Is it time to be afraid????

[AOB9]

As a frequent slf I have an new unexplained uneasy feeling when I board a plane. I cannot help but worry about the state of the airline industry and the probable lowering of staff T&C's and moral. It has always been a belief of mine that airline pilots (and other aviation staff) are well trained, well adjusted and well paid ;and so they should be. However, the drive to cut costs in aviation has become such an obsession that there is no doubt in my mind that safety has (or will) be compromised. It's one thing for me ( a lab analyst) to be pissed off due to wage cuts but it's another thing completely when the drivers of a 747 spend most of their day complaining about the state of their jobs. I can't help but wonder why 3 pilots failed to look out the window on approach in the Netherlands last week.The whole thing just beggers belief really. Even as a frequent flyer I get a rise in adrenaline as we approach a runway treshold. I always presumed the man/woman in the driving seat would also be a bit more alert at this time, no matter how many times they have done it before. From what I read on this site automation is so advanced that (some) pilots almost totally rely on it. I can speak from experience when I say a person that relies on automation can become even more reliant on it when he would rather be at home than at his desk.

Is it time to develop a fear of flying, I wonder??

P.S Yes I am willing to pay more for my ticket in return for an "easy feeling".

[akerosid]

An interesting question, but personally I have no qualms about safety; sure, there are pilots (indeed, people in every profession - speak to people in RBSI, for example, and you'll know!) who have grumbles about their jobs; this site has been up for a good ten or eleven years and we've all seen peeves and grumbles. Does that translate into a less secure environment? I don't necessarily think so; at the end of the day, the safe operation of a particular aircraft requires the same level of professionalism, concentration and knowledge as it did this time last year - or five years ago, regardless of the economic conditions. Indeed, you could argue that sleep (or lack of) or emotional/relationship damage would pose a more serious threat to flight safety than the economic environment. If you look at the most serious air crashes ever, few of them could be directly related to economic problems; some, yes, due to human factors, but even there, more CRM than anything else.

As to the Turkish Airlines disaster, TK is one of Europe's fastest growing airlines? Would this incident make me think twice about flying TK; maybe, but it wouldn't stop me.

I do worry about certain airlines' viability and there are airlines which I'd hate to see go under (some others I probably wouldn't miss); however, it's hard to say that they would lower their standards or cut corners just because times are hard.

I think the one thing that is different now from, say, 30 or 40 years ago, is that a serious (i.e. fatal) air disaster is probably more damaging to an airline's prospects now than then, because of the compensation culture and the effect that could have on its insurance bill and in other ways; can you imagine the effect on the viability of a low cost carrier and its competitiveness of a significantly increased insurance bill; pretty serious, I would say.

[Rainboe]

I couldn't understand what your post was about! 'Is it time to develop a fear of flying?' I don't think you will have any choice in the matter! If it happens, it happens- there's nothing you can do about it!

[Rainboe]

Bit of a strange post picking semantics out of 2 lines there! I merely said you do not have any choice in the matter of developing a fear of flying!

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

Doesn't matter how bad or good my t&c's get, I personally still want to get home at night. Yes we grumble, and laugh, and chat, do all the things office workers probably chat about, however when it comes to concentrating when need be, we do.

Don't quite see the correlation between our T&C's and our concentration and professionalism.

[SNS3Guppy]

I'm not sure where the idea has come from that pilots are well paid...but that's never been the case for much of the industry. If it makes you feel safer to think about pilot pay being better than what it is, then by all means, do so...it just isn't true.

[ZFT]

If you don't have a fear of flying as SLF by now, you are on the back side of the curve, not to mention way behind reality.

Why? The reality is flying generally has never been safer. Do you really want to return to the days pre TCAS, EGPWS, predictive windshear, poor or non existent radar coverage etc?

People (the general public - the bulk of SLF) these days know nothing of aviation and only see a mode of transport, no different "to them" of getting a cab, a bus, or a train.

As it should be. Flying IS a mode of transportation. The average SLF has never understood aviation (as many posts on PPRuNe clearly indicate) and why should they?

Furthermore, they expect to be able to go wherever they want, whenever they want, regardless of weather or anything else, and on $10 fares.

Sadly true but SLF are not solely to blame for this. The advent of LCC has given rise to this expectation.

[BRUpax]

Statistically flying is no doubt safer than ever before. Nevertheless, in more recent times I have got the feeling (i.e. I'm not stating that it's a fact) that accidents and serious incidents are on the rise. As technology and automation have advanced so have new types of incidents and accidents.

Take the Uberlingen midair. If the crew had followed their TCAS RA, instead of hesitating and then following the ATC instruction, there would have been no collision. Equally had there been no TCAS the ATC instruction would have been sufficient to avoid a midair. TCAS would have done its job but crew discipline/confusion caused the accident. Result: TCAS technology did not prevent a midair. At the opposite end of the spectrum there is now a new generation of young pilots who have become too trusting in automation and systems and they are perhaps less inclined to revert quickly to manual flying skills when they should. And finally, if you follow the debates on some recent threads concerning accidents, it appears that qualified pilots (flying the same type) disagree in the workings and logic of some of the automation. This I find quite alarming and leads me to wonder how that affects decision making in times of stress.

Btw, should this not be in the SLF forum?

[AOB9]

Maybe I should rephrase; "Is it time to develop a fear of flying, I wonder??"

to

Do you believe commercial aviation will maintain it's high safety standards despite the continuous pressure to drive down costs?

I think it's a valid question. I can't think of anyone better to ask than those who work in the industry.

[Rainboe]

When I started flying training (end 60s, the time of 'Hey Jude'), I did a calculation based on current aircraft flying time per loss. The calculation showed 1 of my course would be involved in a fatal loss over a career. Well we've all made it (so far) with a few years to go before curtains down (pardon the expression). The calculation has now gone through the roof, flying is so exceedingly safe. We can thank:
Aeroplanes
1- Far better design
2- Far better certification and testing
3- Far better monitoring
4- far better technical units (engines, systems, ground equipment etc)
Crews
1- Structured training
2- Simulators to practice those nasty dangerous things
3- Checking and licensing to remove the bad eggs
4- Long careers allowing more experience
Against safety now
1- Longer and harder working hours and days
2- Tendency now for very low experience
3- Crowded skies

Some airlines promote really early, too early in my mind. It takes a long long time to be ready to face totally unusual situations.

The point is flying is so outright safe, even I sit back and relax and doze when someone else is driving, and why I am so brutal with nerve-ridden freaks when they pop up here. There is a time to conquor fear of flying with common sense. The time to be afraid is the drive to and from the airport!

So the answer is 'No'.

[philbky]

Don't always agree with our toxic friend but he's right on the money with this one.

Whilst only SLF I've been interested in airliners and airline ops for over 50 years, have studied safety and accidents in depth and have had the good fortune to spend many hours in the front office as well as work closely with many people involved in aviation safety.

I never had a problem flying, though I've been through a number of engine shut downs, severe turbulence (in airman's and meteorologist's terms - not layman's) and a couple of hydraulic problems and can easily sleep if the legroom is enough and the seat is comfortable.

It did take me 20 years to fly across the Atlantic on a twin - though part of that was an addiction to a particular "unsullied" British carrier.

There are problems today, especially in the US and Europe, with short, multiple sectors leading to fatigue due to intense workload rather than hours and there are airlines around the world who are questionable in their practices but they are few and far between.

Basically, the answer to the O P's original question is a resounding "NO".

[AOB9]

Well it's good news that the people in the driving seat have such confidence. It's unlikely I would ever develop a fear of flying though. I am one those passengers in the back that loves the whole experience. To me it's so much more than just another form of transport. At 40 years young I still stop to look up when a plane passes overhead, sometimes to the amusement of those around me.



Thanks for the replies.

[Grueber]

AOB9, I recognise what you're saying. Not a pilot myself, but with a tiny little experience on small planes and a great interest in aviation, I have no fear of flying in itself. But it did make me feel a bit uncomfortable to see Boeing release a bulletin in which she did feel the need to remind the pilots to keep an eye on their primairy instruments. As a passenger this is one of the last things you expect to hear.

Nevertheless, I do have confidence in man and machine and will board next time without hesitation.

[R04stb33f]

I suspect that you get "an uneasy feeling" during critical phases of flight as a direct result of reading this forum.

Rainboe is right mathematically, that flying is statistically safer than other modes of transport. This isn't going to stop you from worrying because, unlike rainboe, you don't know how it all works, you don't have all the fact, you don't know how to fly, you're not sure if when you look out of the window there should be flaps out at this altitude, is that the AT or is it the PF modifying the thrust? if that wing moves much more, surely it'll fall off.....

But because you come here and read about all this, the mistakes, the arguments, the stress, the mindblowing technical knowledge and skill required to fly such machines, I'm not surprised that you start to ask questions.

PPRuNe is not for the faint hearted!

[Ten West]

Flying is extremely safe.

No-one has ever been killed whilst flying.

....... it's when you suddenly stop flying that you have a problem.

[philbky]

Sorry, that isn't true. There have been a number of instances (a couple of Lear Jets and a Helios 737 spring to mind) where people have died as a direct result of being in an aircraft where that aircraft has malfunctioned, killed them and continued flying perfectly well until it ran out of fuel.

In those instances the sudden stop may have destroyed the bodies but those concerned had already died.

[AOB9]

R04stb33f...... I do not have the skills and the knowledge to fly a modern airliner. That's because I am not a pilot.......not for the want of trying.However, I am NOT faint hearted when it comes to flying and I am NOT put off by technical jargon, in fact I try hard to understand it (because I am interested). I have total faith in the guys at the driving wheel and NEVER second guess their actions, decisions, or whatever. My question is in relation to safety. I have spent 12 years in the pharmaceutical industry, in the front line where chemical synthesis is induced and controlled in reactors. I can confirm through first hand experience that cost cutting, both in terms of continuous (or lack of)operator training and maintenance has a direct effect on safety. My suggestion is that the same may apply to the "cash strapped"airline industry.

[deltahotel]

1. Nope
2. The most dangerous thing I do at work is get into taxis twice a day - if I didn't believe that I'd give up yesterday.
3. I'm at the front of the a/c and want to go home to drink beer, eat food, do stuff at home. See 2 above.
4. Sadly, occasionally, things go wrong/people cock up.
5. Regulation of aviation is still strong, so we continue to train and check to a level beyond belief. How often are doctors/surgeons/teachers/social workers/police ckd?
6. Hang on in there, be bold and keep flying.

[Dit]

RE: ventus45

Originally Posted by ventus45

I then said, "with all the safety issues QF has had lately, what do you think is going on behind the sceenes in the low cost airlines ?"

Why should low cost mean low maintenance? The principle that my airline (Ryanair- and thats low fares, not low cost) uses is that it is cheaper in the long run to keep all the aircraft as close to fully serviceable as possible, rather than allowing them to fly with defects that affect(/effect? can never get that right) the operation of the aircraft in any way.

For example, the aircraft I flew today had a Speed Trim problem yesterday, which limited the aircraft's maximum speed. It also downgraded it to a CAT I only aircraft. This problem was fixed overnight, and we did a practice CAT III landing into STN today at the request of engineering so it would be back to CAT III straight away. This potentially saves Ryanair having to mess round with aircraft rotations if it ended up going somewhere where CAT III was needed.

Personally I think a low profit airline would be more likely to cut back on maintenance than a high profit low fares/cost airline.

[Grueber]

Reading the last 20 or so pages in the Amsterdam Turkish Airline crash threat, one might get worried when boarding a plane. Ongoing discussions about whether or not landings should be done manually occassionally, whether or not A/T is active during the entire flight (if I understand correctly), whether or not more automation is required on the flight deck, whether or not a number of sim trainings are sufficient and in one of the last threats a suggestion that in a few years time the plane will not require pilots anymore, yet just 2 flight engineers.

As a non-pilot it makes you wonder whether there still is a balance between automation and flying. Clearly there still is, since only a small number of aircraft crash. No ones knows what the future brings, but I am slighty worried about over-reliance on automation which may already be happening sometimes, but is more likely to happen in the future as automation will increase.

By the end of the day, whenever I board an aircraft, I expect the aircraft to be in good condition and the pilots to be skilled and well-trained, and capable of landing the aircraft safely whenever things go pear-shaped. And occassionally that will happen, which is why you need pilots, not flight engineers.