|
|
Listers,
Beware, this is a long post -- you might want to print this and take it to
the throne room with you.
Last month's issue of Aviation Safety magazine contained an article titled
"Rogue's Gallery." I requested permission from the magazine to post the
article here on the list, but I received no response -- I'm taking that as a
no. I can, however, paraphrase.
BTW, I highly recommend a subscription to this publication. It's expensive,
but that's because they don't accept advertisers, the magazine is completely
supported by subscription costs.
Remember the Marine EA-6B Prowler crew that cut a ski-lift cable in Italy
back in 1998? They killed a bunch of people and created an international
incident. Sound familiar? Obviously we can examine situational awareness,
skill and judgment lapses here, but no one can argue that if they hadn't
been flying faster and much lower than authorized it would never have
happend. Jeff Pardo, author of the article, attributes this accident to
"rogue behavior."
In the early years of aviation, let's call it the barnstorming era (when
there was a lot of experimentation going on), a certain amount of
"derring-do" was considered a prerequisite to piloting an aircraft. Through
the years we, and the public in general, have revered those pilots who can
maintain control of their craft while performing death-defying maneuvers
close enough to the ground that we can see. I would hazard a guess that
most of us have, at one time or another, availed ourselves of the freedoms
flight offers to exercise a little derring-do on our own. The siren song
calling us to wheel and soar with the eagles is all but overpowering at
times -- it's fun, scary and exhilarating. But let's not forget the reason
it's fun, scary and exhilarating; it's also dangerous.
In today's insurance- and bureaucracy-driven world of aviation we (pilots)
are expected to toe the line, follow the rules, keep the shiny side up,
etc., etc. We're also a group of ambitious, determined and capable people
who've learned (in the non-aviation world) that sometimes the best way to
get things done is to "think outside the box." We (most of us) didn't get
where we are in life by always following the rules. Not only are we
successful, but we are among a select few that have the courage (temerity?)
to learn to fly. Some of us aren't satisfied with even that level of
intrepidity and have chosen to BUILD OUR OWN AIRCRAFT! The question is how
do we apply our audacity, and what we've learned about success in our
non-aviation endeavors, when "soaring and wheeling?"
In his book, "The Killing Zone," Professor Paul Craig observes that the
typical pilot personality feels a need for independence, excitement,
prestige and control. Is it as easy for you as it is for me to see how this
can lead to shining one's ass?
According to the Nall report (an AOPA Air Safety Foundation statistical
examination of aviation accidents and incidents), pilots who engage in
low-level maneuvering and flight into worsening weather are still killing
themselves (and others) with appalling regularity. Single-engine,
fixed-gear pilots seem to favor accidents involving low-level maneuvering
over weather 2-1; vice-versa for pilots of higher-performance singles, they
prefer weather-related accidents to low-level maneuvering 2-1. Maneuvering
flight (mostly buzzing and other related activities) accounts for
approximately 25% of all accident fatalities. More than a third of these
low-level accidents involved loss of control, a small number (about two
percent) involved a power loss and about one in nine were outright low-level
aerobatics. In any given maneuvering flight accident, about half involve
fatalities. In most serious accidents, judgment is usually involved, whereas
it's more a matter of skill in less serious "fender bender" accidents.
So where does this leave us? Many of us are still scratching our heads
trying to figure out why we are still killing ourselves (and others). Some
fear the coming backlash that will most certainly further erode our freedom
to engage in one of life's most rewarding activities. Consider these
questions: How does temptation foster a bad decision? When does innovation
or heroism become recklessness, or even villainy? When should profit and
personal gain eclipse safety? When does expanding the envelope become an ego
writing a check that one’s experience can’t cash?
Mr. Pardo made a list of Rogue Pilot characteristics. This I will post in
it's entirety:
-- Socially adept, an effective communicator, politically savvy.
-- Can use, modify or withhold information for personal gain.
-- Believes that he or she is superior, and that the normal rules don’t
apply to them.
-- Displays far greater skill than discipline.
-- Driven by something -- money, fame or their own ego -- to the point
behavioral inhibitions are overcome.
-- Easily bored with the mundane.
-- Usually very popular within their organization, knowing what rules can be
broken, when and with whom.
-- The “ripple” effect follows them: perceived as a role model within their
organization, others are prompted to “try their luck,” sometimes with
disastrous results.
-- Their behavior exhibits progressively larger deviations from what is
usually perceived as “normal,” “expected” or “safe.”
Please keep in mind that I point no fingers save the one pointing at myself.
If we accept the premise that we should strive to be the safest, most
professional and effective pilot possible, then each of us must KEEP that
finger pointed at ourselves. We must constantly survey our reasons and
motives for our decisions and behavior. If even a whiff of one of these
characteristics is apparent in our self-examination then we owe it to
ourselves, our passengers, a freedom-loving pilot community and innocent
bystanders on the ground to CEASE AND DESIST IMMEDIATELY!
The discussions on this list have covered a plethora of angles related to
this topic: skill in low-level/high-speed maneuvering, FAA rules, judgment,
training, personal preferences, interference with other air operations,
etc., etc. Some say we’re beating a dead horse. Others agree with the
message, but don’t like the way the message is shared. I think it’s
important that each messenger deliver his or her message in whatever form
gets their point across. Every time someone shares an experience or idea we
are given a lens through which we can view our own ideas and experiences
differently. Sometimes looking at an idea from another’s perspective can
give us a fresh opinion of its merits, or lack thereof. If everyone looked
at things the same way there would be no reason for discussion!
Since we are always (according to Prof Craig) looking for ways to
demonstrate our skill and bravery, I suggest this: There is nothing harder
than to honestly examine ourselves. After each flight, especially if you
have another pilot or even a passenger aboard, consider conducting a
post-flight critique. Ask for input from your passenger; they might well
have seen something you didn’t (and don't shoot the messenger). Review the
flight from flight planning to engine shut down with emphasis on your
decision-making and how it affected the outcome. This is the time to nit
pick -- no nit is too small. It takes a brave person indeed to examine his
or her mistakes and shortcomings -- and an even braver person to accept
responsibility to take the necessary steps to ensure they never happen
again.
Integrity is doing the right thing even when no one is watching. Honor is a
gift one gives to oneself. Giving in to temptation is easy, especially when
you know you can put on a show. Following the rules takes strength and
integrity, especially knowing you'll only impress yourself. Are you strong
enough to give yourself the gift of honor?
Fly safe and always have a reason,
Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
|
|