Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Assoc. Press study finds older pilots=accidents

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

matt1.1

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Posts
47
I know parts of this article are buried in other age related threads but most will not see it unless they read through six or more pages of trash talk that does not present an unbiased view. So here it is for those that want to get to the facts and decide for yourself.

Age a factor for pilots

Study shows older pilots crash more
By Ryan Pearson
Associated Press
Posted Sunday, March 26, 2006
http://www.dailyherald.com/images/spacer.gif LOS ANGELES — At 50, Philip Semisch learned to fly. He took aerobatic lessons on his 60th birthday. When he turned 70, he flew gliders.
Another aviation milestone followed just a few years later: He crashed.
The retired Army officer and manufacturing executive from Skippack, Pa., was alone, piloting a small Decathlon plane in September 2002. It bounced as he tried to land, twice. As he took the plane back up for another landing attempt, he failed to clear a wall of trees.
Semisch walked away with bruises and a few stitches.
“I feel very comfortable flying, and did immediately after my accident,” he said. “I take it very seriously. I don’t fly in bad weather. I’m careful.”
http://www.dailyherald.com/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.dailyherald.com/dow_photo...OTS[f].jpgAssociated Press
Philip Semisch, in his early 70s, crashed his Cessna 152 near Collegeville, Pa., last November, but has no intentions of giving up flying. The Federal Aviation Administration has made it easier for old pilots to keep flying even though data shows they are more likely to be involved in crashes. http://www.dailyherald.com/images/spacer.gifDespite such confidence, Semisch’s Pennsylvania accident was one of hundreds in recent years that illustrate a trend within the general aviation industry: A disproportionate number of crashes among older private pilots.
Following a rash of plane crashes involving older pilots in Southern California, The Associated Press analyzed five years of federal pilot licensing documents and aviation crash data. The analysis showed that pilots in older age groups were in a significantly higher percentage of crashes than they represented among all pilots.
Fatal crashes also are proportionally higher for older pilots, according to AP’s examination of Federal Aviation Administration and National Transportation Safety Board data.
Restrictions eased
The findings come after an FAA rule change in September 2004 made it easier for graying pilots to keep licenses to fly certain smaller planes.
From the 1920s, every pilot, private and commercial, was required to pass a physical exam administered by an FAA-certified doctor at least once every two years for those age 40 and older.
The rule change allows pilots of smaller planes to fly using only a driver’s license as proof of good health. The FAA and pilots said the change would be of particular benefit to older pilots, though they must pass regular flight tests
Under the new rules, pilots whose licenses were revoked for health reasons — such as a history of heart problems — may be recertified after a medical exam and are not required to undergo future checkups.
This comes as the general aviation industry is graying; the average age of private pilots rose from 43 in 1995 to 47 at the beginning of last year.
Experts widely acknowledge that about three-quarters of all aviation accidents are caused by some kind of pilot error, including slower reactions that can come with age.
“We don’t see too many aviation accidents that are related to a medical cause. The increase in accidents (with age) may be due really to cognitive factors,” said Federal Air Surgeon Jon Jordan, the FAA’s top doctor.
What’s in the records
The AP reviewed 2000 through 2004 NTSB records related to general aviation, a category that encompasses private, recreational and corporate pilots. Also checked were FAA files covering all pilots.
Among the findings:
•Pilots age 60 and over accounted for 23.6 percent of all general aviation accidents even though they represented just 14.7 percent of all licensed pilots. Those in the 50-59 age group were responsible for 26.4 percent of accidents; they were 22.1 percent of all licensed pilots.
•Pilots 50 and older were involved in 55.8 percent of all general aviation accidents that led to fatalities, although this group comprised just 36.8 percent of all licensed pilots.
Many pilots interviewed defended aging aviators, saying wisdom and experience more than make up for age-related forgetfulness or decline in motor skills.
“The statistics don’t support planes falling out of the sky,” said Phil Boyer, president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, which claims more than 400,000 members.
There has been only one major jetliner accident in the U.S. in the last three years — at Chicago’s Midway Airport — but crashes of small airplanes have become nearly routine. On an average day in 2005, there were four general aviation accidents, with at least one accident-related death.
More than 500 people have died in general aviation crashes during each of the past three years. (By contrast, more than 30,000 people die each year in car and truck accidents).
In Southern California, small planes plummeted into apartments or homes four times in 2003 and 2004. Nine people were killed in those crashes, including the four pilots, all of whom were age 50 or older.
A look at one crash
Ross Anderson was one of those pilots. To his friends and fellow pilots, he was the epitome of safety.
The former Naval aviator held commercial and airline transport licenses and was meticulous about maintaining the Harmon Rocket II he spent years assembling. Almost every day, the 62-year-old Rancho Palos Verdes resident beat Southern California’s freeway congestion by flying from Torrance Airport to his office in Chino, about 45 miles east.
Anderson’s friends remain mystified about why his plane plunged through the living room of a Seal Beach home.
Authorities have not determined whether he died during the crash or just before it.
On July 7, 2004, Sharon Loe had settled onto her living room couch to read the morning newspaper. Seconds later, Anderson’s plane crashed through her roof.
“The glass just came at me. It looked like a fireball,” she said.
She escaped with her husband and dog with only minor cuts and singed hair. The home was in ruins.
David Hallmark, an aircraft services shop manager who helped Anderson build the plane, believes his friend was somehow incapacitated.
“The way the accident happened, there was no way he was at the controls,” he said.
Health issues hidden
For Bob Loo, who regularly soared above Michigan’s rugged Upper Peninsula counting wolves for the state natural resources department, the cause is clearer. He suffered an apparent heart attack in mid-flight in June 2002 and died in the crash that followed.
“That’s the way he wanted to die, I guess,” said his longtime companion, Clarice Arnell of Iron River, Mich.
But the 78-year-old former World War II pilot concealed from the FAA a long history of ailments that included blocked arteries, gout and congestive heart failure so that he could keep flying his Cessna 182.
Every year from 1978 to 2002, Loo obtained a Class 2 medical certificate from the FAA.
In the medical history section of each application, he checked “no” when asked if he had been admitted to a hospital or suffered dizziness, fainting or heart trouble.
M.D. signed forms
He was lying, according to the report on his crash prepared by the National Transportation Safety Board.
The NTSB investigation found that Loo’s aviation medical examiner from 1988 to 1994 — such doctors are certified to determine whether pilots are fit to fly — treated Loo for his gout, heart disease and diabetes. The examiner then signed the FAA applications, the NTSB said in its report.
Anonymous tipsters twice told the FAA that Loo shouldn’t fly. An unsigned letter in July 1978 prompted an FAA review, but that was dropped in December of that year after Loo insisted that his health was “excellent,” according to the NTSB report.
Living alone in a small cottage, Loo was most comfortable in the solitude of the sky. “That was his love. As long as he could be in a plane, he was happy,” Arnell said.
user_offline.gif
 
No where in that report did I see mention of how many hours each group flew.
So they are comparing accident rates only among age groups and numbers of pilots.
This assumes each group flies the same number of hours.
If the assumption is wrong then the data is.....useless. Unless you are out to incite people.
 
Seems that the people that wrote these articles, have never really flown with an older pilot. I am not going to sit here and make it sound like I read all of that, well because I did not want to say this, I can't read!!!:bawling: But at the same time, I think how disrespectful it is. These are the same people we would all look at as children in the airports and say, "I want to fly planes too". As your parents would share passive encouragement. I am not at all one for kissing a$$ or being sentimental, but I do feel that there are some things that would point out the obvious objectively, and other reports issued that would clearly have an underlying agenda. But I guess if we were to compare certain pilot groups with an accident rate, we could also include the accident rate between male and female pilots. All jokes aside, it really sounds just as ridiculous. When push comes to shove I feel it comes down to two issues. No. 1 being quality of training, and No. 2 being levels of complacency. If a pilot realizes that their is always a need to be 110% in front of their aircraft, then the years of experience would only make them that much better than their younger counter parts.
 
I am suprised by the regional pilots responses

It is truely amazing how passive and disengaged you'all seem to be on this issue. The stacks are incredible for your career potentials yet you all seem to not be concerned in the least.

That is fine. Hope those RJ jobs pay the bills.
 
It is not that I don't care about my future. However, I do feel that it is rude and frankly disrespectful. We will all have our turn on the high side of a seniority list. That is just the way it is when you continuously strive to be the best at what it is you do. So I am not worried about my job or what equipment I am flying. As far as making the bills, There is not a one of us that have made it this far chasing big money dreams. Obviously it is everything on the contrary for the first several years. So I know the money will eventually be better, and the whole while keeping in mind that I did not start this career venture for money, rather than for the flying.
 
matt1.1 said:
It is truely amazing how passive and disengaged you'all seem to be on this issue. The stacks are incredible for your career potentials yet you all seem to not be concerned in the least.

That is fine. Hope those RJ jobs pay the bills.


I'm lost. What is your point with this artilcle, Matt1.1?
Pilots who choose to fly under the sport category (no medical) will have to fly sport category a/c correct?
I think the author is not taking in account that those who can afford to own an aircraft and fly solely as a hobby are usually older pilots.

Help me out. I can't find any other reason to be concerned.

-Keith
 
keith said:
I'm lost. What is your point with this artilcle, Matt1.1?
Pilots who choose to fly under the sport category (no medical) will have to fly sport category a/c correct?
I think the author is not taking in account that those who can afford to own an aircraft and fly solely as a hobby are usually older pilots.

Help me out. I can't find any other reason to be concerned.

-Keith



I think the only point Matt1.1 has is at top of his head...
 
matt1.1 said:
It is truely amazing how passive and disengaged you'all seem to be on this issue.
Matt,

you are giving us rednecks a bad name, the propper spelling is y'all.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom