How Safe Is Private Aviation?

[jyl]

I am interested in knowing, how safe is it to fly as a private pilot?

What are the main risk factors, and which can you control? How does the risk vary with hours of experience, whether you are visual or instrument, if your plane is single or twin-engined, what sort of airfield you fly from, etc?

How does the risk compare with, say, driving cars or motorcycling?

No specific point I'm getting at or trying to figure out, just curious. Flying is something I've always been interested in, but I've never had both enough time and enough money at the same point in life.

[Joeaksa]

In a lot of ways, its like parachuting. I have had 3 friends killed parachuting, and all three of them were killed while driving a car to the airport to jump out of the plane.

Private airplanes are only as good as their pilot and maintenance. Rarely does a plane have a problem, or go down due to maintenance but it does happen from time to time. More often the pilot does something silly, or pushes their limits or flies into weather that they are not trained for or exceeds the capability of the plane.

You are far more likely to be injured or die in a car accident going or coming to the airport to fly the plane. Yet we are so used to using the car that we consider that a safe manner of travel so throw it out the window.

BTW, your safety comes with experience, which is no great news there. The insurance companies usually drop the rates at 100, 500 and 1000 hour levels for private pilots. "Time in Type" is also important and if you move from a single engine airplane with a fixed gear to a retractable plane with larger engine, your rates usually increase until you get 100 or so hours "in type" and show that you are able to handle the increased complexity of the new airplane.

[Seahawk]

Joe captured much of my feelings on private aviation. There is a tremendous amount of data available...

http://aviation-safety.net/index.php

Most accidents in the military are caused by pilot error, which means that the pilot put the fully operational aircraft into a regime that caused the accident. The problem is serious enough that all services have an aviation risk management program that seeks to address pilot causal factors BEFORE the flight occurs.

Google for more details. I recommend that you adopt some of the practices should you decide to fly.

[onewhippedpuppy]

NHTSA accident reports are easy to find, you'll find that the vast majority of GA accidents are from pilot error. Taking it a bit further, you'll find that the biggest error that the pilot made was flying in a manner that he was not trained for, or continuing a flight when he should have landed.

Pretty much every statistic shows that flying is safer than driving. If you get proper training for the flying that you want to do, then fly within your limits, it will be a safe and fun experience. My grandfather has been a pilot for something like 40 years, and at 76 still flies VFR on a regular basis. But I remember many times that we had to cancel a flight due to bad weather, because he saw that the risk was there. Fly smart, and you'll be able to do it for a long time.

Other than that, Joe hit the big stuff. Flying is all about experience, don't bother if you only have the time/money to put in a couple of hours every three months. The more you fly, the better a pilot you become. The more training you put in, be it instrument, high performance endorsement, commercial license, etc, the better off you are because you are gaining more experience. Also, more training allows you to not only do more, but to better deal with situations you might find yourself in.

Single vs twin is somewhat of a moot point, because you'll be stuck in a single for a while. You'll have to build time in a single, get licensed, then train in a twin. As Joe elluded to, most insurance companies require a certain amount of time in a certain make and type before they insure you. The more complex and expensive the plane, the more time required. In some ways a twin can be safer, as you have two engines. However, engine failures in modern GA aircraft are fairly rare, the extra cost of a twin would not be justified just for safety sake (IMHO).

Vs cars and motorcycles? Put it this way, I plan on starting ground school within a year or so, but you couldn't pay me enough to ride a motorcycle on a regular basis.

[Dantilla]

People who have studied the accident statistics for private pilots have determined that the accident rate would be cut in half if pilots quit doing two things:

-Running out of gas.
-Flying into bad weather.

Study after study shows that the weak link is the pilot's brain. Keep your head sharp, and gas in the tanks, and you'll fly safely for decades.

[Normy]

How safe is your Porsche?

One major flight training organization has this as their motto: "The most important safety device in any aircraft is a well-trained pilot". I agree with this whole-heartedly. You have to understand- aviation itself is not inherently dangerous, it is just very unforgiving of any carelessness or neglect. Which simply means that in comparison with driving an automobile, let's say, it requires greather forethought and preparation.

If you forget to put gas in your Porsche 928, the engine quits, and you get to walk to a gas station.

If you forget to put gas in your Cessna 172, the engine quits, and you are landing whether you like it or not. Even if there are nothing but trees or water underneath you...

[Jim Sims]

For the majority of pilots GA should be considered an expensive hobby and nothing more. There is an adage among GA pilots: "If you really have to get to your destination, drive a car." When this is forgotten and the "scud running" begins, disaster will eventually manifest itself in the form of mangled aluminum and bodies, often roasted in gasoline.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

All of the above is true. I'd add that it's as safe - or as dangerous - as you care to make it. The overwhelming majority of incidents and accidents are (sadly) preventable. The #1 cause of accidents is "continued VFR flight into IMC". Bear that in mind and don't ever forget it. All the adages and aphorisms about "good pilots know when to make a 180" and "I'd rather be down here wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here" exist for a reason. We get spoiled down here in the southwest, since we rarely have to contend with anything but a little marine layer or whatever, but don't let it lure you into a false sense of security. When I was flight instructing in SMO a few years ago a recent (relatively low-time) private pilot got checked out in one of our C172s and blasted off a couple nights later with two passengers, intent on a quick "Malibu and back" jaunt along the coast. He lawn-darted it into the ocean, killing everyone on board. Subsequent investigation by the NTSB concluded that as he was turning around back towards Santa Monica, he got disoriented by the black-on-black of the open ocean and black night sky (featureless) and simply lost it. Instead of trusting his instruments and training, it was over in about 15 seconds, according to eyewitnesses. So it doesn't necessarily take thunderstorms or totally rotten weather to create a dangerous situation that exceeds one's abilities.

That said, I still feel 1000X safer in an airplane than in a car. At least people in airplanes (for the most part) tend to know what they're doing, pay attention and take it seriously. I wish the same could be said for driving, but it can't be. It's still statistically very, very safe.

[widgeon13]

I find it difficult to separate private aviation from the rest of the aviation industry, to a great extent we all share the same airspace, facilities and resources. I fly as a hobby and my son flies professionally. We can both make judgment decisions which can have serious consequences.

The bottom line for me is knowing my limitations and using my best judgment. I feel safer in an airplane even when flying over remote areas of the Adirondacks, primarily because I have a great deal of control over my situation and my equipment. I don't have that same control on the highway, I have to rely on the judgment of others and these days that judgment is seriously flawed most of the time.

When you read the NTSB reports on aviation mishaps, a significant number are attributable to pilot error. There is a message there for all of us that take the controls of any aircraft, the same principle would serve us well when we are on the highways.

[the]

Originally Posted by Dantilla

People who have studied the accident statistics for private pilots have determined that the accident rate would be cut in half if pilots quit doing two things:

-Running out of gas.
-Flying into bad weather.

I don't fly, but I've always been curious as to why people who fly little private planes don't keep an emergency parachute in the cockpit with them. Seems like under certain circumstances, it wouldn't be a bad option to have!

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by Dantilla

Keep your head sharp, and gas in the tanks, and you'll fly safely for decades.

The only time you have too much fuel in an airplane is when its on fire.

The,

The problem with carrying a parachute is that its far too difficult to get out of most airplanes in flight and the FAA is not real excited about having someone get over their head in an airplane, bailing out and letting the plane then glide into a town, school or such.

Surplus military jets that have ejection seats on them must have them disabled. Even if the plane was designed with one onboard its not allowed for civilian pilots in the states.

[Joeaksa]

Hey Widgeon,

Am going to be in Montreal and NYC next week. You anywhere near that area?

Would love to get together and talk airplanes for a while!

Joe

[on2wheels52]

"don't bother if you only have the time to put in a couple of hours every three months"

That's about where I'm at. I still have the certificate but would need another physical and flight review to become current. Untill I'm willing to devote the time I'll stay on the ground.
Jim

[widgeon13]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

Hey Widgeon,

Am going to be in Montreal and NYC next week. You anywhere near that area?

Would love to get together and talk airplanes for a while!

Joe

Joe, Thanks for the invitation. I'd look forward to getting together on the next trip east. Unfortunately(next week), I'll be working on getting my mother's condo (Springfield, MA) cleaned out and ready for sale.

Right now, I'm in the southern Adirondacks about half way between NYC and Montreal. I will be in Manhattan in early November for a dinner and have some other plans on getting in before the holidays. We'll keep working at it.

Regards

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by on2wheels52

"don't bother if you only have the time to put in a couple of hours every three months"

That's about where I'm at. I still have the certificate but would need another physical and flight review to become current. Untill I'm willing to devote the time I'll stay on the ground.
Jim

Jim,

There is a new license in the last couple of years. Its called the "Sport Pilot" license and takes no medical certificate or exam what so ever. If you have done the pilots training and fly the airplanes allowed (small single engine, two pax max etc) then your valid states drivers license is all you need plus the bi-annual flight check by a cfi.

Widgeon,

Will do, did not know what area you were in and thought I would give it a try.

Joe

[cashflyer]

Yesterday a local pilot couldn't remember if he put the gas cap on securely, so he attempted to land on a soccer field to check the cap. Initial report is [edit: local news is now saying that a cross-wind caused the helo to upset while landing]




It's the little things that get you.

[jyl]

I found a number. 1.32 deaths per 100,000 hours flying in private aviation. This is 2006 data per NTSB. http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/Table1.htm

I tried to compare that to driving. I get appx 0.06 deaths per 100,000 hours driving. This is based on 2005 data from NHTSA. http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx The NHSA data says 1.45 deaths per 100 million miles driving, I assume avg speed 40 mph to convert to the same units as the aviation data.

I also tried to compare it to motorcycling. I get appx 1.6 deaths per 100,000 hours motorcycling. This is based on 2004 data from NHTSA. http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-Safety/motorcycle-accident-statistics.htm I've also assumed 40 mph average.

So this suggests that per hour of travel, private aviation and motorcycling are about equally likely to kill you while driving is far less likely.

However, "deaths per hour" may not be the right measure. Perhaps "deaths per year" is the better measure.

The average American driver probably spends 300 hours/year driving (think 12,000 miles/yr at 40 mph), implying 0.000174 deaths/year/driver. How many hours does the average private pilot fly a year? I don't know. If it is 100 hours (?), then that implies 0.00132 deaths/year/pilot. If the average motorcyclist rides 150 hours/year (?), that implies 0.0024 deaths/year/rider.

This also seems to suggest motorcycling and private aviation are roughly similar in deaths/year/person, while driving is roughly 10X lower deaths/year/person.

Or, perhaps think about "deaths per lifetime". Assuming 60 years of doing the activity, I get 0.01 deaths/lifetime/driver, 0.08 deaths/lifetime/pilot, and 0.14 deaths/lifetime/rider.

This last set of numbers are the ones that make the most sense to me. They suggest that if I drive all my life I have a 1% chance of dying behind the wheel, if I fly I have a 8% chance, if I ride I have a 14% chance. Hmm.

Do you think this above is a more or less fair, or an unfair, estimate of the risks of private aviation? Or do you think the data or calculations above are all wrong? Or perhaps the numbers are right, but they miss the point?

I realize that, in the big picture, deaths per lifetime = 1. So if someone is deeply impassioned of a risky activity, who needs it to be happy, whether the activity be flying or motorcycling, I would think that even a high risk is not a reason to stop pursuing it. I'm approaching this from the point of view of someone who wouldn't need to fly or ride or whatever to be happy.

[the]

is it legal to land a helicopter on a soccer field?

[Jim Sims]

People are generally irrational and innumerate when it comes to evaluating risks.

They tend to rationalize (lower) the risks they voluntarily take and exaggerate the risks they perceive someone else is making them take.

Also, the consequences from the risk (type of death or injury) seem to influence the evaluation of the risk - sort of a manifestation of personal phobias or terrors.

A classic case was in WWII when the operational research types of the UK Bomber Command concluded overall survivability of the their bombers would improve with the addition of additional armor around the pilot(s), engines, etc. at the expense of airframe safety factors. The pilots would have none of it; the fear of breaking up due to aerodynamic loading exceeded that of flak in guts.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by the

is it legal to land a helicopter on a soccer field?

I got stories...