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

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

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

Do you fly Singe Engine's Into Hard IMC

  • Yes, frequently, sometimes (or often) with passengers.

    Votes: 89 35.9%
  • Yes, frequently, but never with passengers.

    Votes: 11 4.4%
  • Yes, but only in Turbine Powered Singles

    Votes: 6 2.4%
  • Occasionally, but I generally try to avoid it.

    Votes: 76 30.6%
  • Only if I absolutely have to.

    Votes: 35 14.1%
  • No frickin' way!

    Votes: 31 12.5%

  • Total voters
    248
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
....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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top