As a pilot, our first reaction is to say that we are safer pilots than the other pilots who created those bad statistics. They made stupid mistakes that we won't make. But we can't all be safer than the next guy. Surveys of any group tend to show that most people think they are "above average," and pilots are no exception. We need to own the risk, before we can change it. We need to assume that those bad statistics came from pilots exactly like us. That feels bleak, but it makes us more serious about safety.
I have served as a volunteer pilot for the U.S. Civil Air Patrol, and have heard they made an agreement to share their safety statistics with AOPA for analysis. I am dying (bad choice of words) to know what those statistics say, because CAP uses amateur pilots to fly GA airplanes (Cessna 172's and 182's), and uses many processes that others could emulate if they have resulted in safer flying. CAP requires a "flight release"--getting permission from another person before every flight, who verifies that you have filled out a risk matrix questionnaire for the flight (adding up risk points based on flight profile, pilot currency, etc.), you have checked weather, and you are committed to safety. CAP pilots must also pass a thorough flight review annually instead of biannually. And when an accident happens, CAP knows every detail about the experience level, ratings, currency, etc. of the pilot involved. If CAP flying is no safer than a motorcycle ride, maybe we all need to hang up our wings. I like to think that I can do something to control the risk of flying, but I can't do much more than CAP. If CAP has found a process that makes a big safety difference, they need to share the data in an open way, with the rest of the flying community. We can implement some of its practices on a voluntary basis, if they actually work.
I am not a professional statistician, and would love for someone who knows the data to correct my motorcycle riding comparison. But too often, people hide behind the rough and unreliable nature of the data, and make no estimates at all. Stop hiding behind the saying, "The data is not reliable." That does not mean flying is safe, and gets us nowhere. Make some reasonable comparisons with other life activities, based on the rough data that we have, so we can own the risk. And change it.
Flying, you're likely to be the one at fault; LoC / stall.
Well trained, recreational GA pilots have no good reason to do the above, so dont!
I'd suggest you are comparing apples & mangos, assuming by m/c you mean street bikes; riding (especially in the cities) is far more dangerous & unlike flying,
Do you have some statistics to support that statement? I really don't the number bear that out vis a vis owner-flown private light aircraft..
Pat, no it was a cessna 15x, but what are your wider thoughts on the matter, has it happened to you too ? Do you think its a "best practice" ? ( this is a reply from my post on the safety discussion grp)
Ron; no stats, just alotta riding experience, like horses, its not so much a ? of "if", just when & how bad is it going to be! Now i hope thats not the case for my e-fox, i think thats one of the gr8t things about flying ... you are above & out of reach, of most of the 2 dimensional chaos! : }
All the studies I've seen support that original thesis -- that the accident and fatality rates for light single-engine non-professionally flown GA are comparable to those for motorcycles operated on the street, and higher than those for private automobiles. Google around and you can probably find those stats.