New small airplane laws may allow owner Owner Maintenance!!!

[steveinindy]

I could care less if a pilot removes him or herself from the gene pool, due to technical incompetence, with respect to aircraft maintenance. I just hope someone isn't with him or her.

The problem is not so much the loss of life, but the press coverage thereof.

However, I am concerned for the safety of the non-aviation personnel, on the ground, that their aircraft may come down upon due to the fact that we fly over populated areas.

The risk to a person on the ground, not involved in aviation activities are about as slim as your chances of being killed by lightning while having a winning lottery ticket in your pocket.

[martymayes]

The risk to a person on the ground, not involved in aviation activities are about as slim as your chances of being killed by lightning while having a winning lottery ticket in your pocket.

Guess nobody ever explained the odds to this guy........



Plane Hits, Kills Man on South Carolina Beach

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...#ixzz1qd57Kfc5

[aosunaiv]

The problem is not so much the loss of life, but the press coverage thereof.

The risk to a person on the ground, not involved in aviation activities are about as slim as your chances of being killed by lightning while having a winning lottery ticket in your pocket.

In answer to the first part...HUH??? WTF???

In answer to the second part... Your opinion is noted.

[aosunaiv]

Or these school kids...

At Least 13 Die in [Light] Plane Crash....

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/wo...ilippines.html

[martymayes]

I'm thinking pilots, aircraft owners and wannabes will be their own worst enemy if this proposal were to be seriously debated and considered.

[Bill Berson]

With 2 Macs, an iPhone and an iPad. What type of Mac, OS version, and browser are you using?

I'm typing this on a mid 2005 iBook with a 1.42GHz G4 PPC processor.

We have a 2007 iMac 5.1 desktop with Tiger 10.4 OS, and Safari browser (version 4.1.3).
This problem happened once before, but only once.

[steveinindy]

In answer to the first part...HUH??? WTF???

OK....I'll remember to type slower and try to refrain from using words with more than four syllables. The problem is that if we have people killed in crashes, it makes the news and people get worked up about it (the NIMBY morons). When people get a hair up their butts, they call their local politicians. When they call their politicians, the politicians take it out on the FAA who in turn takes it out on us. Reduce the number of deaths, reduce the amount of press coverage and you reduce the political pressure that is most often the trigger for oppressive regulation.

Or these school kids...

Welcome to how you have odds: something has to occur (or have at least the theoretical ability to occur) to have an odds ratio above zero. The odds of being killed by a crashing plane when you're not on board it are pretty small which is what I was trying to point out. It's something ridiculously small. If ten people a year are killed in the US by crashing aircraft (which I think is probably well above the actual number) and there are 311 million people in the US (let's assume everyone has equal exposure to the risk, which they don't), that gives you an one-year odds ratio of 1:31.1 million. Assuming a 76 year life expectancy, that gives you a roughly 1 in 400,000 chance. That's 1/5th the risk of being struck by lightning or about the same as the odds of being killed by a meteor or asteroid impact.

My point was that the bigger concern should be for the folks on board the airplanes who have a much larger risk of serious injury. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go back to watching the FedEx jets as they pass over my apartment.

[aosunaiv]

Good evening, steveinindy,

Okay...I'll type in douche-speak.

The WTF was not in reference to the likelihood that CNN types would report any mishaps in an overblown manner. That's a given, these days. Additionally, it wasn't in reference to the fact that folks tend to remember, often incorrectly, dramatic events. Yes, Steve, other folks have endured psych classes as well.

The WTF was in reference to what seemed to be an utter lack of regard for anyone that is not you, or that would inconvenience you. Lost lives matter.

Your refusal to acknowledge any other view, as demonstrated by the refusal to acknowledge the simple fact that 13, non-aviation related, people died when the light plane impacted a school, in the article provided, when combined with the attempted use of semi-statistical bullying in defense of your view serves as a fine example of confirmation bias. Yes, Steve, other folks have endured stats, physics, thermo, diffy qs, and many other university courses, as well.

Remember, it's okay to be very intelligent, and very learned, but to speak plainly.

Enjoy the FedEx hardware show. Remember not to stare into the sun, and to lower your head if it rains.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________________

To the Moderator, and the rest of the group. I'm sorry, that this has become a rude exchange. But some folks really should take themselves less seriously. I'll disengage at this point and endure whatever is sent my way. I'll understand being barred. Have a good night.

[aosunaiv]

We have a 2007 iMac 5.1 desktop with Tiger 10.4 OS, and Safari browser (version 4.1.3).
This problem happened once before, but only once.

I performed a quick check on your system specs. If your machine is a Core 2 Duo, 2.16 Ghz, 1GB RAM, iMac, then you can easily upgrade your OS to Snow Leopard OS X 10.6. Which is available for about thirty bucks at the online Apple store. It will allow you to run the latest Safari, and provide added security. I recommend you stay away from OS X 10.7, as it'll slow your machine to a crawl.

Let me know what else I can do.

[steveinindy]

The WTF was in reference to what seemed to be an utter lack of regard for anyone that is not you, or that would inconvenience you. Lost lives matter.

Woah, woah....back the aggression train up there, you're completely taking what I said the wrong way.

As someone who keeps a roof over his head by trying to keep people from dying in plane crashes (I do aviation safety research for a living), I agree wholeheartedly that lives do matter. You seem to miss the point that in the big scheme of things, 700 or so lives a year in GA crashes doesn't mean a lot to those of us who haven't counted friends or loved ones in that group. In other words, it's not a huge deal to anyone outside not directly connected to the GA community because the numbers are so small until we get a bunch of non-pilots riled up. The way we make that number better for us and worse for our critics is by pushing the number of fatal crashes down so that we give our enemies less ammunition to use against us.

In GA crashes alone, I've lost NINE friends including the first person who ever took me for a ride in a small plane. If you fact in the the friends I've lost in medical helicopter crashes, I'm getting close to two dozen. I don't do the work I do because of the fact that I think I'm better than anyone or because I hate people who inconvenience or annoy me. Quite frankly, I spend my professional life trying to give those people (and everyone else) the best chance possible to go home from their flights- GA, commercial, HEMS, etc- to their families and friends because I don't care how much someone annoys me, no one deserves to die in a crash. I don't want anyone else to standby a grave and long to spend time with their friend again.

Your refusal to acknowledge any other view, as demonstrated by the refusal to acknowledge the simple fact that 13, non-aviation related, people died when the light plane impacted a school, in the article provided, when combined with the attempted use of semi-statistical bullying in defense of your view serves as a fine example of confirmation bias.

I'm not bullying anyone. I'm pointing out that the odds of the average person has far bigger things to worry about than a plane landing on them. Nothing more, nothing less. OK? Yes, people do die from being struck by crashing planes but so few as to make it a freak event (if it broke 500 people in an average year worldwide, I'd be rather surprised). Is it sad a handful of folks died? Yes. Does it prove that there's a significant risk, nope. That was my point with all the statistics I mentioned.

BTW, I'll have you know this very same "bullying" got me a thank you e-mail from the president of the AOPA several years ago when I helped derail a "not in my backyard because those planes crash here all the time and are going to kill one of us" article after a crash. I spend a fair amount of time talking to reporters and here's the amazing thing. If you give them the actual facts and statistics, most of them (unless they work for USA Today) tend to be really, really willing to listen. The problem is that most of us treat them like the enemy, don't want to teach them and so they have to go off of rumor and supposition because if we don't want to talk, we must have something to hide tends to be the attitude.

Trust me, I'm not looking down on anyone. I may get irritated (and plus, I'm still recovering from surgery earlier this month so I'm kind of crabby because of the pain and stuff; I do apologize for being condescending earlier) but once you get to know me, you'll realize that my heart is in the right place even if, at times, I tend to put my foot in my mouth because I don't word things the best.

If you're coming to Oshkosh this year, I'll buy you lunch as a way of making up for the miscommunication. You'll find I don't take myself that seriously at all.