Safety Complacency

by Dan McDowell

In the 1970s, we were happy if our automobile engines went 60,000 miles before needing overhaul or replacement. Today, the average auto engine can easily last (with reasonable care), 150-200,000 miles, or more. Jet engines were no different. Some were good for 2,000 hours before needing major maintenance. Today, similar jet engines are safe and reliable with proper care, for 8,000 to 10,000 hours before major maintenance or overhaul is required.

Airframe and avionics manufacturers are also building great reliability and safety into their products. Cirrus aircraft, for instance, come standard with a Ballistic Recovery Systems safety parachute. If a pilot gets into a serious situation and cannot recover, the chute is there to help the pilot and passengers survive a potential crash.

Automobiles have airbags in the dash and some even have side impact airbags, all to protect the occupants of the vehicle. Some aircraft may have similar devices in the not-too-distant future. Many newer cars have steel cage construction and side impact steel beams in the doors. New aircraft, like the Cirrus SR20 and SR22, are designed with an airframe built to withstand significant crash impact forces, while remaining intact to protect the occupants.

The point is that design engineers, new technologies and materials, and manufacturing processes have all contributed significantly to the greatly increased reliability of engines and significantly improved safety and survivability for vehicle and aircraft occupants. But is all this built-in safety and obvious reliability making us safety complacent?

Think for a moment. Have you heard someone mentioning a kid that has trouble reading an analog clock because everything in their house is digital? Have you heard a recent TV news magazine story about the increasing number of people who cannot write (cursive script) because they only use keyboards every day? Have you read a recent news story about the many efforts of airline flight attendants to get people to listen to the flight safety instructions?

In an article by Deb Riechmann, reporter for the San Francisco Gate News, she says, discussing the pre-takeoff passenger briefing, “…the briefings, required since the early 1960s, are often ignored – by people certain they are doomed if something goes wrong, by those who are convinced they are safe, and by those who think they have heard it all too many times.” Later in the article she says, “Confidence in the safety of flying contributes to apathy about safety briefings…”

So what does this have to do with general aviation? Quite simply, everything! If we can be lulled into complacency with safety issues about our autos, and with flight in airliners, we should probably stop and look at what we do with our own aircraft, and in our lives.  We should look at ourselves, or better yet have someone who won’t hesitate to be truthful, observe us objectively and give us solid feedback. This could help save our, and other people’s lives.

We must ask the questions: Am I unsafe in anything I do in relation to my flying? What am I lax in doing? What do I overlook? What do I rush by with little more than a passing glance when I do my walk around? Do I make sure that my aircraft is maintained according to the FARs and manufacturer’s recommendations? Is my minimum equipment list (MEL) up to date? Have I complied with all the appropriate airworthiness directives? Am I proficient and current at night flying, GPS navigation, dead reckoning, landing in crosswinds, and in the use of all navigational equipment installed on my aircraft?

Is my health a safety factor? Imagine someone who works on a computer every day. They have frequent headaches, and some difficulty clearing their eyes from time to time. Besides being a potential hazard on the highways, what if this person DOES have an eye problem and does nothing about it? Now they get into their aircraft and fly. Can they see the traffic they are overtaking? When given traffic advisories, will they ever actually see the traffic? Are they safe in the pattern? Can they see traffic in the dimming light of the day on the ground as they taxi about? Do you see the point?

Being complacent about safety issues, any safety issues, is a serious mistake that could cause you to suffer significant, if not fatal consequences. Worse yet, you might cause harm to a number of innocent people in the process. Is being safety complacent worth that possibility?

No one can really afford to be safety complacent at any time. No one should rely 100% on the technologies to make up for their lack of safety awareness and preparation. In fact everyone, especially aviators, should always keep the basics in mind. What if the technology fails? Could you handle a given situation by reverting back to the basics like dead reckoning? If you lose your panel because of an electrical failure while in flight, could you safely navigate to another airport?

It is important for everyone, not just aviators, to maintain a sound, safety awareness at all times. After awhile it becomes second nature to do things with safety in mind. Being complacent (especially about safety) is a mistake no one can afford to make.

This entry was posted in Columns, February/March 2015, MN Aeronautics Bulletin and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.