Originally Posted by
ScotiaQ
On this thread and others on this Forum, the question of Safety is raised in one form or another.
Isn't it the case that Safety is paramount, providing it doesn't cost too much money? I was in the Industry from 1961 to 2010 and it was ever thus. There were people in the Management tree who subscribed to the principle more than others but there were those who appointed "Safety/Quality Managers" . Write the Manuals and that's job done.
What's the next problem? Cynical....moi?
No absolutely not. In leisure aviation, safety is not paramount. This is the stupid sort of BS spouted by commercial aviation management who don't know anything about flying. If safety were paramount then we would all stay in bed with the hangar doors firmly locked.
Safety is pretty important in commercial aviation for reasons I'm sure I don't need to go into on here.
Safety in leisure aviation is much more a case of the degree of risk averseness, priorities and general purpose of the flight. For example in my capacity as a gliding instructor flying members of the public on "Trial Lessons", there can be no doubt that we should expect the same number of satisfactory landings as takeoffs. However when I fly my glider in a competition, I may need to cut safety margins to the bone and I accept that one day, I may misjudge slightly and come to grief. If I never do, I probably wasn't trying hard enough!
It is like the difference between a coach driver (who should never crash) and a Formula 1 driver who, when they crash, we just shrug at and get out the next car.
So in leisure aviation it is our necks at risk, we can choose to set whatever level of safety we like. People who are prepared to fly with PPLs should realise that it is probably not as safe as flying on a commercial air transport flight. If they don't, well they are stupid.