocked the Queensland aviation industry.

 

"I knew them both and you couldn't ask for better pilots," Mr Saint said.

 

Mr Saint is certainly entitled to his views.

 

He likened flying recreational aircraft to climbing mountains or riding motorbikes.

 

"It's about exhilaration and personal achievement, similar things that mountain climbers and motorbike enthusiasts feel when they do what they love, and in those sports there are also risks involved," he said.

 

There are risks involved with getting out of bed in the morning too. I would suggest that the journalist has attempted to misconstrew what Mr Saint has said. It hasn’t worked well.

 

Mr Saint said ultralight enthusiasts were "a close-knit group" and had closed ranks since the latest incident.

 

I think we have all been deeply saddened by the untimely passing of our peers.

 

Police are investigating the fatalities, and spokesmen for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority declined to comment.

 

The spokesmen said ultralights, also known as recreational aircraft, were an RAA responsibility.

 

The RAA failed to return The Sunday Mail's phone calls and emails.

 

When did you try to ring them, Sunday?

 

And do you think that the responsible body is going to speak to a reporter who has no interest in reporting facts?

 

"The day-to-day handling of ultralights, the licences and monitoring of aircraft is the responsibility of the RAA," the CASA spokesman said.

 

In 2003, there were at least 5000 ultralight planes in Australia.

 

Aviation insiders said they believed the number had almost doubled in the past four years as access to inexpensive planes and excitement about the pastime spread.

 

Speculation only. Not based on facts.

 

Inexpensive planes? Compared to what? Another off handed throw away line.

 

Celebrities with pilot's licences, including Angelina Jolie and John Travolta, also made flying popular.

 

Captain John Travolta is a very accomplished pilot and good role model.

 

As for Angelina Jolie, I have no idea as to her accomplishments.

 

A growing number of retired pilots, in their late 50s and 60s, have adopted the hobby, along with farmers who use them to manage large properties.

 

Are these people not allowed to have a hobby??

 

Advertisements on the RAA website show planes available for as little as $4950. Time-share planes were also available for $3900 plus an hourly rate.

 

Exception rather than the rule. Most Recreational cost twice that of a family car. I.E. upwards of 70,000 dollars

 

The most basic recreational plane can be constructed from hand-hewn lengths of aluminium tubing and sail cloth. By definition, ultralights are powered aircraft intended for experimental, recreational or educational purposes, flown at less than 200km/h and under 5000ft (about 1500m).

 

The Boeing 777 and the A380 airbus were also in the experimental class. What’s your point?

 

Ultralight-related incidents include:

 

• Gold Coast pilot Garry Sweetnam, 49, a licensed aircraft maintenance engineer, and Murwillumbah man Andrew Mitchell, 33, died when their twin-seater ultralight nosedived into the sea off Surfers Paradise on March 7.

 

• Two men were injured when their ultralight crashed during take-off on North Stradbroke Island on September 2 last year. The men suffered back injuries and leg fractures in the incident at the Dunwich airstrip.

 

• Caloundra man Bernard Flood, 53, and his teenage granddaughter Lysinda died when their ultralight went into a tailspin and nosedived into the sea off the Caloundra coast on June 17 last year. The plane was registered with Recreational Aviation Australia and allowed to fly up to 20km offshore.

 

• A man and a woman died when an ultralight plane crashed on take-off north of the Sunshine Coast on April 16 last year. The plane crashed at a private airstrip at Howard, west of Hervey Bay. It was believed the aircraft clipped trees and cartwheeled above a road after clearing the airstrip. It crashed 50m from a home and burst into flames.

 

• Two men died when their ultralight crashed at Oak Valley southwest of Townsville on May 20 last year. The men from the Townsville suburb of Mt Louisa were killed when the microlight apparently experienced engine trouble and crashed into a waterhole during a 20-minute joy-ride from the Montpelier Air Park.

 

• A Gold Coast man was lucky to be alive after his ultralight crashed into canefields near Jacobs Well on August 26, 2006.

 

Probably need to look at the facts behind each accident to assertain what happened. Was it the fault of the Pilot? The Aircraft? Or just an accident?

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Lies, damn lies and statistics

 

I wasn't too keen on that article either, especially since any small plane crash is called an "ultralight". I would hardly consider a Yak-52 "light"! And some of the worst crashes seem to be by some of the most experienced pilots. For instance the Hempels accident last week and also the recent flight incident of GPS failure causing the plane to fly into a ridge. I get the feeling pilot experience has very little to do with it - you can have a fatal accident weather you have 100 or 10,000 hours.

 

But if you want to compare it to getting into a car, there are some statistics:

 

Fatalities per 100,000 hours:

 

http://www.atsb.gov.au/pdfs/statistics/total_fatals.pdf

 

Fatalities per 100 million km traveled:

 

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2008/pdf/Ann_Stats_2007.pdf

 

Now assuming a 90 kt ground speed, 100,000 hours should be about 17 million km.

 

The past few years, private aviation fatalities (which I assume to include ultralights, for which I can't find specific numbers) have been running at 2.45 per 100,000 hours. That would bring fatalities per 100M km to 14.4 compared to 0.85 for road vehicles.

 

That is quite a big difference!

 

So it seems to me that claims like "getting into a car is dangerous too" are, statistically speaking, misguided.

 

 

[ahlocks]

....Feel free to pass comment as I think this will be what I send the reporter.

G'day Flyer,

 

Don't "do a Lou" and not properly research your message. Come back at her with facts presented without emotion or personal bias.

 

She's written a hastily constructed 'fluff' piece based on what appears to be a couple of minutes on Google and the RAA web site with the rest created by her imagination, personal bias and a thesaurus. Call her on that, with a well constructed promotion about recreational aviation instead.

 

Cheers.

 

Steven B.

 

 

[Guest Michael Coates]

Road deaths = 1.54 Fatalities for every 100 Million vehicle kilometers traveled

 

See figure 1

 

Air Deaths

 

See figure 2

 

See figure 3

 

I have used Training and other aerial work because we are obviously not charter and business travel…..

 

Average Air deaths = 0.34 Fatalities for every 100,000 hours flown

 

Lets assume that the ‘average’ ultralight travels at 200 km/hr then it calculates to be 100,000 hours x 200 km/hr = 0.34 fatalities for every 20,000,000 kilometers traveled.

 

Times this by 5 to bring it up to the 100 Million vehicle kilometers and that = 1.70

 

Summary

 

Road deaths = 1.54 Fatalities for every 100 Million vehicle kilometers traveled

 

Air deaths = 1.70 Fatalities for every 100 Million Air kilometers flown

 

So there you go, Air Deaths are more than Road Deaths (but only just)

 

NOTE: Interesting observation with the car figures > > >

 

Car fatalities have really dropped since 1995, which coincides with the introduction of airbags, if the same figures are run pre 1995 then cars are more dangerous.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Michael,

 

Where does your 1.54/100MKM for cars come from? Rates for recent years is much lower, averaging from 1976 is not a realistic representation. That is 32 years ago!

 

I am also surprised about your using training and other aerial work - I would assume that safety wise we are very close to our PPL peers, hence "private and business" is likely to be much closer, where business is private aircraft flown by a PPL for their own business use.

 

I just found this: http://www.casa.gov.au/seminars/selfadmin/papers/CASA-Safety-Statistics.pdf

 

On page 6 it shows fatal accidents (regardless of fatalities per accident!) for ultralights to be about 7 per 100,000 hours. That's even worse then private and business in the ATSB stats!

 

 

[facthunter]

Dangerous Places.

 

I'd like to see statistics on the number of deaths per 1,000 hours in a hospital. It is said that maladministration (mistakes) kill around 10,000 annually in Australia, so don't go there. It IS really dangerous!!!.

 

If you respond to this person be civil and factual. The real culprit is the person who employs her. A good democracy needs GOOD HONEST journalists to be the watchdogs of our freedoms. This lady, would deny us our freedoms, with her irresponsible tripe. I doubt that facts would be of much interest to her.

 

I wonder what her favourite hobby is? Would she like it to be presented in such a biased & contrived/distorted light. I doubt it. Nev...

 

 

[Guest Michael Coates]

It comes from attachment 1, i have added all the deaths and divided by the years reported in the attachment

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

It comes from attachment 1, i have added all the deaths and divided by the years reported in the attachment

Like I said, not very realistic when you compare to only to aviation accidents from 1996 to 2005! In that case you can only use that road figures for those years as well, which bring the number to below 1.

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

As I've said before in this thread I think it's a crap article by an ordinary journalist. But leaving that aside let's look at this realistically:

 

• Light aviation - whether GA or RA is all the same to Joe and Jane Public - they don't really care. What they do care about is when they hear of 5 deaths in little over a week - the Falke, the Yak and the YMMB mid-air. This journo knows her public;
   
   
  
• Risk communication: there is ample evidence world wide that where you over communicate with the public about perceived risks and problems, they form a much more rational view of what's going on. As an organisation and across leisure flying generally we are hopeless at communicating with the broader public. If we want to mould their views then we need to be setting the communication agenda. We need to be offering up articles to slot into quiet news days and we need to be pro-actively focusing their attention on our safety agenda.
   
   
  
• Since the Falke accident about 31 people will have died on Australia's roads. Yes there are fewer pilots but we can put a context on this - we can put our spin on this. More people die on the roads in one week than in leisure flying in a whole year;
   
   
  
• When you get crappy stunts like the abandonded a/c in Queensland after a forced landing then you encourage the media. Don't blame the media for reporting that blame the person who pulled the stunt;
   
   
  

 

 

Finally I bet that more than one of you has reflected on the risks of aviation in the last week or so. I know that people around me have. It's just that we are so crap at setting the agenda that we give hacks like this journo a free run to write whatever sensationalisation she feels like.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[antzx6r]

Oops, I may have insinuated she (lou) was a man in my reply. Maybe I should have done more research eh?

 

 

[ahlocks]

Oops, I may have insinuated she (lou) was a man in my reply. Maybe I should have done more research eh?

Nah, why let the truth get in the way of a good story...

 

 

[Deskpilot]

Instead of comparing road/air fatalities, why not compare road/air accidents, irrespective of injuries. Me thinks air will come out the winner, safety wise.