 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rv10flyer(at)verizon.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 10:31 am Post subject: Recent article by Gene Benson |
 |
|
The NTSB has decided to take a look at the experimental and amateur-built aircraft. This isn't surprising since. According to the most recent Nall Report, amateur built fixed-wing aircraft logged less than 7% of total flight time as compared to other non-commercial fixed-wing operations, but accounted for 21% of all corresponding accidents and 30% of fatal accidents. Numbers like that are sure to draw attention. EAA is participating in the study by conducting a survey and sharing the results with NTSB. This is a difficult issue. We certainly want to maintain the freedom to design, build, and/or fly aircraft and anyone who engages in any or all of those activities understands that there is increased risk. These aircraft have panel-mounted placards warning passengers that the aircraft does not meet certification standards of the FAA so passengers are, at least in theory, notified of increased risk. Of course there is ample precedent for some level of government to protect us from ourselves as evidenced by all the safety equipment that is mandated for our cars, motorcycle helmet laws, restrictions on use of fireworks in some states, etc. This study will probably follow a familiar path. The NTSB will make recommendations to the FAA for new or expanded regulations. AOPA and EAA will mount a massive and successful campaign to block any new rules. But if the trend continues, blocking restrictions on amateur-built aircraft will become more difficult. The best course of action for anyone who has a stake in amateur-built aircraft is to do whatever is possible to prevent accidents and increase safety overall. A change in direction of the statistics curve will do more than anything else to avoid increased regulation.
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 11:05 am Post subject: Recent article by Gene Benson |
|
|
I think there's a huge glaring error in the statistics. It's in that 7% of total flight time. Just take a look at your own airport ..... how often do the experimentals fly and the air time compared to all the hangar queens and lawn ornaments. Where did that flight time figure come from??? Other than my hobbs meter, nobody is keeping track of the flight time of my aircraft. I'll admit that I don't fly as much as I did years ago ..... but then neither do my 'certificated' friends. I also believe we're the fastest growing segment of aviation in the U.S.
The other points about regulation are well taken. How do we prevent accidents caused by those that ignore the present 'guidelines' that are intended to keep us safe?
Linn
On 8/1/2011 1:25 PM, Pascal wrote: [quote] The NTSB has decided to take a look at the experimental and amateur-built aircraft. This isn't surprising since. According to the most recent Nall Report, amateur built fixed-wing aircraft logged less than 7% of total flight time as compared to other non-commercial fixed-wing operations, but accounted for 21% of all corresponding accidents and 30% of fatal accidents. Numbers like that are sure to draw attention. EAA is participating in the study by conducting a survey and sharing the results with NTSB. This is a difficult issue. We certainly want to maintain the freedom to design, build, and/or fly aircraft and anyone who engages in any or all of those activities understands that there is increased risk. These aircraft have panel-mounted placards warning passengers that the aircraft does not meet certification standards of the FAA so passengers are, at least in theory, notified of increased risk. Of course there is ample precedent for some level of government to protect us from ourselves as evidenced by all the safety equipment that is mandated for our cars, motorcycle helmet laws, restrictions on use of fireworks in some states, etc. This study will probably follow a familiar path. The NTSB will make recommendations to the FAA for new or expanded regulations. AOPA and EAA will mount a massive and successful campaign to block any new rules. But if the trend continues, blocking restrictions on amateur-built aircraft will become more difficult. The best course of action for anyone who has a stake in amateur-built aircraft is to do whatever is possible to prevent accidents and increase safety overall. A change in direction of the statistics curve will do more than anything else to avoid increased regulation.
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
