Why are light aircraft allowed

[effortless]

To fly over Brighton like that?

So what could I answer. I was a guest at a nice house in the centre of town. Mrs effortless and I were happily sitting back and watching a 172 and a PA28 turning overhead, wishing we still could fly ourselves.

I tried "er why not?" But it didn't seem to wash. What could I say apart from explain the height and glide clear rule.

"What! They could crash? I didn't even think of that!" Oh dear. :{

[Neoburner]

Sat was a good day, flew out of EGKA myself but went east instead of coast this time.

Did see a few low-uns out there as well....

Neo

[ChrisA87]

Saturday was indeed awesome. Did Shoreham -> Oxford (free landing!) -> Stapleford -> Shoreham

Busy skies everywhere, Farnborough sounded a bit overloaded!

[effortless]

Ok! Rub it in why don't you! I may get a couple of hours in in France later in the year but all I can do is watch you beggas now. Don't get old, don't get unfit, don't get skint. Like a pillock, I did all three.

[soaringhigh650]

The best to convince someone about the safety of flying is to look at the statistics objectively rather than some perceived fear about "falling out the sky" when in the air.

Currently you'd be several times more likely to be involved in a motoring accident than when in an airplane.

[cats_five]

The best to convince someone about the safety of flying is to look at the statistics objectively rather than some perceived fear about "falling out the sky" when in the air.

Currently you'd be several times more likely to be involved in a motoring accident than when in an airplane.

Think that depends what statistics you use. Yes, far fewer pilots are in an accident each year than motorists, but you need to look at the per hour and/or per journey figures.

[dont overfil]

Why are light aircraft allowed

Because EASA hasn't found a way to ban them yet.

However, they are getting there!

D.O.

[soaringhigh650]

Yes, far fewer pilots are in an accident each year than motorists, but you need to look at the per hour and/or per journey figures.

Yeah but someone has basically assessed it as the same risk of riding a motorcycle with a huge percentage of those accidents caused by pilot error - not by mechanical or engeering failure.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I tried "er why not?" But it didn't seem to wash.
It should have done.

It's fairly fundamental in the UK that everything is allowed unless there is a law against it, and there should only be laws against things, ie laws restricting people's freedom, for good reasons. So it was up to your questionner to answer your "why not?".

[Heston]

I bet if light aircraft were first thought of today they wouldn't be allowed...

[abgd]

The best to convince someone about the safety of flying is to look at the statistics objectively rather than some perceived fear about "falling out the sky" when in the air.

Currently you'd be several times more likely to be involved in a motoring accident than when in an airplane.

More accidents per mile, motoring. More fatal accidents per mile by far with light aircraft. Flying isn't 'safer than the drive to the airport' - unless you're going by airliner.

[Jude098]

Don't wait until you get to the end of this life and say I wish I had.

Go out and do it. Get in that aircraft and do the training. It will be the best thing you ever did. There is nothing quite like it....well ok some things, lol.

[Blues&twos]

Strange how people like different things. I grew up in Shoreham, and although on the face of it, it's nothing special I love the place. Blissful memories of lying on the beach or the South Downs in blazing sunshine with the smell of the sea and the sound of light aircraft lazily buzzing about. The sound of small planes still gets me all nostalgic twenty years after moving away.

[abgd]

Don't wait until you get to the end of this life and say I wish I had.

Not certain whether that was directed at me, or more a general comment. I have a PPL already and fly as often as time and money allow.

[davydine]

More accidents per mile, motoring. More fatal accidents per mile by far with light aircraft. Flying isn't 'safer than the drive to the airport' - unless you're going by airliner.

1901 were killed on the roads in the uk in 2011 and 23122 seriously injured. Not sure how one would calculate the per mile or per movement values but the roads are pretty dangerous

If someone tried to invent the motor car today telling us that it would kill nearly 2000 people every year would that be allowed?

[effortless]

A good read is the Tombstone Imerative, he postulates that miles traveled isn't a good comparator. Journeys number is better.

[abgd]

Well, it's difficult to do well because aircraft data is relatively sketchy compared to data for road transport. However, the differences are stark enough that it's safe to conclude that GA is inherently more risky however you work it out - by hour, distance, number of participants or number of journeys. Anybody who argues otherwise is frankly delusional.

One difference is that road transport kills 70% car occupants/motorcyclists and 30% pedestrians/cyclists*, whereas it's relatively speaking much rarer for GA to kill any non-participants.

* Whilst cyclists may be responsible for a minority of car/cyclist accidents, they very rarely kill themselves unassisted though are almost as dangerous to pedestrians per passenger-mile as cars.

[davydine]

Anyone who argues otherwise is frankly delusional

Not arguing, I simply don't have enough data to put a strong case either way, i just think the fact that nearly 70 people will be killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads every day is a shocking statistic which most people are not aware of.

As a matter of interest, can anyone estimate how many aircraft movements there were in the uk last year, when you include all types of aviation such as baloons, microlights, gliders, light aircraft? I would imagine it is not possible, just as it is unlikely we can get an accurate number of road journeys there are, so it seems unlikely we can prove this one way or another.

[dublinpilot]

I suspect that it might be easier to estimate the number of aircraft and cars rather than movements.

I suspect cars are used far more frequently than the aircraft, however I also suspect that even ignoring this GA will be more dangerous.

[abgd]

Well, there are 31 million cars on the road and about 20,000 light aircraft including balloons etc:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/56/UK%20reg%20cofa%20and%20weight%20group%20010110.pdf

and an average of about 30 deaths per year for all forms of light aviation.

So, there are 1500 times as many cars on the roads but only about 65 times as many road fatalities as there are GA fatalities. And whilst school aircraft get well utilised, I would wager that the average driver utilises the average car a lot more than the average ppl uses the average aircraft.

Another estimate is that there are 1.3 million hours of flying done in the UK each year, so there's about one death for every 43000 hours of flying - which sounds about right - typically GA is said to have one fatal accident for every 100,000 hours or so of flight but there can be more than one death per accident.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/8932/nts2010-01.pdf gives some comparable statistics for motoring.

I haven't the time or inclination to trudge through all the statistics again, but the differences are enough that whichever way you look at it and and even allowing for huge inaccuracies, aviation comes out way behind in the safety stakes.

I still go flying, and I have fun, but I hope that I treat it with the seriousness that it deserves.

[mixture]

So what could I answer.

How about "nobody lives in Brighton apart from drunken students and commuters from London who just come back to sleep before going back to work.... so the little plane is just really only flying over one big brownfield site"

:E

On a more serious note, you could have broken out your charts and shown her the route it was flying and why it was low risk.

[m.Berger]

70 killed or seriously injured on the roads a day.
70 million people in the country, your daily odds are a million to one against.
Seven a day killed, forty million movements. Assuming that a couple die of heart attacks and strokes at the wheel then it is five in forty million, twice as likely as winning the lottery jackpot. As you live on average for only 27,000 days, a million to one shot is pretty insignificant.
A million people die a year. 1900 on the roads. <1 in 500 over a lifetime.
Get a grip. The roads have never been safer and the only thing we could do to make them more so is to raise speed limits.

There are a million things that can kill you and only one will. Live dangerously.

[effortless]

Risk: surely this is one of the reasons we do it. The risk bit is the icing on the cake. It just wouldn't be the same without it.

My complainant didn't care about the risk, just the noise. And yes, I did once take him up.

[24Carrot]

My complainant didn't care about the risk, just the noise.

I see he lives in central Brighton. Obviously a refugee from the lawn-mowers in the 'burbs. :eek:

Why are lawn-mowers allowed to ... :)

[Whopity]

Why are light aircraft allowed
Because we live in a free country.

Anyone who doesn't like, that knows what they can do!

[abgd]

Those 1900 deaths are more significant than they appear, because they typically affect younger people in the prime of their lives.

For an A&E doctor, a typical 'life saved' would be an elderly person with pneumonia, or perhaps heart failure. If we treat them (as we almost always do) then we're typically buying them a few months of life before the next admission. By and large such patients have life expectancies of months or a few years.

By contrast, A 20 year old man in a road traffic accident may have 60 years cut off his life expectancy.

Secondly, if he survives he may well have a head injury. These can be utterly devastating - nice young lads of previous good character get incarcerated in rehabilitation centres for years on end, filled with antidepressants. They are often disinhibited, sexually and otherwise, start groping the nurses and hurling abuse at one and all; they eventually get let out, at which point their marriages collapse (if married) and they may well be unable to hold down a job...

It's not that bad for everyone of course but it's a depressingly common scenario. Teens and twenty-somethings are more likely to die on the roads than for any other reason.

[mary meagher]

We had four injury accidents to members of our gliding club last year; three were riding motorcycles, one was in a car - the car that hit him had a drunk for a driver.

[Monocock]

There are a million things that shouldn't be 'allowed' before GA gets a spotlight shone on it.

'Women In Business' clubs.
Fat women in leggings.
Microwaveable hamburgers.
Snooker on TV.
White Audis.
Over-staffed and under-worked public sector departments.
Public footpaths.
Car driving for 70 year olds without a biennial check.
Pudding menus with photographs.

And the other 999,991 I can't be @rsed to list.

[Crash one]

One day you will be 70 & remarks like that will piss you off as much as they piss me off. Who the hell gave anyone the right to dictate an age limit for anything?:mad::mad::mad:
Excuse me but I've heard it before & it's not bloody funny even when you think it is:ugh:
Edit: Here's a thought, what about banning car driving for under 30s, that would keep a few out of A&E save the rest of us a few bob.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

And the other 999,991 I can't be @rsed to list
C'mon, you could have included the

Oven chips

to go with the microwave hamburgers.

what about banning car driving for under 30s
Not sure there's the evidence base to support that - would you just get a load of 30-somethings crashing instead?

It's like most crimes are committed by kids, who grow out of it by the age of around 26. So, you say, why not just lock up all boys and let them out when they get to 26?

The reason this doesn't work is that it's mostly getting involved with some girl that turns them, at her insistence, sensible, and if they're locked up they aren't going to meet the girl.

[Monocock]

One day you will be 70 & remarks like that will piss you off as much as they piss me off. Who the hell gave anyone the right to dictate an age limit for anything?
Excuse me but I've heard it before & it's not bloody funny even when you think it is
Edit: Here's a thought, what about banning car driving for under 30s, that would keep a few out of A&E save the rest of us a few bob.

Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. I was just working on national statistics, which are clearly wrong, and probably just Daily Mail twaddle. I wasn't trying to be funny either.

[Crash one]

Banning under 30s till they grow out of stupidity is no worse than banning anything else for illogical reasons.
Ageist remarks get up my nose, & if I want to get grumpy about it I have as much right to a stupid opinion as anyone.
I could list some of mine but I'd get banned:=

Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. I was just working on national statistics,

Accepted. And statistics can be mutilated to suit whatever purpose the authorities want.
I wonder if someone could survey a number of A&Es to determine how many beds are occupied by RTA cases & their ages, (trying to be serious)
I remember being in Penzance General in 59 with a motorcycle gear lever embedded in my foot and finding 50% of the ward filled with motorcycle accidents of similar ages, 18--25.

[abgd]

There is data out there - e.g.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9066/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-main-results-2011.pdf

or

Transport Accidents and Casualties: UK National Statistics Publication Hub (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/travel-transport/roads/transport-accidents-and-casualties)

In addition to statistics collected by the NHS - which I imagine will be publicly available if you google hard enough.

There aren't many acute wards full of motorcyclists any more, though there is still a steady stream of people coming in with life-changing injuries. There are rehab centres for head injuries where most of the clientele have been injured on the roads. Over the past few weeks I've had three patients coming in for other causes (e.g. attempted suicide) who have either been unemployable or had to downgrade their careers due to the aftermath of head injuries sustained during road accidents.

The roads have gotten a lot safer since '59, but people are now surviving collisions that would previously have been fatal, so it's swings and roundabouts as to whether you see more of them in hospital. However, the majority of patients coming into A&E and staying in are likely to be very elderly folk with multiple medical problems, who would never have lived nearly as long in 1959 and who, as Britain ages, are accounting for an ever increasing proportion of the NHS workload.

That's not meant to be a gripe - it's great that people are living longer and often staying active nearly until the end of their lives. Just a statement of fact - there aren't any wards of young motorcyclists any more, not because there aren't any young motorcyclists with gear levers impaled in their feet, but because they are now sharing them with elderly ladies and gentlemen who've broken their hips.

[Silvaire1]

Seriously risky behavior in middle age is a public service. The optimum age is in your 50s, the age range where a lot of people do some flying. That's when you've done a lot of useful work, but before you start hanging out in hospitals so much.

Risky behavior in your 50s that leads to terminal events versus injury (as does flying) is the best kind. That Swiss guy who flies on jet powered bat wings has public service wired, or would if it wasn't for his skill.

My goal is to never to make a vehicle insurance claim (so far so good) then expire rapidly and dramatically, maximizing my contribution relative to cost. I've been working on it with very fast motorcycles (currently own 8) and airplanes (only 2) for about 40 years, since age 10 actually, but have still to figure out the cost saving end game. In time, all will be revealed and the new wife will get the cash.

Screw the statisticians, bureaucrats and worry warts, do it your way and give them the finger(s) they so richly deserve. Their plan is not mine, and I'm happy to consider them self important circle-jerk detritus.

:) :) :)

[mixture]

Edit: Here's a thought, what about banning car driving for under 30s, that would keep a few out of A&E save the rest of us a few bob.

Have you seen the way taxi drivers, white van men etc. drive ... they're all over 30 ... :ugh:

[Gertrude the Wombat]

There are rehab centres for head injuries
I had a girlfriend once who was a speech therapist.

She said she never really succeeded in getting the motorcyclists to speak again to conversational standards.

I stopped driving a bike.

[abgd]

Ah, so economists aren't boring. They've just worked out that 75 is the optimal age to have fun.