Originally Posted by
itsnotthatbloodyhard
I think you might be making an assumption there
.
Sure, but that’s just for a single scenario. Now consider everything else that might go wrong on a given trip, and how many different possibilities you’d have to work through. How many pages would you have to write, and how big would your brain have to be to be able to apply it all? Being a motivated and well-prepared student is great, but it’s got to be in a way that can be applied practically. (Which I think was Ruprecht’s point.)
The student would have enumerated 16 cases, that potentially could be simplified to fewer given a principles approach as Ruprecht says.
Aviation safety is an incremental process. Somebody writes out the 16 pages and then should publish it in one of the aviation journals. And then others can read it and improve on it. There are hundreds of thousands of pages in the aviation journals. This is how science works and how we have the super safe aviation systems we have today.
My heart sank when I read Ruprecht's post. It seems he shut down part of a really good process. In medicine they have the concept of the scientist-practitioner. Every medical specialist at some point has done a research project and knows how the scientific process works. What a pity we don't do that in aviation.