The performance of the airplane is a product of the airplane's attitude times the thrust (amount of energy) applied. That makes sense and is a basic premise of how airplanes fly. The safety of the flight is the product of the pilot's attitude times the effort (amount of energy) applied.
Education theorists list three domains of learning. The first is the cognitive domain, in which knowledge exists. For example, knowing how and why a modified slip is used in a crosswind landing falls in the cognitive domain. The next domain is the psychomotor domain. Here, the physical skills to perform a task (in our example, the modified slip) are contained. The final domain is the affective domain. The internalization of the other two domains is contained in the affective domain. For example, the pilot who knows why and how to make a crosswind landing and also possesses the skills to execute the maneuver, may or may not actually perform the modified slip when confronted with a crosswind. The pilot who has internalized the rationale for the maneuver will execute it. The pilot who has not internalized the rationale might decide to try something different. The result may or may not be desirable depending on the skill level of the pilot, the strength of the wind, and also a certain amount of luck.
Let's look at another example. A pilot may know how to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given trip, make sure the required fuel quantity is onboard, and monitor the fuel consumption during flight (cognitive domain). The pilot may also possess the skills necessary to operate the E6B computer or a calculator to perform the calculations, operate the fuel pump to put fuel into the airplane, and operate the computer or calculator again as the flight progresses (psychomotor domain). Now, if the pilot has internalized the importance of the first two domains (through the affective domain), sufficient fuel will be onboard and, barring something like a fuel leak, the flight will be conducted without encountering a fuel emergency. If, on the other hand, the third domain is lacking, the flight might depart with insufficient fuel or unanticipated headwinds might cause a fuel emergency along the way.
This is where the attitude of the pilot becomes at least as important as the attitude of the airplane. Our accident rate in general aviation is way beyond acceptable limits. Why? Because pilots are not sufficiently trained? Because general aviation is inherently unsafe? I don't think so. The vast majority of general aviation accidents, especially the serious ones, seem to be caused by an attitude on the part of the pilot. The attitude might be described as careless, lazy, risk-taking, or several other adjectives. Whatever it might be called, it comes back to the pilot not having internalized the significance of one or more of the many elements already mastered in the cognitive and psychomotor domains.
So, simply put, pilots need to follow those procedures learned early in the training process. Really do a thorough preflight. Really look in the fuel tanks and take sufficient fuel samples. Really figure out whether or not the runway is long enough for the prevailing conditions. Really know the altitude of the airplane relative to the terrain. Really maintain proficiency, especially if flying IFR or in multiengine airplanes.
I sit here at age 64 with more than 15,000 accident free flying hours. I reflect on accidents that a number of my friends and acquaintances, who all had similar experience to my own, have had over the past several years. Two of those accidents were fatal. One was nearly fatal. In all but one of those accidents, the pilot made a "beginner's error." But, none of the pilots were beginners. In my opinion, each of the pilots had failed to internalize, or had experienced some kind or reversal of the internalization, of the importance of a basic procedure.
So why them and not me? Am I smarter? Am I wiser? Am I more skillful. Am I more knowledgeable? I don't think so. Many years ago, on an airline check ride, an FAA inspector with a reputation for being "by-the-book" complemented me on my performance and then admonished me to always fly as if he was sitting in the jump seat. I never forgot those words of advice. If we all operated as if an inspector was watching over our shoulders, I believe that the general aviation accident rate would quickly turn around.
|
