B767 From Norway, joined Feb 2008, 131 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3644 times:
Today the safety in commercial aviation is fantastic.The fatal accident rate for a A320 or B737Ng is around 0,15 accident per million flight.But in the early jet age,things were different.TCAS and EGPWS didn,t excist, nor did crm or realistic simulators .When I heard the numbers of 707,s PAN AM and TWA lost from late fiftees to the middle of seventhtees,I got a little shockhed.Later on I have heard that the safety record for these companies were rather good.The safety record of the DC8 and 707 today is about the same.A little over 4 accidents per million flights,which indicate that the record was even worse in the earlier days.I think Pan am lost 3 707,s in 1975.
Question to the many old pilots on this forum:How did pilots cope with the safety standard of the old day,s.Did it at any time take away the joy of going to work?Did they think much about accident,s?Could pilot,s be afraid if they know the weather was bad on the flights following?And how was it to combinine family life with a risk job?
Soku39 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1797 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3614 times:
Well as a young pilot/flight instructor I can tell you this. Flying a light 4 seat piston single engine airplane is statistically some of the least safe flying you can find, unlike airlines there is little standardization, and very little excess thrust. However I do it every day, multiple times a day, often times with people I don't know, some of the time in bad weather for a plane as incapable as your run of the mill 172 or Cherokee. That being said the job is every bit as enjoyable as when I started. Yes it's in the back of your head when you have a close call, but at the end of the day you are in control of the airplane. If you're gut feels that something is wrong, get the hell out of wherever you are and that's all there is to it. I am interested to see what the jet jockeys have to say about it.
B767 From Norway, joined Feb 2008, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3590 times:
Thank you for your reply Soku39.I may wery well be wrong,but in your case could your dream of becoming a jet jockey(If that is your dream)make the risk,s more easy to accept?.I have heard several stories of commercial pilots who become afraid of light aircraft after flying the big ones for a couple of years.
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8957 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3585 times:
Quoting B767 (Thread starter): How did pilots cope with the safety standard of the old day,s.Did it at any time take away the joy of going to work?
I suspect they probably considered the safety record of the time as impressive as we consider our present A320/737NG safety records.
Just as we marvel at the relatively poor safety record of the 707/DC-8 era, they probably marveled at the relatively poor safety record of the B247/DC-3 days. In both cases, everyone uses all available experience and technology to maximize safety. It's all relative.
Does that make it any safer ? well.... yes and no.
Both a/c are more safe then they were in their active period but of course both of them can't be compared to modern standards.
Although the F.27 is a pretty sturdy a/c which flies just as well one 1 instead of 2 engines, the DC2 is kind of another story though.
Do I think about it ? well..... yes and no.
While doing maintenance on the ground you are always concerned about safety but when the decision has been made by everybody involved to go flying the thinking stops and you just concentrate on the job ahead and that's it really.
Soku39 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1797 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6): Another factor is meteorology. The 707 accident in Japan where the aircraft was ripped apart by atmospheric effects probably wouldn't happen today since that area would have been avoided.
Well there's that too, however in light aircraft without TCAS I am convinced that if I die it will be on a severe clear day. Probably a Saturday or Sunday when pilots that don't know what they're doing seemingly are out to kill pilots that do know what they're doing. People will do anything other than fly a standard pattern, and I've had more close calls with midairs by about 2000% percent than any other threat in flight. After becoming a flight instructor sometimes I think aviation shouldn't necessarily be just a hobby.
Atlturbine From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 158 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3482 times:
Another thing to consider is that many of the jet crashes in the 60's & early 70's were attributed to pilots transitioning from much slower piston engine airliners to jets with much faster approach speeds. (staying ahead of the airplane) All of the things mentioned in this thread thus far are true, like most aviation accidents there is always more than one single cause for a crash.
To the World you might be One Person but to One Person you might be the World
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6818 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
Quoting B767 (Thread starter): When I heard the numbers of 707,s PAN AM and TWA lost from late fiftees to the middle of seventhtees,I got a little shockhed.Later on I have heard that the safety record for these companies were rather good.
Well, crew resource management (CRM) didn't exist back then, and God help anyone who questioned the captain's decision making. Not all captains back then had the God complex, though. I think the advent of CRM is a much bigger reason for the improved safety than the equipment advances alone.
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6): It's not just the aircraft, it is also in very large part pilot training. Today's pilot is much better trained than your 1950s pilot, what with CRM and procedures being integral parts of the job.
Thanks, NASA for all the human factors studies in the '70s and '80s, and the NTSB (and all it's sister agencies around the world) for the accident investigations of 1950's and 1960's accidents that uncovered many of the human factors at the root cause of the accidents...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17494 posts, RR: 66
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3442 times:
KELPkid mentions the investigations. This is crucially important. In the old days aircraft would often just "disappear". That doesn't happen a lot anymore. Modern crash investigations are spare-no-expense deals. Combined with flight recorders they contribute greatly to the safety of future operations.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
You're probably thinking of 1973-74. Pan Am lost 5 707s in 9 months between July 1973 and April 1974 with 315 fatalities. One was a terrorist attack on a parked aircraft at FCO just prior to departure for BEY. Another involved a freighter.
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 9138 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3260 times:
Quoting Soku39 (Reply 1): Flying a light 4 seat piston single engine airplane is statistically some of the least safe flying you can find
Only because of the unacceptable risks many general aviation pilots take on a regular basis, alluded to in your later post about clear days. The aircraft themselves and their equipment are generally fine.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3240 times:
Airline pilot 'safety' is very much related to original training in the respective type.
I personally trained at PanAmerican on the B707, then went directly into the LHS at a small charter company, flying the old straight-pipe models of the 707-320.
None of us 'crashed' because we all had trained at PanAm, the the training there, at the time (early seventies) was absolutely the best that could be had...period.
TWA was a close second.
AA, a very distant third.
DeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3225 times:
I think the dangers of the old days are still there, lurking, just, in different forms.
The training has come light years from the 60s, say. Airline's own training departments, or large companies like FlightSafety, have brought aviation safety to a new level, and it's only getting better.
Technology like EGPWS, TCAS, to name a few, are now industry standard on transport category aircraft. Technology that only Gulfstreams seem to boast these days (HUD's with FLIR capability, Synthetic Vision, RAAS, etc) will one day be mainstream I'm sure. Behind these systems are competent pilots.
But those same competent pilots are still just as vulnerable to the demons of complacency or error as the days of Pan Am 707's (and Frank Abagnale ).
It doesn't matter if you're strapped into that Gulfstream, or that C172 on a weekend jaunt- as Soku said, I'd more expect to buy it on a crystal clear blue Florida day out in our T-34, then out in radar controlled IMC with all the bells and whistles on the Gstream. You get accustomed to hearing TA's and RA's when necessary, suddenly those niceties go away in the piston equipment.
Zappbrannigan From Australia, joined Oct 2008, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 3027 times:
Quoting B767 (Reply 2): I have heard several stories of commercial pilots who become afraid of light aircraft after flying the big ones for a couple of years.
It's funny you should mention that. Just about every airline pilot I've spoken to recently about their flying history and GA experience, says roughly the same thing - thinking back, they cannot believe some of the things they did routinely while flying the light piston stuff. Not illegal actions - just actions that are completely foreign in the modern commercial jet environment, and would no doubt be considered foolish. Normally something along the lines of "I can't believe we didn't have any catastrophic accidents while I was at Company X".
As Soku said - I'd say by the time you're flying the big stuff, bells and whistles or not - you've probably already done the most "risky" flying you'll ever do in your career quite a few years ago.