Vintage Aircraft Losses

It's bad enough that people die in plane crashes. It's even worse when rare and beautiful aircraft are lost.

One pilot was killed when these P-51 Mustangs collided at the EAA AirVenture show in Oshkosh, WI this summer.

Decline in Aircraft Accidents

Did you know that the number of aircraft accidents that occur each year has gradually decreased since 1986? More importantly, the accident rate has also gone down.

If you're not a pilot (and even if you are), you might never have given it a thought.

When there's a front-page accident, such as a fully loaded airliner crashing on short final, it gets peoples' attention. As soon as the news outlets tire of that story, however, and move on to more current events, people tend to forget any previous concerns they had about aviation safety. Most people never even find out what was eventually determined to be the cause of the accident.

I used to ask my pilot students how many civil aircraft accidents they thought there were each year in this country. Their guesstimates usually ranged from a few dozen to several hundred accidents accidents a year. They were always surprised when I informed them that the annual number of accidents always hovered around 2000 or more (it has been less than 2000 per year since I retired).

These tables for accidents and accident rates come from the NTSB's Aviation Accident Statistics web page: As you can see from these tables (click on the image for a larger scale view), the airlines contribute only a small number of accidents to the total. Airline pilots receive continuous, intensive training to keep them on their toes, so it's always a bit shocking when an airliner crashes due to pilot error.

General aviation, on the other hand has a great number of pilots who get almost no training after receiving their pilot's certificate. I don't want to appear to discourage people from becoming pilots, but I think that if you aren't willing to dedicate yourself to obtaining and maintaining a high level of flying skill and aviation knowledge, you would be well advised to leave the flying to the professionals.

GA pilots are involved in the vast majority of aircraft accidents, mostly due to a lack of basic piloting skills. Even commercial pilots (non-airline) have a considerable number of accidents, even though their basic piloting skills are much better maintained through frequent training sessions.

The most common cause of accidents among professional pilots, both airline and non-airline, is pilot error resulting from a loss of situational awareness. This problem has been addressed by airlines and commercial pilot training organizations over the last two decades and may account for the gradual reduction in the yearly number of accidents.

There are a number of identifiable recurring situations that tend to cause pilots to make small, but serious mistakes, and those situations are not uncommon in routine flying - especially in low visibility conditions (night and weather). They form a common thread and make many accidents almost identical to previous accidents.

Knowing what has caused previous accidents helps pilots avoid experiencing what others have already suffered. Therefore, I've encouraged pilots to review aircraft accident reports frequently. They may find one (or more) that contain flight scenarios that closely resemble some of their own flight situations that, fortunately, did not result in an accident.

I have always believed that knowing what causes accidents is a pilot's best defense against accident. Becoming familiar the "traps" that other pilots have found themselves in will better ensure that they will be able to continue to avoid getting caught in one themselves.

More important is the need to develop error recovery skills. Pilots, being human, will always make mistakes. The ability to correct those mistakes in a timely manner is what prevents them from resulting in an accident.

Stearman PT-17

This WWII primary trainer was produced in many variants for the Army, Navy, and foreign military. After the war, many were sold to individuals for sport flying and cropdusting and can often be seen at airshows around the country today.

A quick scan of the NTSB Accident Database shows that at least 8 of these beautiful aircraft have crashed since 2001.

*UPDATE*
A closer look at the accident database shows at least 23 PT-17 accidents since 2001. I'm feeling even more depressed now.

EMS Helicopter Crashes

A study published in the Annals of Emergency Medicine (on line) in January 2006 reports a "disproportionate increase" in the number of EMS helicopter accidents and deaths.

Without a membership, we are limited to reading only the abstract and, consequently, are not privy to the more detailed statistics. Therefore, the numbers cited in the report have little meaning.

For example, we could reasonably expect the total number of accidents to increase over time, but has the accident rate increased? If so, by what measure (per 1000 flight hours, per 1000 sorties, etc.). And what is it that makes the increase "disproportionate?" Disproportionate to what?

These folks sometimes have a funny way (to me, anyhow) of stating the obvious, like when they say "Multivariate logistic regression revealed that controlling for other factors, the odds of fatal outcome was increased by postcrash fire ..."

What the heck is "multivariate logistic regression," and just why was it needed to "reveal" that postcrash fires increase the odds of a fatality? Common sense will "reveal" the same obvious result of postcrash fires.

The conclusion to the study (at least that part included in the abstract) offers nothing more than what has been known for many years:

"Fatalities after helicopter EMS crashes are associated especially with
postcrash fire and with crashes that occur in darkness or bad weather..."

Yes, postcrash fires add to the number of fatalities. Crashes that occur in darkness or bad weather (low visibility) usually involve high-speed impacts with obstructions or terrain and, therefore, increased trauma to the aircraft's occupants.

"...and can be addressed with improved crashworthiness..."

Believe me, helicopters are already about as crashworthy as they can be made to be and still be practical for their intended uses.

"...and measures to reduce flights in hazardous conditions."

This problem was addressed very well in a 1986 NTSB Safety Study of EMS helicopter accidents - mainly, apply strict weather minimums (ceiling and visibility) and don't pressure the pilots to fly in any weather conditions that the pilots determine are too dangerous. The highest percentage of fatalities (61%) in the 59 accidents included in this study resulted from "continued VFR flight into IMC."

"Further studies will be necessary to determine which changes will decrease the fatal crash rate and which are cost effective."

Again this is already known, but the lessons learned from previous studies are soon forgotten.

Recurrent flight training in flight simulators (not in the actual aircraft), in my opinion, will yield the most positive results in accident reduction. Yes, simulators are usually more expensive per hour of flight than the aircraft, but simulators offer the pilot the opportunity to fly in the kinds of situations and conditions that most often result in accidents. One hour in a simulator can provide the pilot with several hours more training benefit than one hour in the aircraft.

EMS pilots are often required to fly when the weather is at, and possibly below, their VFR minimums - at least at some unknown point along their flight route. That's why pilots sometimes (especially at night) find themselves in unforeseen IMC through no fault of their own.

Flight scenarios in the simulator can include all the elements involved in an actual aircraft accident and prepare the pilot to better handle the same or similar situation.

Those pilots who have experienced this type of simulator training know of its benefits. Unfortunately, the people who determine how much money will be spent on pilot training and how it will be spent are often not pilots and unaware of the value of simulators.

I have over 30 years experience conducting all levels of training for pilots in both aircraft and simulators, so take my word for it.

In all fairness to the authors of the study, I have access only to the abstract. The full study may actually have some useful information in it.

Wrong runway

Recently, a Comair jet attempted a takeoff from the wrong runway at Lexington/Blue Grass airport with tragic results.

Click on the airport diagram to see a larger picture of the airport layout. Notice that when taxiing from the terminal to Runway 22, an aircraft has to cross the approach end of Runway 26. I would be willing to bet that many aircraft have inadvertently lined up on Runway 26, but either recognized the mistake or were corrected by the tower controller prior to takeoff.

It is my casual observation, over a long flying career, that ATC prevents many aircraft accidents by pointing out pilots' mistakes in time for corrective action to be taken. Unfortunately, this wasn't one of those times.

I have never made the mistake of taxiing onto the wrong runway (as far as you know), but I can imagine several scenarios in which I could have.