To see article on this in USA Today click here.
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Capt Tom Bunn MSW LCSW |
For US Airlines, A New Air Safety Record |
Lead | |
|
For the first time, US Airlines have had two years without a single airline passenger death. "It's a new record," says Arnold Barnett, a
Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who has written extensively about airline fatality risks. "While it doesn't mean risk is now
non-existent," Barnett says, "it certainly means they have done a fantastic job at keeping all these threats at bay."
To see article on this in USA Today click here. |
|||
OneAnt |
|||
|
I read this through CNN earlier this morning.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/T.../us.air.safety/index.html I realize I'll raise red flags for fearful flyers with my comments, but I think the replies from Capt Tom and Capt Steve will more than address it. I know that airline safety overall improves over time with, and largely due to, technology. But is this really something to sink your teeth into as a truly glorious period in airline safety? Or is this kind of article--especially in light of the NTSB's concern over the removal of the ASAP programs ( http://ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2008/081219b.html )--simply the national press touting a record, not unlike of manufacturing jobs, where they have a "No injuries in x days" poster? Personally, I fly anyway. But I'm just curious as to the pilot, and counselor, viewpoint. |
|||
Capt Tom Bunn MSW LCSW |
|||
|
My view of the situation: we have had a good run without fatalities for a period of time.
What does it mean? There are a lot of good things being done to make flying safe, and there are things that need to be done which are not being done. The situation needs improvement, but luck has gotten us through a period without the needed improvements. 1. What the FAA is doing is claiming that the proof that they are doing there job is that there have been no fatalities. That isn't true. The FAA is not doing much to contribute to safety, and continues to stand in the way of needed improvements in safety. 2. No fatal accidents is great, but what does it prove? Who is to say whether no fatalities is the result of luck or the result of good practice which controls things which could go wrong. In other words, absence of an accident is not proof that the lack of accident was due to good practice or good luck. 3. Without question, there are things that need significant improvement which we lucked out on. a. We need positive control to prevent runway incursions. During this fatality-free period we HAVE had runway incursions but - between luck and the quick action of pilots - an accident was avoided. During this fatality-free period we HAVE had safety threatened by outsourcing, but between luck and pilot skill, some accidents have been avoided. b. We need massive change regarding outsourcing, limiting outsourcing to facilities thoroughly supervised with frequent FAA inspections. The fact that outsourcing has not caused fatalities is - again - luck. 4. I appreciate the good luck, but pilots want control and good luck - not good luck only. |
|||
MeghansNerves |
|||
|
Am I the only one thinking both fearfully and cynically about the accident in New York today, right after this record was set? Note that I didn't say
conspiratorially. Just cynically (like, ugh, there goes the record) and of course fearfully.
I hope they are able to get everyone out of the plane and out of the water.... Meghan |
|||
CRob21 |
|||
|
Meghan Im with you... I just keep thinking JINX! To make it a little more personal, I checked the flight tracker on the flight because I was curious... turns out 1549 was supposed to fly to Seattle from Charlotte. I'm in Seattle! Silly coincidence I know, but still made me a little anxious. |
|||
Portastorm |
|||
|
CNN is reporting all got off the plane safely. If that verifies, hats off and a big salute to the pilots and the New York emergency responders who are doing
their usual fantastic job. They are truly heroes in my book!
|
|||
OneAnt |
|||
|
Record is still intact.
Hats off to the pilot for an amazingly safe water landing. One of the channels reported that most of the passengers never even got wet. |
|||
optize |
|||
|
eek!
|
|||
bnjochck |
|||
|
A flock of geese. Seriously? I'm flying in less than a month. This is the LAST thing I needed to hear.
|
|||
aryn16 |
|||
|
I thought planes were able to ingest birds now without any problem. Was it the amount of birds that caused BOTH engines to give out?
|
|||
filmoyster |
|||
|
Amazing work by the pilots, crew, and rescue crews.
|
|||
MeghansNerves |
|||
|
Aryn16, probably, yes, it was the number of birds.
Like everyone else, I'm glad to see everyone (except the birds) made it through the ordeal OK. I fly one week from Sunday, which makes me a little extra jittery. Especially because takeoff makes me the most tense. But the good work of the pilots and crew should have the opposite effect --this is what their training is for, right? Meghan |
|||
OneAnt |
|||
bnjochck wrote:There have only been 5 major incidents caused by bird strikes since 1975. Between 1998 and 2004 alone, there were 56000 bird strikes reported to the FAA. You can do the math on that one. Don't let this make you jittery. If anything, it should make you feel even more confident that, when you DO fly, you are in very good hands. |
|||
cafe |
|||
|
Well, that just about does it for me.
|
|||
MeghansNerves |
|||
|
I can remember sometime within the past 5 years or so when there was a fairly well-publicized birdstrike here in Chicago. The people who lived in the community
under the airplane heard a big boom and saw the plane with smoke maybe? I can't remember the exact details. I just remember that it was scary-seeming from
the ground, and no doubt scary on board. But the plane went back to the airport and landed safely, and no one was hurt.
Again, I think the crew's training really prepared them for the incident today. Think about all the training that crew get that NEVER goes into a real-life situation. I bet this crew felt it would never happen to them, too, but when it did, they did the right thing and everyone got out just fine. I was a little freaked when I first heard about this today, probably because I'm flying a week from Sunday myself, but ultimately it will probably be just another media circus rather than, of course, anything that should really worry us. Meghan |
|||
OneAnt |
|||
|
Bird strikes happen ALL the time. I really do think that some of you need to head over to flyertalk.com to see the frequent fliers (and I'm talking
FREQUENT...in some cases 4 million miles lifetime) discuss these issues.
There are countless birdstrikes that result in nothing more than the "pop" in the engine, the smell, and some smoke, and a completely safe landing (with all engines) back at the airport. This is a freak occurrence. Even AS a freak occurrence, it was a completely survivable one. EVERYONE onboard left that plane safely and, according to reports, very calmly. Only a handful even got wet from what I've heard. DO NOT let this scare you from flying. A friend at work today told me "That is why I won't fly! So they had two years of no fatalities, it's coming!" I told him that, yes, a fatal incident will happen. Just like it does on every highway hundreds of times a day. But just because nothing has happened in 2 years doesn't mean the chances have increased. If you flip a coin 9 times and it hit heads every time, that doesn't change the chances of the 10th being tails. The stats are still the same. You are still unbelievably safe on any given US airline. So this happened. YOU weren't on the flight. Even if you were, you're alive and healthy with nothing more to show than your ticket stub and a water-logged carry-on. Folks, this is NO reason to delay, cancel, or postpone your flight. MeghansNerves is right: This isn't "anything that should really worry" you. |
|||
Capt Tom Bunn MSW LCSW |
|||
|
Right. Engines are supposed to eat birds without failing. And look at the record. Fifty years of jet flying with no accidents due to birds. So, once in fifty
years? Is that going to be something worth focusing on?
|
|||
|
Note from Capt. Tom I know everyone worries about weather, but pilots really do not worry about it. We simply - instead of worrying about it - completely prepare for it. Before going to the plane, we review the weather at the destination. If it is not 100% sure to be within legal limits when we arrive at the destination, we must specify an alternate airport in our planning documents, and load on plenty of fuel for going to the destination airport, and then if need be, diverting to the alternate airport. The legal limits are conservative. Even when weather is slightly outside the legal limits, any airline pilot could still land safely. You can rely on the captain never to land when the weather is not legal, and legality limits are reached prior to safety limits. If you are still anxious, call me and we can talk it over. I'm at 877 332-7359 from 10 AM until 7 PM Eastern time. For effective help, even if you are flying in a day or two, sign up now at www.fearofflying.com/fasttrack and call me when you finish Clip 9 so I can make sure you are all set. |
|
Using Weather Information If you enter your ZIP Code or City at the top of the weather presentation, it will give you weather for your area. Or, you can enter your destination ZIP Code or City.
Click on the "LOCAL RADAR" button to see whether or not there are thunder- Turbulence, though it may cause anxiety, does not mean anything is wrong. Turbulence does not mean danger. The plane can handle far more turbulence than Mother Nature can dish out. Though flying in turbulence is safe, it doesn't feel safe. And here is where the SOAR programs come in. We can help you feel as safe when you fly as you actually are. You can see these programs at www.fearofflying.com/store. |