Three strikes and your out

gismo said:
Generally an accident chain consists of multiple uncorrected errors. Depending on the level of detail you use almost any flight made by any pilot from student to airline greybeard will include multiple errors but no accident chain builds as long as the errors are recognized and dealt with.
Click to expand...

Lance has it spot on.
 
Accident chain theory is BS. Nothing more then literary criticism for pilots. Mental masturbation denying the reality of inherent human traits that prescribe really dumb actions in the operation of fancy machinery. Me and you will do stupid too, eventually, no matter how much talky talk we make about accident chain linky breaky. There isn't a pair of mental bolt cutters powerful enough to save us all of the time. Enjoy the ride.
 
Comment about this being BS and other comments. Look at the NTSB reports. Pilots from just a few Hrs to thousands of Hrs are in these reports.

So in my mind I think about what was going through that pilots mind when he woke up that morning. I bet he never knew that day was his last.

Saying that I want to try and not do what ever it was he did or did not do. So I try to think "Outside the Box" so to speak of how he was thinking.

So I have somethings I do and one is a 3 strike rule.

The other is on preflight I try not to always look at the same stuff or things. I am always looking at things my eyes have not been on in a while. The easy things to look at are just that, easy. If you do a preflight and your hands are not dirty, you did a **** poor preflight.

I try to find 3 things wrong, and go out of my way to do it.

I listen to my gut feeling. If something is telling me one thing and I am thinking another I listen to this. This has saved me more then once, I listen.
 
I'm in a problem-solving business, and Zigler said "if you wait until all the lights are green before you leave for town, you'lll sit at home for the rest of your life."

Accordingly, I don't have "rules of three" or voo-doo dolls hanging from the air-vent knob for guidance. My "should I be doing this today?" tests hinge on the amount of delay and distraction that accompany the issues that can side-track or derail my travel plans, as well as the "what if's" that might result downstream from the event that led up to them.

So I'm willing to deal with some gotchas and try to allow for extra time so they don't cause heartburn if/when they happen. My philosophy is to give every trip a chance but to try to prevent it from hurting me. Since the get-the-plane-ready-and-get-loaded phase of each trip seems to involve a fairly high level of activity, my final yes/no call seems to materialize once I'm in the seat and ready to start.

By then things have calmed down and I can take a deep breath, review everything that's happened and determine how I feel about them, how the trip will play out based on the latest departure time (if delays have occurred) and whether I should just take my toothbrush and laptop home and leave everything else packed for a departure the next morning. Sometimes the answer is yes, sometimes no.
 
wabower said:
I'm in a problem-solving business, and Zigler said "if you wait until all the lights are green before you leave for town, you'lll sit at home for the rest of your life."...
Click to expand...
well put

besides, when I worked for wellstone and privett half the planes were russian made. I would have had to have switched to a "rule of 30" if each mechanical defect and delay was included.
 
JHW said:
well put

besides, when I worked for wellstone and privett half the planes were russian made. I would have had to have switched to a "rule of 30" if each mechanical defect and delay was included.
Click to expand...

Planes don't have to be Russian to have that same number of defects.
 
1600vw said:
Comment about this being BS and other comments. Look at the NTSB reports. Pilots from just a few Hrs to thousands of Hrs are in these reports.

So in my mind I think about what was going through that pilots mind when he woke up that morning. I bet he never knew that day was his last.

Saying that I want to try and not do what ever it was he did or did not do. So I try to think "Outside the Box" so to speak of how he was thinking.

So I have somethings I do and one is a 3 strike rule.

The other is on preflight I try not to always look at the same stuff or things. I am always looking at things my eyes have not been on in a while. The easy things to look at are just that, easy. If you do a preflight and your hands are not dirty, you did a **** poor preflight.

I try to find 3 things wrong, and go out of my way to do it.

I listen to my gut feeling. If something is telling me one thing and I am thinking another I listen to this. This has saved me more then once, I listen.
Click to expand...

Easy there go getter. That's a pretty broad stroke. I could flip it over and say any pilot who gets dirty on a preflight is going beyond their training and certification. (does not apply to pilots with A&Ps)

I don't get dirty and I don't know any that do.
 
Captain said:
Easy there go getter. That's a pretty broad stroke. I could flip it over and say any pilot who gets dirty on a preflight is going beyond their training and certification. (does not apply to pilots with A&Ps)

I don't get dirty and I don't know any that do.
Click to expand...
Heck, my hands get a bit dirty just hooking up the tug and pulling the plane out of the hangar so I guess my preflight is sufficient.
 
Rule of three religiously. I once scrubbed a flight because I didn't have and couldn't get a current chart (thing number three). It was automatic, I walked away and didn't even question it. No one is paying me to fly anywhere, and no one ever died in an airplane crash from staying on the ground.

I'm good. Way better than any of you guys. I could probably talk myself into flying through anything. Rule of three.
 
Captain said:
Easy there go getter. That's a pretty broad stroke. I could flip it over and say any pilot who gets dirty on a preflight is going beyond their training and certification. (does not apply to pilots with A&Ps)

I don't get dirty and I don't know any that do.
Click to expand...


I do not need to be an A&P to work on my airplane.

They have a webinar about this very subject. They agree with me, you should be getting your hands dirty during a preflight, if nothing else when you check your oil. If your hands do not get dirty you missed something.

But this is about 3 three strike rule. Its a good rule.

Fly Smart
 
I check my oil with a digital panel under the right wing in accordance with the AFM.

I'm not saying anything is wrong with dirty hands on a preflight. I'm saying is not fair for you to say ANYBODY who doesn't get dirty did a **** poor preflight.

I don't get dirty and I do thorough preflight.
 
steingar said:
No one is paying me to fly anywhere, and no one ever died in an airplane crash from staying on the ground.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. A friend (and mentor) of mine died in an airplane on the ground when another airplane lost control during it's landing and careened into my friend who was just sitting there on a taxiway. Had my friend just performed a T&G and was still in the air that day he'd still be alive.

Don't know how this applies to the three strike thing though.:D
 
I guess I am more in the mojo crowd. It is not so much three strikes and your out, as much as it is if I feel uncomfortable for any reason with the flight then I do not fly. For me it is as simple as that. Often the uncomfortable feeling is something quite concrete, such as bad weather forecasted for my landing area, or something similar, but on one or two occasions it was the karma was just not there,
 
I believe we should state what we are preflighting.

A EAB or SLSA, is a more hands on type of airplane compaired to something that is Ga say a Twin or something.

My eab, I am taking every inspection panel off and looking at everything I can, everyday before any flights.

if I had a 172 I would not be doing this.

I guess I should have not jumped into this convertation. With what I fly you all are over my head when flying and maybe over my head here to.

I believe I will exit stage left.

Goodbye.
 
gismo said:
I beg to differ. A friend (and mentor) of mine died in an airplane on the ground when another airplane lost control during it's landing and careened into my friend who was just sitting there on a taxiway. Had my friend just performed a T&G and was still in the air that day he'd still be alive.

Don't know how this applies to the three strike thing though.:D
Click to expand...

He would have survived had he found three things wrong and driven home. Sorry about your loss, but Murphy can strike anyone anywhere.
 
1600vw said:
I believe we should state what we are preflighting.

A EAB or SLSA, is a more hands on type of airplane compaired to something that is Ga say a Twin or something.

My eab, I am taking every inspection panel off and looking at everything I can, everyday before any flights.

if I had a 172 I would not be doing this.

I guess I should have not jumped into this convertation. With what I fly you all are over my head when flying and maybe over my head here to.

I believe I will exit stage left.

Goodbye.
Click to expand...


It's all good H.A.S., you're doing exactly what you should. I too am guilty of overstating positions and using way too broad of brush on forums.

No need to exit...
 
gismo said:
Heck, my hands get a bit dirty just hooking up the tug and pulling the plane out of the hangar so I guess my preflight is sufficient.
Click to expand...

Why bother? Just fire up the engines in the hangar and pull out. Add reversing props for putting plane back in the hangar. Much easier, don't get your hands dirty.

;)
 
Jaybird180 said:
I have a rule that if I find 3 things wrong with the aircraft on preflight, I won't fly it.
Click to expand...

How is the number of things significant compared to the magnitude of the things you find wrong?

I've not flown because of one thing wrong. I have flown where I've turned up lots of little things on an airplane.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Why bother? Just fire up the engines in the hangar and pull out. Add reversing props for putting plane back in the hangar. Much easier, don't get your hands dirty.

;)
Click to expand...
Did I tell you about my friend with a nice 310 that had just been repainted before he tried to power it out of his hangar? It was winter and there was a ridge of ice under the door that he couldn't pull the plane over so in desperation he fired up and tried to drive out but the pressure from the prop blast blew the door off it's track and that landed on top of the plane crushing the cabin roof. This was a fairly intelligent college professor and neither he nor I can believe he did this.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
How is the number of things significant compared to the magnitude of the things you find wrong?

I've not flown because of one thing wrong. I have flown where I've turned up lots of little things on an airplane.
Click to expand...

My own opinion as to the answer is because people want to take themselves out of the process. By assigning arbitrary values of number of things wrong to scrub a flight they can relax and not work the individuals issues head on. Its easier. ' more safe' for less experienced pilots could be argued...IMO.
 
gismo said:
Did I tell you about my friend with a nice 310 that had just been repainted before he tried to power it out of his hangar? It was winter and there was a ridge of ice under the door that he couldn't pull the plane over so in desperation he fired up and tried to drive out but the pressure from the prop blast blew the door off it's track and that landed on top of the plane crushing the cabin roof. This was a fairly intelligent college professor and neither he nor I can believe he did this.
Click to expand...

I'd hoped the ;) made it obvious I was joking with an obviously bad idea.

That said, wow, what a bad situation. Proof that it was a bad idea.
 
steingar said:
He would have survived had he found three things wrong and driven home. Sorry about your loss, but Murphy can strike anyone anywhere.
Click to expand...

Or if he skipped the checklist and preflight he would have been in the air out of the way...
 
Well, what do you know. I'm actually siding with Captain in a thread. ;)


Relevant for the mojo believers.


http://crispian-jago.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-venn-diagram-of-irrational-nonsense.html
VDOIN0.D.png
 
Last edited:
gismo said:
Did I tell you about my friend with a nice 310 that had just been repainted before he tried to power it out of his hangar? It was winter and there was a ridge of ice under the door that he couldn't pull the plane over so in desperation he fired up and tried to drive out but the pressure from the prop blast blew the door off it's track and that landed on top of the plane crushing the cabin roof. This was a fairly intelligent college professor and neither he nor I can believe he did this.
Click to expand...

Snow in front of the hangar - one of the old man's Navion partners couldn't pull the big heavy Navion out. So he fired it up to taxi out. The only problem... When you apply power, the thrust would compress the nose strut a bit. When the nose came down a little, the tail came up a lot. Enough that the rotating beacon was higher than the bottom of the door.

On the other hand, I did land on my butt this winter trying to get my little LSA over the hump at the door.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
How is the number of things significant compared to the magnitude of the things you find wrong?

I've not flown because of one thing wrong. I have flown where I've turned up lots of little things on an airplane.
Click to expand...


You're right! Quality and quantity are unrelated.

My rule is useful for me because, I still have butterflies until I push the power forward. My 3 strike rule usually means that if I DON'T find 3 things wrong then I MUST fly. :D

Once I take the time to prep and drive to the airport and do all the other nagging tasks, only once have a scrubbed because I wasn't feeling it (a strike there), the other time I switched planes.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Where do you put "real" science in the diagram? The scientific method is more philosophy than than the science you're testing. /flamesuit on
Click to expand...

I think the diagram was made by an Atheist Scientist explaining the human psych.
 
Captain said:
I think the diagram was made by an Atheist Scientist explaining the human psych.
Click to expand...

Either that, or one of those losers that have nothing better to do than to protest Scientology. I noticed that it intersected all the bullocks.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Where do you put "real" science in the diagram? The scientific method is more philosophy than than the science you're testing. /flamesuit on
Click to expand...
It's the Venn Diagram of Irrational Nonsense, Bollocks Section. Thus, there is no place for real science in it.
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
Well, what do you know. I'm actually siding with Captain in a thread. ;)


Relevant for the mojo believers.


http://crispian-jago.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-venn-diagram-of-irrational-nonsense.html
VDOIN0.D.png
Click to expand...
Interesting Venn Diagram, and though much of it is probably appropriate, some of it is very inaccurate. Chiropractry for example does have a scientific biomedical basis to some of what they do. They provide a great service to many who are in pain from back injuries and neck injuries as well as the arthritic conditions of the back and neck. It is traction, massage, and other therapy modalities in a different package than a physical therapist gives you(disclaimer I am not a chiropractor nor related to one. I also have not seen one personally, but have utilized them in my business). Accupuncture also may have a scientific biomedical basis to it but this certainly less clear. However, it is pretty egotistical to discount 5000 years of Chinese medicine based on the narrow minded views of some practioneers of Western Medicine. Think of what future practioners of health care may say about what we do today in 5000 years. I let others comment on some of the other things in the diagram.

As for Mojo, or a badd feeling or whatever you want to call it, if I feel uncomfortable to fly for whatever reason real or imagined I will cancel the flight. I do this for fun, and have that option.
 
1600vw said:
I do not need to be an A&P to work on my airplane.

They have a webinar about this very subject. They agree with me, you should be getting your hands dirty during a preflight, if nothing else when you check your oil. If your hands do not get dirty you missed something.

But this is about 3 three strike rule. Its a good rule.

Fly Smart
Click to expand...

And if I keep my plane clean?

I knew a mechanic who could complete a 100hr with out getting his hands dirty.

If I want to get my hands dirty preflighting my plane I would need to start tearing it apart.
 
douglas393 said:
Interesting Venn Diagram, and though much of it is probably appropriate, some of it is very inaccurate. Chiropractry for example does have a scientific biomedical basis to some of what they do. They provide a great service to many who are in pain from back injuries and neck injuries as well as the arthritic conditions of the back and neck. It is traction, massage, and other therapy modalities in a different package than a physical therapist gives you(disclaimer I am not a chiropractor nor related to one. I also have not seen one personally, but have utilized them in my business). Accupuncture also may have a scientific biomedical basis to it but this certainly less clear. However, it is pretty egotistical to discount 5000 years of Chinese medicine based on the narrow minded views of some practioneers of Western Medicine. Think of what future practioners of health care may say about what we do today in 5000 years. I let others comment on some of the other things in the diagram.

As for Mojo, or a badd feeling or whatever you want to call it, if I feel uncomfortable to fly for whatever reason real or imagined I will cancel the flight. I do this for fun, and have that option.
Click to expand...

I posted this in a vein of humor, after I saw a link to it yesterday.

If I were to make my daily decisions based on superstition and mojo vs. data, math, and physics, my career in engineering would be a bit truncated.

With regards to Chiropractic healing, however, I think once a specific fringe branch links spinal manipulation with cancer and various diseases, it falls into an irrational bullock bucket.

There has to be a sacred cow for just about everyone in that diagram, however. ;)
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
I posted this in a vein of humor, after I saw a link to it yesterday.

If I were to make my daily decisions based on superstition and mojo vs. data, math, and physics, my career in engineering would be a bit truncated.

With regards to Chiropractic healing, however, I think once a specific fringe branch links spinal manipulation with cancer and various diseases, it falls into an irrational bullock bucket.

There has to be a sacred cow for just about everyone in that diagram, however. ;)
Click to expand...
Thus my limitation of chiropractry as a form of physical therapy. I though it was humerous as well, but I have a feeling that the guy that made it did it was serious, and I would suspect is not a big fan of L Ron Hubert, Tom Cruise, the Travolta's, and Scientology.
 
I read a story about Travolta's accusations of sexually harassing men came as retaliation from the scientology leaders for him trying to leave the church.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I'd hoped the ;) made it obvious I was joking with an obviously bad idea.

That said, wow, what a bad situation. Proof that it was a bad idea.
Click to expand...
I knew you were joking and would have assumed that even without the hint. That said, more than once I've had a somewhat subconscious urge to taxi an airplane in or out of a hangar (like a car and garage) but thankfully I've always managed to ignore that urge. You ever had something like that float through your head?
 
gismo said:
I knew you were joking and would have assumed that even without the hint. That said, more than once I've had a somewhat subconscious urge to taxi an airplane in or out of a hangar (like a car and garage) but thankfully I've always managed to ignore that urge. You ever had something like that float through your head?
Click to expand...

Oh, certainly had a bad idea like that, because it would be really nice to taxi out and hit the "close" remote button vs what we have to deal with for hangars. But I repressed it, because I didn't want the doors (that I was always afraid would fall) to actually fall. Plus, having the tugs available helped.

I do know someone who actually did routinely use reverse on his Cheyenne to back it up from the pumps. I was waiting for the day that practice bit him.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Where do you put "real" science in the diagram? The scientific method is more philosophy than than the science you're testing. /flamesuit on
Click to expand...

Actually, you are not far off. The problem comes in when non-scientists latch on to science as the answer to everything with the same fervor as any religious fundamentalist. It is called Scientism and is a very common variety of bollocks. True scientists know that science only addresses a small portion of reality and many scientists hold quite esoteric beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top