PDA

View Full Version : Accidents in NZ - too frequent?


Irishwingz
9th Feb 2006, 16:54
Hey All

Firstly, despite my name and location I hold a NZ PPL and spent 18 months living there doing most of my flying out of Wellington ip to mid last year. During my time there and since then I have come to a conclusion that the volume of light aircraft accidents and fatalaties in NZ is just too high.

I realise its a small country but can it be that in bigger countries like Aussie and the UK accidents do not merit being reported? Even in Ireland I struggle to think of a handful of accidents in the last few years. It seems in NZ there is about 1 every 6 weeks.

I'm not saying its the standard of training and maintenance of aircraft as I have flown in 4 countries extensively and NZ rates as high as the next. Could it be the weather? Sure, it can change quickly but if you are doing your homework you will be aware of the situation - and if it looks bad, you dont go.

Off the top of my head - last year's fatalaties - 172 down in Turangi, 172 down in Q'town, 172 down in cable bay, Seneca down in Taupo, seaplane down in taupo, seneca down on mt eggmont

I wonder sometimes 'what is going on?':confused:

ViagraDependent
9th Feb 2006, 18:51
Why not ask the NZ CAA.
I'm sure they have a perfectly planned answer as to why there are so many fatal GA accidents in thier country compared to other, larger, countries.

wombat13
9th Feb 2006, 20:30
I don't have the figures to hand for NZ, but the stats for the UK have flying on a par with Motorcycle riding for fatalities. The big difference is that for motorcyclists, many of the accidents are other peoples fault, where as for flying...........

I seriously doubt if NZ has any bigger problem than Oz / UK / Eire for accidents where GA is concerned.

Flying remains an inherently safe, but extraordinarily unforgiving passtime.

rottenlungs
9th Feb 2006, 20:34
I read somewhere that New Zealand has 6 times the GA accident rate compared to the UK. I have picked on the UK as they have lots of cultural commonality and the data is accessible.
There are a number of factors which I believe are responsible:
1) Climate. The weather is volatile here compared to the UK.

2) Geography. There are a lot more hills to hit and and less flat bits to land on if needed.

3) Fleet age - I flew in a Tomahawk that was 200 hours from the scrapper when in Nelson - I don`t think that is unusual over here.

4) And this is the biggy. New Zealand has a culture of tolerance towards minor breaches of regulation. If no-ones hurt no-one really minds. This mentatility is also why NZ has double the UK motor vehicle fatality rate (per registered vehicle). "Its fine to overtake there because no one is ever coming the other way"! How many times are the road deaths due to cars "crossing the centreline'? A somewhat euphemistic term for some prick trying to overtake. This mentality pervades aviation as well over here. The problem with flying (at the ga level) is that it is not difficult, just exceptionally intolerant of mistakes.

It won`t change in a hurry sadly, cultural change is difficult to achieve..

Cheers
James

haughtney1
9th Feb 2006, 21:42
here here Rotten, truer words have rarely been spoken:)

rottenlungs
9th Feb 2006, 23:28
Haughtney1

It is something that both horrifies me and fascinates me.

Unfortunately, it`s that same relaxed approach that makes NZ such a user-friendly country. I used to rant about the Nanny-state back in the UK, something which is just as damaging as it results in the 'breeding out' of any common sense. "Its not my fault I took the corner too fast and went over the edge - the council`s failure to put a barrier up is to blame".

Somewhere out there is a delicate balance between safety and usability - I just wonder if any country has found it yet?

tinpis
10th Feb 2006, 02:34
It was probably worse in the 60's than now.
Seemed at one stage a month didnt go by without a topdressor fatality/prang.
Aero clubs lost plenty.
That was all without any flying from "IFR" twins .
Only a little place but the weather has a habit of getting crook.

glekichi
10th Feb 2006, 03:05
Maybe Dick can tell us whats wrong with our aispace:}

GOATRIDER
10th Feb 2006, 18:38
Yes the NZ aviation industry is an interesting on. GA in NZ I guess is just a progression of its immense and colourful aviation history. Many years ago with the advent of the venison industry we had pilots initially in fixed wing Austers, Cubs and then 180s and 185s doing all sorts of stuff that defied logic and gravity!. And then of course helicopters took over. As a pilot in NZ I dont really think that we have more accidents per say. Lets take the US- Cessna stopped making light GA aircraft for many years purely because of the liability issues associated with crashes and of course the law suit environment that is so prevalent in the US. I have however lost many friends in aviation mostly from bad weather decisions and situational awareness. I dont believe there are any "new accidents"- they've all been done before. New Zealand has a very rich aviation history and that surely must help. I will however go out on a limb here and say that some NOT ALL flying schools are driven by the dollar and the need to conveyer belt students through the system. The 200 hour commercial and then onto a C- Cat instructor to teach is a hard one. Its a catch 22 situation really. I think wx is a real factor here in NZ.

haughtney1
10th Feb 2006, 20:08
I think wx is a real factor here in NZ
As someone who completed my first 1000 hrs in NZ, and now the next couple in Europe, I cant honestly say I agree with this statement. The weather and topography that GA aircraft operate in the US and Europe is every bit as variable.
I tend to think that in NZ it has a lot more to do with attitude and culture...there still seems to be a "she'll be right mate" attitude, particularly in GA. In my experience Rotary operators appear to be the worst culprits, although certain small fixed wing operators also seem to push the limits.
I also think a contributory aspect is the lack of modern SSR over large area's of the country below FL100, and the lack of modern ground based nav-aids.
Just my thoughts.
:ok:

GOATRIDER
10th Feb 2006, 21:59
Hautney1- yep I agree with you- its all good stuff mate. I think that you are quite right. As far as Europe goes I cant comment on that. I also think that egos play a very big part too in this industry. Have you heard of the old "swiss cheese formula" where if three of the holes line up you're going to have a bang. Its quite interesting how there are almost always three things that lead to an accident not withstanding luck which can go either way. the aviation culture where I am is great as we operate under a memorandum of understanding. We also have the added benefit of alot of experience down here too to fall back on. Yes you're right about SOME of the helicopter operators- yes they are shocking...both in maintenance and flying. I often wonder if some of them still think they are in the venison industry, however thats a bygone era- been there done that...anything and any comments that can lead to a safer environment must be worth their weight in gold. The moment you stop learning irrespective of experience is the moment you end up in an old pine box. Cheers for your input.

G. RIDER- CZAR52

Keg
11th Feb 2006, 00:56
I ...New Zealand has a culture of tolerance towards minor breaches of regulation. If no-ones hurt no-one really minds.

From an outsiders point of view, this one is hard to go past. From every airshow I've ever been to, the Kiwi's have always been eagerly anticipated because they flew lower, faster and harder than anyone else. The display of the 757 at the last Avalon airshow is probably a good example. Whilst I'm not saying that they broke any rules, there does appear to be a predisposition to pushing the envelope to the extreme limit.

I understand the bizzo about military pilots/ envelopes/ type of job but the Kiwis always seem to be that little bit further out on the edge of acceptability. The 757 fly bys seem to get more spectacular each year. It reminds me of Czar 52 and we all remember how that one finished up. :(

tinpis
11th Feb 2006, 01:03
For a little bit of light reading try "MeatHawks"
I think most of the guys featured are Kamate.

Keg a lot of the pilots in Kiwi are from good old Fred Dagg stock.
When they werent trying to kill themselves stacking sillage on a tractor they went for a blat in the old Aero Club machine.
Usually for a loop de loop over the farmhouse .

rottenlungs
11th Feb 2006, 07:40
Hi
Interesting what Keg says about the Outsiders view.
From my (whingeing) pom perspective, the 'fair go' attitude of NZ & Oz is one of the most attractive things about this end of the world. That people are generally trusted until they do something dumb is a nice way of operating. It represents the geometric opposite to the British way which is to trust no-one and legislate away any possible chance of individual blame or risk anywhere in the system. Which, of course, is why Britain is dying of "Beaurocrat`s palsy".
The problem is that it is all too easy to misuse the trust. This doesn`t matter in a safety-uncritical industry like IT. However, there are many industries where this not the case. The obvious one is aviation where a lot of compliance is based on self-regulation. As I stated earlier, it shows on the roads as well. Another area where, despite Helen`s cash-driven speed cops, the vast bulk of vehicle movements rely on self-regulation.
Lets just say that I`m glad NZ is nuclear-free - I think the "see if you can get 105% out of it, bro!" mindset would be a bad one in that industry!!
Cheers
James

27/09
12th Feb 2006, 02:03
I have read this thread with interest and thought I would add my 2 cents worth.

First any accident especially one invloving death is one too many.

However I do wonder how bad things really are here in NZ compared to other parts of the world. We keep getting told how bad our GA accident rate is and also our road toll for that matter.

Whenever figures get quoted I always thinks of that famous saying which I think is attributed to Winston Churchhill, "There's lies, lies and there's damn statistics".

Do these oft quoted figures always compare apple with apples. I remember being told once that insurance company accident data is a much more reliable source than "official sources" such as the CAA. With that in mind I make the following observation.

Are insurance pemiums much higher in NZ or is insurance much harder to obtain in NZ when compared to other parts of the world. I have anecdotal evidence that suggests that it is much easier to obtain insurance in New Zealand than the USA and insurance premiums (hull not liability) are as cheap or cheaper than in the US. THis suggests to me that our accident rate is probably at least a good as and probably better than the USA.

Food for thought.

nike
12th Feb 2006, 04:16
Rottenlungs,

"see if you can get 105% out of it, bro!"

love it.



Re: the stats/numbers of incidents within NZ, is this apparent rise something that is occuring of late? reference 50 year stats or the like?

The reason I ask is if indeed the number of incidents are as a result of the Kiwi attitude then this would be reflected by no real change (compounded) over the years. That is to say the No. 8 wire mentality hasn't changed since someone invented it.
Although there is more than likely a case to say that local mindsets have some level of effect on the cause of incidents, if the numbers show an apparent rise in recents years (and this seems to be the current discussion) then how could this be attributed to a historic attitude?

I believe that attitudes are involved somewhere along the line, but feel the answer may lie within the training environment.

Waka Rider
19th Feb 2006, 05:07
With the wx bit. Its not as extreme as other parts of the world its just that most parts of the world have radar control with an ILS. Now Eagle Air and the Air Nelson etc are doing day in day out NPA's with out radar and when did they last have a smash. The question really is how can we get their standards into GA.

Dixons Cider
19th Feb 2006, 06:48
Nobody here has touched on possibly THE most relevant aspect of this whole discussion;

....the amount of GA going on in NZ per capita.

NZ has on its register the highest proportion of rotary wing a/c to population. Can't fixed be sure about fixed wing, but its got to be up there.

So with a population of 4 millionish, NZ has got to have one of the highest rates of GA flying anywhere. Mix in with that a bit of changeable weather,terrain, old technology and economically marginal operations, and the result appears alarming. But put into perspective, it unfortunately comes down to law of averages.

Add to that the nature of the beast, ie how many operators are there in Europe flying VFR round the mountains, on floats, strips, no radar, NPA approaches? They are there I'm sure, but in the context of the vast populations of Europe, the numbers are pretty weak and diluted. Contrast that with with the array of operators in NZ eaking out a living every day, with often relatively inexperienced drivers at the helm.

My point is, given NZ's size, there is ALOT of avaiation going on, and often in less than ideal conditions.

I'm not going to add kudos to the arguement of attitude/culture by bothering to discuss it.

27/09 makes a good point re insurance rates.

G-LOST
19th Feb 2006, 08:19
Rest assured, there are plenty of numpty's flying in the Uk and Europe, both at PPL and airline level. When I was instructing, I worked alongside a couple. The NZ ego thing is true, but some Poms have a far greater ego problem and in many cases much less experience.

The differences are simple: the amount of GA in NZ compared to UK, per capita; the fact that a light plane crash in Britain is not really big news (in fact it amazes me that any plane crash here is news for 5 seconds and is lost in the sheer volume of other news, whereas in NZ it would linger for weeks); the volatility of the NZ weather combined with unforgiving terrain; the lack of airports in NZ to sprint to when things turn to custard (there are simply hundreds over here); the comparative lack of uncontrolled airspace in the UK; etc etc.

LOST