Sign in to follow this  
Guest CRJ700FO

NASA...Air Safety Survey? What Survey

Recommended Posts

Somewhat disturbing to say the least. Not the survey, but NASA's decision not to publish.In aviation, sunshine is the best and only medicine.MHO,bthttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071022/ap_on_..._safety_secretsMOFFETT FIELD, Calif. - Anxious to avoid upsetting air travelers, NASA is withholding results from an unprecedented national survey of pilots that found safety problems like near collisions and runway interference occur far more frequently than the government previously recognized. ...Just last week, NASA ordered the contractor that conducted the survey to purge all related data from its computers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

People fill out NASA forms on a daily basis. All it is, is a way for pilots to report something they think they will get in trouble for or are concerned about. Nearly every day there is at least one of our pilots getting into a near collision, it's nothing new. Airlines also have reports like this along with NASA reports. They make for some interesting reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, a GA pilot that only flies on weekends may consider seeing another airplane that's a half mile away as a near collision, where an airline pilot wouldn't even give that a second thought.John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somewhat agreed, John, but 1/2 mile in my lowly Piper Dakota is pretty close, depending what is closing on me (closing speed). I've had my share of near misses over 32 years (some a lot closer than 2600'), and do not assume that an ailrine pilot is better able to judge them.These days I deal with TIS, and that lovely, English lady on my Garmin saying, "Traffic" everytime I turn around. It's never been an issue, but sometimes I have had to touch the yoke to be sure it was not.I do agree that exposing reality to the flying public might not be the wisest thing to do, but I do want to point out that we GA pilots are not exactly clue less either. ;)Some of those GA folks who do not fly often, often did at one time, and many do have a good deal of experience. Many still do fly quite often.Don't sell us GA pilots short, okay? ;)Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...R_FORUM_LOU.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have also had a few nears..why I like my zeon traffic detector as an extra set of eyes.However-when you consider the car on the opposite side of the road 1 foot from you going 70 miles an hour down a highway-and the number of daily car collisions-I think perspective is needed.The media has hyped bird flu, the flu,mad cow, sars-now can't find anything else-aviation is always a good news story that sells.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Geofa..,I agree hype is a media staple, but the media did not commission the survey, NASA did. The media did not order the destruction of the results, NASA did.Those facts alone, regardless of the findings disturb me.BT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>People fill out NASA forms on a daily basis. All it is, is a>way for pilots to report something they think they will get in>trouble for or are concerned about. Nearly every day there is>at least one of our pilots getting into a near collision, it's>nothing new. >>Airlines also have reports like this along with NASA reports.>They make for some interesting reading.this is not the ASRS program. it is a separate program that NASA conducted individual interviews, etc to collect information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the acronymn I was looking for. I know they are not the same but I was explaining there are many different reportings about incidents that aren't shown to the public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here in UK we got told several years back that a collision over London was not a matter of 'if' but 'when' it would happen. We still don't walk the streets with our heads skyward, well mayby I do but not for that reason, I often like to think 'I wonder where they're off to'.But we are fully aware of the danger and people still choose to fly with the major budget airlines. Personally I figure 'hang on a minute, if the others are charging x ammount, and the budgets are charging only R ammount, then where are they cutting costs?'Crux of it is though I do think we are more aware over here of air safety because of our tight airspace, I mean we're right on the track for everything between the US and EU, as well as our own Atlantic traffic.I think it really is a matter of time before a large airliner goes down in a city, as happened in NY in '01, only it won't be a small airliner it will be a large one, and maybe 2. I think they really need some means of making sure ATC and Aircraft understand each other without fail. And with the skies filling up as they are, and the distances becoming less, it is becoming inherantly less safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This always brings up the 'heated' debate: human vs machine. If we are going to keep increasing the number of airplanes in the sky then, eventually we are going to have to rely more and more on automation and less on human intervention. This technology is presently in the making and will not be readily available, however, as we've seen in present train travel in parts of Europe and the US, for example, when you remove the human element from the system, you generally increase safety. Will accidents still happen? Ofcourse they will. Anytime you send an object into motion it stands a chance of hitting something or someone. Or, as the old saying goes...."s**t happens".John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>...Just last week, NASA ordered the contractor that conducted>the survey to purge all related data from its computers.Frankly I don't see any 'big news' or scandal here. Unless the data is put in the right perspective and effort is made to provide unambiguous interpretation of the data it is better to destroy the data. Otherwise it only serves as cheap bait for incompetent journalists.Moffett Field is where I work ... ;)Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this