the higher accident rate in general aviation is due to less training, less maintenance, inherently more dangerous operations (e.g. single-pilot and VFR), less attention to important factors like proficiency "pilots having major operational control" is not a major factor
-
-
Replying to @ded_ruckus @zeynep and
and, hell, you're wrong even about Part 121 aviation the pilot in command is the final authority for all decisions concerning the flight from takeoff to landing, he's king, just like in GA
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
You're missing the point. We don't let them fly a thing without intrusive and expansive control over their whole lives, including extensive training and protocols and checklists, and we don't let them continue flying if there's the slightest deviation from our parameters.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @ded_ruckus and
"Here's the world's shortest leash in a field regulated within an inch of its life" is the not the paean to deferring to technocratic expertise people seem to think it is. The amazing part is that this is not immediately obvious to people.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Pilots have a short leash, yeah, but the leash is mostly also set by technocratic experts the procedures are defined by engineers and mechanics, the regulations are set by FAA/NTSB career guys (often pilots themselves)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ded_ruckus @zeynep and
very little about aviation policy is set democratically
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The democratic part is that we decided we were going to prioritize safety almost above all for this industry. NTSB fascinating and I think they have figured out good tools for wrangling a complex sociotechnical problem. But it costs what, one million $ per line of cockpit code?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @ded_ruckus and
Give me that kind of prioritization and funding for public health, and I think you'd find a very well functioning system, and Chris's claim that public health experts add little while pilots add a lot is, humbly, ludicrous because pilots add very little, though they are skilled.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @ded_ruckus and
The difference between commercial aviation and public health isn't that we understand aerodynamics better than germ theory of disease, but the broader political context in which the "experts" operate, which is not because of the particulars of science or tech, but policy.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Germ theory of disease is one thing, but "public health" is a complicated amalgam of biology, psychology, economics and politics. I think we absolutely understand aerodynamics and aerospace engineering better than we understand most of that cocktail.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Commercial aviation is no less a complicated amalgam of biology, psychology, economics and politics.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.