The Killing Zone: How and why pilots die

saracelica

saracelica

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
1,814
Display Name
Display name:
saracelica
I'm like a bookworm with all this cold weather...

Finished "The Killing Zone: How and why pilots die" it reads a little like a research paper and my husband and I agree it's a little dry but they have some NTSB and NASA reports within each chapter which is what made the book interesting.

If anyone wants it send me a PM. I'll send it to you free of charge.
 
Found a home for it. Feel free to post if you want it and the guy I'm sending it to can send it along to you.
 
Very nice offer.

I made a similar one on the Cirrus Owner's website and it did pass from hand-to-hand for a while.

Worthwhile book, especially for pilots entering that zone.
 
What is the difference between first and second edition?
I can get the first for $8 on ebay but 2nd is 20+ and I am way cheap.
 
FastEddieB said:
Very nice offer.

I made a similar one on the Cirrus Owner's website and it did pass from hand-to-hand for a while.

Worthwhile book, especially for pilots entering that zone.
Click to expand...
FWIW, IMO the books main premises is flawed. The author's conclusion that serious accidents occur with greater frequency for pilots with 100-500 hrs ignores the fact that there's a large bump in the pilot population there.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
What is the difference between first and second edition?
I can get the first for $8 on ebay but 2nd is 20+ and I am way cheap.
Click to expand...

The 2nd edition includes a chapter on people using geese instead of ducks during a wing separation event. Overconfidence I suppose.
 
The author's conclusion that serious accidents occur with greater frequency for pilots with 100-500 hrs ignores the fact that there's a large bump in the pilot population there.
Click to expand...
Yes. It's an entertaining read, but the author's conclusions are completely unsupportable from the data provided. No one with even the slightest scientific or statistical training would have published such a conclusion. Had he normalized the accident rate to the pilot populations in his various hours ranges there may or may not have been a pattern. We'll never know. Probably he will never know either.

In fact I read an article sometime in the past couple of years where Avemco's research told them that a pilot's total hours was a poor or even useless predictor of risk. It might have been in their periodic PDF newsletter. I don't remember.

I gave the book away after I read it, too. It's simply not a keeper.
 
airdale said:
Avemco's research told them that a pilot's total hours was a poor or even useless predictor of risk.
Click to expand...

I'd think flight time/experience over the last 90 days would be a better indicator of risk.
 
Strange that Avemco would state that yet do the opposite in my case. My rates were reduced considerably, according to the rep. I spoke with due to my many hours in taildraggers. ( over 3000 hours) I should add that all of these hours were insured by Avemco with no claim ever filed.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
Strange that Avemco would state that yet do the opposite in my case. ...
Click to expand...
Well:

  1. I only dimly remember the article.
  2. It did not say that their underwriting guidelines ignored total hours.
  3. It was just a report on a study they had done or had sponsored.
So I wouldn't take the information too far without asking them about it. If someone is really curious, though, and makes a phone call I'd bet that one of their reps would be happy to comment on the study and its significance to them. I have found them to be a pretty open and easy to talk to company.
 
I have delt with them for over 40 years and yes they are easy to converse with, very up front, and very knowledgeable. I've been very pleased. Personally, I learned something everytime I flew after I obtained my private. I think higher time pilots have a decided edge. Airlines certainly think so.
 
Last edited:
Bill Jennings said:
I'd think flight time/experience over the last 90 days would be a better indicator of risk.
Click to expand...

I'll give you a hint:

The life insurance guys have actuaries that do this for a living, and this is the most common criteria for preferred rates. People who meet this criteria are often given rates equivalent to being slightly overweight. While many of it might seem obvious, the minimum hours per year might come as a suprise to some. Notable, total time is not a substantial mitigation to the risk. The once a month in the summer flyer and currency, is.

200 hours PIC
Minimum 50 hours per year.
Maximum 250 hours per year.
Certificated airplanes only.
Prefer IFR (but surprisingly, often not required).
 
pj500 said:
I'll give you a hint:



The life insurance guys have actuaries that do this for a living, and this is the most common criteria for preferred rates. People who meet this criteria are often given rates equivalent to being slightly overweight. While many of it might seem obvious, the minimum hours per year might come as a suprise to some. Notable, total time is not a substantial mitigation to the risk. The once a month in the summer flyer and currency, is.



200 hours PIC

Minimum 50 hours per year.

Maximum 250 hours per year.

Certificated airplanes only.

Prefer IFR (but surprisingly, often not required).
Click to expand...


No questions about the last two on any applications I've yet filled out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top