PPRuNe Forums


Safety, CRM, QA & Emergency Response Planning A wide ranging forum for issues facing Aviation Professionals and Academics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th Jan 2018, 17:13   #61 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 881
How someone of that level of incompetence was allowed a command is another valid question.
J.O. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Jan 2018, 01:12   #62 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,729
Why is this thread full of phrases like "false sense of security" , "incompetence" etc? This just highlights how PPRuNe has become overrun with haters desperate to run down our industry any way they can.

These figures are truly impressive; let's hope other professions are watching; how many avoidable deaths were caused by medical professionals in 2017 for instance? Even the usual PPRuNe haters sat at home on their Mum's computers can't pretend this safety record is anything other than outstanding.
ShotOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Jan 2018, 09:02   #63 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,079
As the OP I think it's fair that people point out it's great but we're a long way from being confident we can repeat it year in year out

What is clear that the margins between incident and accident are small and the extent is only really visible with modern reporting that covers almost every flight incident.

But we can chip away steadily to improve the margins and focus on the items (such as runway excursions) that make up many of the incidents - this will, in turn lower the long term accident rates
Heathrow Harry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Jan 2018, 09:31   #64 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,317
These figures are truly impressive; Even the usual PPRuNe haters can't pretend this safety record is anything other than outstanding.

Indeed they are. But as long as the 'quick buck' airline brigade continue to expand, or start up on a shoe-string, and employ pilots like these 2 on the Lahore crash the risk of more crashes is enhanced frighteningly. Pax do not want to feel they are in a lottery. An accident might be considered acceptable if there are unforeseen circumstances, which combined with bad luck where events moved so fast out of your control, that it was indeed a true accident. When it is a crash caused by incompetence & perhaps negligence, and or ignorant behaviour that make matters worse, and an unavoidable crash happens then we have the right to ask questions on behalf of the victims. They will not be calmed by saying that 'overall it was a good year'. There are some people who should not be sitting up front, and there are many managers, trainers, XAA's etc. who bear some responsibility for allowing it. Fault is not all down to the individual.
RAT 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Jan 2018, 16:40   #65 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,079
Yes but.........

It's simple to show that the rise of LCO's has led to a diminution in accidents- this is the beauty of statistics (!)

However, possible contributions include that LCO's tend to fly newer aircraft, their fleets are all the same or very similar so you reduce the opportunities for confusion in both flying (and perhaps more important) maintenance crews. They also tend to fly more bus-stop flights a pilot is likely to do the same flight several times a day or week cp the legacy carriers who have more variety.

And the fact that most tend to fly to reasonably well equipped airfields (excluding Indonesia.) helps

Plus of course they fly so damned many airmiles - so the accidents/incidents that do happen are spread over a lot more flights/pax/kms.

Last edited by Heathrow Harry; 29th Jan 2018 at 17:22.
Heathrow Harry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Jan 2018, 20:00   #66 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,317
has led to a diminution in accidents-

Rate of accidents? I wonder about the rate of significant incidents that we hear nothing about? For me that is measure of increase or not in safety, and also the same with training standards.

this is the beauty of statistics

if you are a statistician. Get a hard on by .01% change.
RAT 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Jan 2018, 20:27   #67 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
Why is this thread full of phrases like "false sense of security" , "incompetence" etc? This just highlights how PPRuNe has become overrun with haters desperate to run down our industry any way they can.

These figures are truly impressive; let's hope other professions are watching; how many avoidable deaths were caused by medical professionals in 2017 for instance? Even the usual PPRuNe haters sat at home on their Mum's computers can't pretend this safety record is anything other than outstanding.
Haters, or just a healthy unease in the face of complacency?

It's not that long ago that some big wigs at NASA pooh poohed the warnings from Morton Thiokol engineers who advised them not to launch the Challenger in the prevailing cold temperatures. Those engineers knew the data and were right to be uneasy with the recent performance of the SRB O-rings. The rest - as they say - is history.

Recent near miss events in our industry across the world should be a wake-up call that we've been lucky almost as much as we've been good. So you can call me a hater if you want, but I'll keep my healthy skepticism for now.
J.O. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2018, 02:08   #68 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 79
Safest year but quite a few close calls, definitely a lucky year. Improvements in training and technology contribute but with the increase in traffic volume they will have to, as with the numbers involved even a tiny fraction of a percent will be significant.

Fortunately our knowledge base keeps growing and we keep learning.
krismiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2018, 07:18   #69 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,079
"I wonder about the rate of significant incidents that we hear nothing about?"

But we never heard about them in the past either .... in fact it's clear we hear about more incidents in greater detail than ever before - blame the WWW or 24 hour news or Social Media but it's clearly the case

Although occasionally annoying I think it's a good thing.. - 25 years ago few runway excursions were ever reported unless there was serious damage to people or kit for example - now everyone knows in 24 hours if you put a tyre in the mud ................ and with pictures or even videos........
Heathrow Harry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2018, 16:33   #70 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 881
Quote:
Success is an enemy of aviation safety
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...viation-safety
J.O. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Feb 2018, 11:53   #71 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,079
Well the crash in Moscow shows we still have a ways to go.................
Heathrow Harry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th Feb 2018, 09:51   #72 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 61
Posts: 3,328
There huge are diffences between safe, lucky, unsafe and accident free. It was good to hear that in 2017 there were no major public transport accidents resulting in death reported. But let’s not kid ourselves, we should be prepared at all times to do whatever we have to do to recover it situation that has gone wrong. Our friends in the sandpit are leading the way in safety by battering their crews with their safety stick (I’m sure that will work). And even at Birdseed things are not much better. The AAIB made some interesting comments about the way the Airbus with open cowls was flown. This is not a criticism of the crew involved but of the highly restrictive SOP’s under which they have to operate. I’m afraid we are as dangerous (or as safe) as we have been for a long time. The next smoking hole in the ground will not come as a surprise to me. My prediction is that it will involve an aircraft flown with highly restrictive SOP’s.

PM
Piltdown Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th Feb 2018, 11:55   #73 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: A place in the sun
Age: 76
Posts: 531
And here is another one in quick succession. The quirks of chance?

Iran plane crash: All 66 people on board feared dead - BBC News
Bergerie1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th Feb 2018, 18:54   #74 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,079
partly reversion to the mean of course - and it's bad winter weather season in places like Iran and Russia which are amongst the less safe places to fly
Heathrow Harry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:52.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1