Informal poll for the IR's: do you fly single piston in IMC?

[avbug]

Maybe we should have a poll and ask "How many of your co-workers/friends have you buried when they:

1. Did not manage risk well.
2. Single engine IFR accident.
3. Multi-engine accident.
4. Automobile accident.

You can stop the poll at question one, because it need go no further. How many have needlessly died when they failed to manage risk well? Therein lies the point...how many died because they were willing to accept risk, and made the decision to engage in the foolhardy and dangerous practice of risk managment rather than risk elimination?

Question one implies an acceptance of risk in the first place, and entirely belies the concept of risk elimination...which is a state of mind, an active process, and a way of life.

I took some risks tonight walking down the street with a black jacket on. I probably should have put a reflective vest on.
For the record I fly single pilot single-engine turbine IFR at night. Do I think I'm a daredevil? No. Do I think its stupid? No. Do I think there are risks? Yes. I risk my life taking a shower or eating meat or walking across the street without a reflective vest.
Also if you think I believe I have eliminated risk by flying a turbine single vs. a piston single your wrong.

I do not believe you have eliminated risk by flying a turbine single vs. a piston. Not because it's turbine or piston, but because you believe in accepting risk. Your black jacket had nothing to do with anything, nor does that powerplant. It's your risk. You accept risk, you believe in accepting risk, you are blinded to any other alternative, and you state that you feel you are in the right.

Someone else, who might be a little more open minded and safety conscious, might elimiante risks by wearing that reflective jacket. Or not walking down the street. Or by taking a cab. Or choosing a different street. Or carrying a flashlight. Or looking in all directions frequently. Or by keeping one's self away from the street, with a barrier between the street and the pedestrian. Or by merely constantly asking one's self, second by second, what might become a risk, and finding a way to eliminate it immediately.

That man ahead is unknown to me. He's a hazard. The street is dark. I might walk down there, or I might not. If I walk down there, that hazard becomes a risk. I will choose a different route. I will hold my concealed firearm in my hand beneath my jacket. I will carry a flashlight. I will cross the street to walk in a better lighted area. I will choose another route. I will stop at this house and ask to use the telephone to call a taxi. I will do something. I will not accept risk. This is the process, and it's up to you to choose or reject it.

You have not eliminated risk by flying your turbine powered airplane. You're not interested in eliminating risk. You embrace it, caress it, manage it, marry it. You're like so many other lemmings who perch, looking down at the sea, and cry out that eliminating risk is impossible, so why try?

Wear your dark jacket at night while flying your single engine airplane IMC if it makes you feel better...the risks you face are ones you choose and embrace, else you'd eliminate them rather than manage them, or take the fatalistic attitude that risk cannot be avoided. It can, you cannot see it or admit it, and without that, you are consigned to the fate you choose.

 

[CalifDan]

Avbug,

You are obviously one smart and experienced poster to these forums and I do look forward to your opinion on things.

However, I do not understand your concept of eliminating risk. I understand the concept of lowering risk to some acceptable level, we do that all the time. But frankly, I'm at risk sitting here at the computer typing this message, let alone in twin engine IFR flying.

Sometimes you get hold of an idea and fail to see beyond the end of your nose. Most of the posts you have taken exception with are doing nothing more than risk elimination to a managable level, the best anyone, you included, can do. Nothing you have said provides me with a sense that your examples have "eliminated" risk.

 

[mtrv]

You have not eliminated risk by flying your turbine powered airplane. You're not interested in eliminating risk. You embrace it, caress it, manage it, marry it. You're like so many other lemmings who perch, looking down at the sea, and cry out that eliminating risk is impossible, so why try?

Wear your dark jacket at night while flying your single engine airplane IMC if it makes you feel better...the risks you face are ones you choose and embrace, else you'd eliminate them rather than manage them, or take the fatalistic attitude that risk cannot be avoided. It can, you cannot see it or admit it, and without that, you are consigned to the fate you choose.

Bungie jumpers, mountain climbers, ski jumpers, base jumpers, cliff climbers, divers, amusement park riders------ stay home and watch TV. Preferrably battery powered.

 

[mikecweb]

....You accept risk, you believe in accepting risk, you are blinded to any other alternative, and you state that you feel you are in the right....
.....You have not eliminated risk by flying your turbine powered airplane. You're not interested in eliminating risk. You embrace it, caress it, manage it, marry it. You're like so many other lemmings who perch, looking down at the sea, and cry out that eliminating risk is impossible, so why try?...

Wear your dark jacket at night while flying your single engine airplane IMC if it makes you feel better...the risks you face are ones you choose and embrace, else you'd eliminate them rather than manage them, or take the fatalistic attitude that risk cannot be avoided. It can, you cannot see it or admit it, and without that, you are consigned to the fate you choose.

My point is by living in this imperfect world you MUST accept risk. I don't understand how you can begin to believe that I don't try to eliminate risks. You are wrong and out of line for accusing me of the such. I do everything I possibly can to make my flight the safest possible. I fly for a company with industry leading maintenance. I know my route and my airplane as much as possbible and always seek more information. I research the weather for my route and give myself the knowledge to give me outs if something should go wrong.
You think that the only way that I can eliminate risk is to keep the plane tied down. But then I wouldn't have this job. Maybe I'd work in a cubicle in an office building. Maybe a disgruntled employee goes postal and sprays the place with bullets. Should I then goto work with a bullet proof vest? Maybe I shouldn't be in an office then to avoid this. Perhaps I should run a home office that should eliminate risks. Maybe my house will get robbed and I'll be shot for my flat screen TV.
I didn't become a pilot to be a daredevil. I did this because I love the freedom I feel when being up there. I love being in control of an aircraft. Are my risks more then someone elses? I wouldn't look at it that way. My risks are in one column. The person in the office has risks in another column. And the person with the home office has risks in another column. Each column adds to a common amount of risk and that is the cost for living on this earth.
Sorry pale but if you think you got the world figured out because you recognize others are taking risks and you aren't you are naive at best. Oh and btw there is no fountain of youth either.

 

[USMCmech]

Back to the origional point of this thread.

Do airbags and anti-lock brakes make cars safer? No they don't. Stastistics prove it. Drivers were told that ABS would keep them safe on slick roads. they were not trained to use the new system. Drivers were told that airbags would protect them in the event of a crash. The result was that serious auto accidents acctually rose slightly when these "safety" devices were introduced. People were driving faster than they were before and takeing more risks.

If you never make any flight in a twin that you would not make in a single, then the second engine does add more of a safety margin. If you decide to make flights in your new twin that were "too risky" in a single, then you are back where you started and have not improved your safety margin at all.

Which is safer, a Caravan, or a Citation? Neither. The jet has more power, redundant systems, and is probably more reliable. Therefore the jet has more utility to make flights when a single can't. But it is the pilot that makes it safe or unsafe.

 

[agpilot34]

Avbug, you've got to be the best in the world at putting words in people's mouths, and twisting everything they say into what you want it to be. I never said I was a "crazy outlaw pilot". I merely implied that if that's what you choose to think of me, so be it. You dont know me, so you have no basis for your comments, other than attempting to twist what I said all out of porportion. You of all people should know that for the most part, pilots that engage in low level operations, ie ag pilots, tanker pilots, pipeline and powerline patrol pilots, are some of the best and most highly skilled pilots out there. We have to be, because we dont have the luxury of 20,000 ft. of altitude below us in which to solve a problem when it arises. You do EVERYTHING you possibly can to make sure those problems dont crop up, but at the end of the day, it is impossible to eliminate 100% of ALL risk unless you just stay on the ground. If you believe otherwise, you are nothing more than a naive fool with no common sense about you at all. Risk is involved in these types of operations. So, since you are portraying yourself as an expert in risk elimination, I would like to hear you explain how YOU eliminate ALL the risk involved in YOUR flying. I know you fly air tankers, or did, so I am really curious. I know this is off the subject of single engine IFR flying, but since we've gone the direction of ELIMINATING all the risks involved with ALL types of flying, I look forward to your response. Gotta go to my crazy risky job now.

 

[USMCmech]

Don't take the bait, agpilot! It's like wresteling with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it. Just go about your job like the safe profesional pilot you are and ignore the rude comments.

I personaly belive that Avbug posts like he does because he is bored and wants to amuse himself by getting a rise out of people. He deffinately knows more than me, writes better than I do, and is probably a better pilot than I am. However none of that changes the fact that his attitude is arogant and condescending to anybody that disagrees wiht him. If he actually cared about the people he is talking to, he would not belittle them wiht insulting comments like "lemmings" "crazy outlaw pilots" and "fools".

Rude is rude, wether you have 50 hours or 50,000.

 

[agpilot34]

Don't take the bait, agpilot! It's like wresteling with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it. Just go about your job like the safe profesional pilot you are and ignore the rude comments.

I personaly belive that Avbug posts like he does because he is bored and wants to amuse himself by getting a rise out of people. He deffinately knows more than me, writes better than I do, and is probably a better pilot than I am. However none of that changes the fact that his attitude is arogant and condescending to anybody that disagrees wiht him. If he actually cared about the people he is talking to, he would not belittle them wiht insulting comments like "lemmings" "crazy outlaw pilots" and "fools".

Rude is rude, wether you have 50 hours or 50,000.

Very true. It's sad, too, because just by reading his posts, he seems like a VERY knowledgable pilot whom I would NORMALLY enjoy talking with. It's his $hitass attitude that puts everyone off. I hope that when I get to the point that he's at in life, I dont become one of those bitter old @$$holes who cant carry on a civilized conversation with anyone or have a discussion with anyone without putting them down. There's a decent way to get a point across, and he ain't found it yet. Oh well, makes for some interesting reading, anyway.

 

[BenWA]

Attitude notwithstanding, I have read through a number of avbug's posts/arguments and would be willing to bet a good limb that at least a life or two has been spared as a direct result of the advice that he has broadcasted over the internet in forums like this. My suggestion would be to get over any personal jabs to your ego (be they real or perceived) and think about the bigger picture of avbug's intended messages.

 

[agpilot34]

Attitude notwithstanding, I have read through a number of avbug's posts/arguments and would be willing to bet a good limb that at least a life or two has been spared as a direct result of the advice that he has broadcasted over the internet in forums like this. My suggestion would be to get over any personal jabs to your ego (be they real or perceived) and think about the bigger picture of avbug's intended messages.

No personal jabs to my ego, I'm a bigger man than that. I"m sure you are right about Avbug's advice, as I've read some very good info he's posted in the past. It has nothing to do with taking any of what he says personally. Heck, I've got good friends that are bigger @ssholes than he ever thought about being. The problem I have is with the advice he is giving in THIS instance. It is a foolish pipedream to tell someone that it is possible to eliminate ALL the risks involved with flying, whether it be single engine IFR, or any other type of flying. True, it IS possible to eliminate many risks with skill, common sense, adequate pre planning, and knowing the limitations of yourself as a pilot, and the limitations of your aircraft. But to say that ALL risk can and should be eliminated or your just not a good safe pilot is plain ridiculous, and about as stupid a comment as I have heard in a while. The only way to eliminate ALL the risk associated with ANY type of flying is to just stay on the ground. Airplanes break, I dont care how old or new they are, how many engines they have, what kind of redundant systems are onboard, or what kind of conditions they are flown into. Piston engines fail, turbine engines fail, instruments malfunction, electrical systems take a dump at the worst possible time, or maybe God just didnt like the color of shirt you picked out that day. There's ALWAYS some risk involved when you leave the ground in a MAN MADE MACHINE. There's no way around it, and there's no way to eliminate ALL of it, regardless of how much Avbug knows, or I know, or anyone else knows. To suggest otherwise is just not logical.

 

[Publishers]

I vote with the soft IFR crowd,,, use it to get above or below cloud decks with plenty of room on either side.

 

[avbug]

I never said I was a "crazy outlaw pilot".

Actually, you did...

Risk is an inherent part of the type of flying I do. I accept that level of risk and have no problem with it. If that makes me a crazy outlaw pilot, so be it.

I tend to post for the lowest common denominator. Personally, I don't fly single engine piston powered airplanes in instrument conditions, as stated at the beginning of the thread. Others clearly do. I have never stated that doing so makes one an outlaw, although I do see their actions as stupid, and foolish, and I make no apology for stating for the record that anyone who beats their chest proudly after dragging their knuckles through the gravel to shout at the full moon that they take risks...is a bloody idiot. Especially in the air.

Now certain operations require more care. Flying ag requires carefull attention to loading, turning, obstacles, drift control, mixing, spacing and gaps, and many, many other technicalities particular to the job. A heavily loaded ag airplane is a heavy airplane, no matter what the actual weight, as it's a minimal performance aircraft. You know that, I know that.

One might say an aircraft that is capable of one hundred feet per minute sustained climb on a good day is a hazard. Putting that aircraft in flight is a risk. We eliminate that risk by ensuring that we are able to dump the load. Now performance due to the weight isn't a risk; we eliminated the risk by opening the back door. Unless we allow it to be, it isn't even a hazard any more. Unless we choose to accept more risks. Instead, we find the risks, and we elimiante them.

Obstacles in a field are hazards, each and every one. No doubt about that. From powerlines to standpipes to illegal power connections some yahoo tries to make from a run on the edge of the field to his shed in the middle of a quarter section...without a single pole to give away his little trick. This is a hazard. We go blowing into that field without looking, we're taking a risk. One might assume that ag flying is all about risk management, and say we've been there so many times before that we are taking an assumed (and therefore managed) risk...after all, we were there yesterday, and nothing was there yesterday...

But instead we eliminate that risk by taking a turn around the field before we spray it. Good habit. You know that. I know that. You know people who are dead because they failed to do it, and so do I. It's not academic for them. It's a life and death issue, and if you fail to check a field before you spray it, it will eventually kill you. Again, we both don't believe this. We both don't assume this. You and I both know it, because we know dead people who proved it to us. Perhaps even had it driven home ourselves in clear and unmistakable manners, no?

So we take a turn around the field for the wife and kids, or the mother-in-law, or just for the sake of professionalism, and we verify that the field is clear of obstacles. Even though we were there yesterday. We perform risk elimination. We seek the risks as though our lives depend upon it, because our lives depend upon it, and we eliminate them. One by one, individually, second by second, throughout that flight.

A tree is at the end of the field. We are unable to climb over the tree. Our aircraft performance is physically incapable of clearing that tree. Or barn. Or whatever. It's a hazard. Our line is right toward that tree; it has to be that way to avoid skips in the field. Are we taking a risk? We're faced with a hazard in that tree, to be sure. It will be a risk if we try to go over it. So we don't. We eliminate that risk, and we go around it. Powerlines down there, can't go around them...a risk. We reach the end of the field, pull back on the stick, the airplane rotates, but it doesn't climb. You've experienced it, I've experienced it. The hazard powerlines have just become risk powerlines. We don't try to outclimb them. We push, and go under them. Not out of chance, not out of desperation, but because we've already inspected them and know there's no fence beneath them, and at their lowest point in the run, we can go under them. Doubtless you've done it, I've done it. We don't think, we know.

I don't recommend this act for every reader of this forum. Ag flying is highly specialized work which can and does kill people...very often under very avoidable circumstances during a tiring day in a strenuous cockpit where few second chances are offered...but under circumstances which are avoidable when risk elimination is practiced.

to be continued...

 

[avbug]

...continued be to...

You may or may not eliminate every risk. You may not even identify every risk. But you must never stop trying. Ever. The moment you say to yourself that flying is risky and therefore you're just going to accept risks, then you've failed, and you're playing a fools game in which you WILL ultimately lose.

It's never a matter of if you'll have an engine failure. It's a matter of when. You WILL have one eventually. It's never a matter of if you'll have an instrument failure. It's a matter of when. You WILL have an instrument failure. And so on. Accordingly, knowing what can happen, we plan such that we open the back door. We have alternates. We train partial panel. We know our engine out proceedures. We calculate performance for the worse-case scenario. We know our runway lengths. We wear helmets for special operations where we need them, we wear fire resistant clothing, carry emergency gear, and know what to do when we're on the ground in the environment over which we're flying. We prepare our minds.

I'm watching daily the local arabs going through life with an attitude of "God willing." They have their own sayings for it, but that's the function of life here. No aimed fire...pray and spray, because if allah wishes to hit someone, then their rounds will find their target. Run across the road because they'll make it if allah wills it. It's all about risks...they accept risk because they are fatalistic in their approach to the concept that it's okay...the risk won't harm them unless God wills it. Drive in traffic like a madman, takeoff through the desert at eighty miles an hour without being able to see over the next rise...and hope it isn't a wadi or gully or cliff (three weeks ago I nearly went over one when the driver just managed to turn when it was a cliff over the next rise). That's no way to be, but when I hear pilots braying about accepting risk, I see the exact same attitude. A pathetic third-world uneducated mindless mentality which is absolutely fatalistic. Can't avoid risk, it's everywhere, so go ahead and jump. And again, I make no apologies when I say it's WRONG!!!

You CAN eliminate risk, and if you don't practice it, you KNOW the consequences.

I'm not nearly so concerned about you as I am the student that reads these threads, and comes away with the idea that it's okay to accept risk. You go fly yourself into a pole or play partial panel. You told us you had the partial panel training long ago, and have full confidence in your skills. I don't do regular partial panel training...you're probably far better at me when it comes to retaining specialized flight skills over long periods, but if I'm going three weeks without having done a particular instrument practice (and partial panel is a perfect example), my perishible skills are already oxidizing into a pasty caste of rust. Perhaps you're one of the special cases who really believes that flying and flying instruments is like riding a bicycle...but it's not. You do that...but don't try to convince, by purpose or default, the lowest common denominator who reads your posts that it's okay. It's not okay.

During my last sim recurrent, I was given an unusual attitude. Look down, close your eyes (no, I don't cheat), okay, now open them. It's either going to be nose up, or nose down. Decreasing performance, or in a dive with increasing airspeed, either way, probably turning. Nose down, airspeed high. But he had me inverted, nearly 45 degrees nose down, and he failed the attitude indicator. My initial reaction was wrong, and it wasn't until I cross checked the copilot ADI and the standby gyro that I figured out what was occuring. My copilot never did figure it out until we had recovered. Personally, I've never found myself in a nose-down dive inverted with a failed gyro. I may or may not. What I can tell you is that while I do fly regular instruments (right now, 90% of my flying involves finding weather and penetrating it), my partial panel skills aren't top-notch. I'm glad to have an extra set...and an extra skilled body in the cockpit to boot.

Point is, you may be exceptionally exceptional, and can handle any risk with aplomb. You may have been trained for your instrument rating, and can now handle anything thrown at you without breaking a sweat. I'm happy for you. I can't. I do sweat. I do need frequent training. I find myself constantly learning in the air, and each time I do, I often find learning one thing teaches me two things I didn't know...my own awareness of my own uneducation and ignorance grows exponentially with each thing learned. Accordingly, with each lesson learned, I am reminded not to take chances. My own judgement in the cockpit has been gradually formed by this event and that such that I have learned not to push myself, my aircraft, or my environment too far. The air is bigger than I am. The airplane is mine so long as I respect it or give up control, but I am a speck of dust against a towering cumulonimbus clous, against a tall granit mountain, and to a truth, against the awesome power of a set of thin grey powerlines that wait at the bottom of a risk-accepted descent out of a cloud where I had no business in a piston powered single engine airplane. Accordingly, I don't go there.

You do, more power to you. If you choose to call yourself a crazy outlaw pilot, as you said in your own words, so be it.

Accepting risk is your choice. It's your right. Demand it at the top of your lungs, bray proudly about it if you will. It's still a stupid act, for which no quarter will be given from my cheap seat.

 

[agpilot34]

Excellent post, Avbug. Believe me, I DO understand what you're saying. I think we have the same view about most of this, just seem to be expressing it differently. I agree that a pilot MUST always be planning ahead to minimize, even eliminate risks as much as possible. No, I dont consider myself as an overly exceptional pilot with super human instrument skills. I try to keep my skills current as best I can. Like you, I get concerned about some of the stuff I read on this forum and others, that a new wet behind the ears pilot might pick up and take as gospel truth. There's some really bad advice out there, that's for sure.

 

[avbug]

That's pretty much what I thought. Neither of us would be alive if we didn't think that way.

You've heard it before...everybody thinks you're a cowboy because you fly ag. I've been called it before, and folks don't believe one can be a professional and still do it.

I had a conversation just this morning with a potential F/O about CRM. He had taken a course on CRM a year or so ago, and commented that it's ridiculous stuff...only applies to airline pilots. CRM isn't necessary in small aircraft, or in operations outside scheduled passenger, he opined.

I said I thought the same requirement applied to all operations, and immediately thought back to this summer in a single pilot airplane when I failed to complete the before takeoff checklist, and powered up with the control lock still installed. I powered right back...and it was the seventeenth load of the day and the seventeenth takeoff in what had been a tough day...but the fact was that in my single pilot single seat cockpit, I failed to exercise CRM...and it could very well have killed me. I failed to find and eliminate a risk...in fact, I created one.

I told him that in a single pilot airplane, be it single seat or bigger, I still tend to read the checklist challenge and response, even though I'm the only one there. If someone else is there, the routine doesn't change, they just get incorporated into the act. Likewise, all other aspects of CRM are important, right down to organizing the cockpit for the mission. This very summer another screwup highlighted my own CRM failure...and a failure at risk elimination. I made a run down a canyon with a target at the bottom. I'd been asked to make a turn at the bottom and take the drop out of a turn, but the rotors weren't acceptable, and I felt a straight downhill run was better for my escape.

It was. Until I finished the run and hit the rotor...and got smacked in the face by two bottles of water, a crash axe, the handle of my knife, and a packet full of charts and papers that I thought were secure. I was given a load and return, and while I was loading, everything that smacked me went flying out the window. The first thing I did when I got done that day was reorganize my cockpit, lash down what wasn't lashed, and purchase additional holders, packs, and whatever else I needed to make the cockpit safe and convenient. I can imagine what might have happened had any of those escaped items found their way behind a rudder pedal, or floated up behind the panel to short something out. Another example of a failure to eliminate a risk. Or even to find it. On the other hand, a good example of finding a risk...and eliminating it.

I guess that's the point I was trying to make...risk elimination is something that almost universally we all do. However, introduce it as such, and as we've just seen, almost universally most pilots balk at the concept...until they realize it's a part of the routine they probably don't even think about.

My own mission where that's concerned is to get people thinking a little more about it...even if it takes a little rubbing the wrong way, and some controversey to get the job done.

 

[Fearless Tower]

That's actually one of your better posts, Avbug. I've long suspected that is what you meant by eliminating all risks. Thank you for actually clarifying it.

 

[agpilot34]

yeah, I do the checklist out loud also, even by myself. On the one day a week that I have an observer flying with me, I make him do his part as well. Good CRM is deflinitely NOT just for airliners.

 

[Publishers]

Avbug always offers great advice and reasoning. We have had a great deal of discussion here about the Cirrus and the accidents that have happened. I think part of the problem is that the parachute system while excellent actually encourages risk taking by giving a feeling that there is a way out. That combined with all the information provided by new avionics is leading them down a path to a risk that you might not really understand.
Look at the poll here among pilots who are most likely more qualified and they do not even want to fly IFR.

 

[pilotyip]

why does this keep popping up as a new post?

 

[unreal]

why does this keep popping up as a new post?

Because people keep voting on it.