Comments on: Piloting, Sex, and Sports

By: Tony O'Brien

Tony O'Brien — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:19:00 +0000

We have all learned journalism is by trade no longer a proud tradition. Why should we be so surprised by an article with no research, relevant point or real basis?

These hacks who write articles with biased slants look not for real news but to sensationalize their byline. We can only hope our Nation figures this out and refuses to read what is called news.

By: Josh Johnson

Josh Johnson — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 23:20:39 +0000

I find a fair amount of comfort in reviewing accident data. Flying is kind of like living in a big city, generally safe, but you can sure find trouble if you want to. In reviewing the Nall report, if we would agree to: (1) Never attempt VFR flight into IFR conditions and (2) Maintain minimum safe altitudes (i.e. – no buzzing) we reduce our risk of dying in an airplane by something like 90%.
In this case, I likely am as safe or safer than driving my car. The difference is that I can control many more aspects of the risk I am taking than I can when driving.

By: Kevin Collins

Kevin Collins — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 21:41:18 +0000

Bruce, thanks for the link! It would have been nice if the response had refuted the articler’s questionable conclusions, but I suppose one has only limited space in which to express one’s views in a letter to the editor. I’m glad the NBAA pointed out some of the obvious gaps in the Ms. Lublin’s logic.

By: Bruce Landsberg

Bruce Landsberg — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 01:14:43 +0000

Kevin –

Here is the link provided by NBAA: http://www.nbaa.org/news/letters/20120314-wall-street-journal.php

By: Vince Latona

Vince Latona — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 04:28:19 +0000

Nice article Bruce….the case can be made that driving to work is unsafe. Recall the 55 MPH speed limit going to be raised to 65 and the media blathering that ‘babies bodies will be splattered across the highways.’

If saving lives is the goal then slowing down will definitely work. How about 20 MPH national speed limit. That will save lives. 10 MPH will save even more. Flying at 200 knots is more dangerous than driving at 30 MPH. And the message we are to take from this is ……?

By: Robert Tompkins CFI/CFII

Robert Tompkins CFI/CFII — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:32:30 +0000

It is clear that this “professor” needs some additional coursework on “risk management”. As a business school finance professor, I can speak with some experience that it is sub-optimal to eliminate all risk. As a pilot and flight instructor, I know that when I fly there is a risk. However, aviation teaches concrete risk management assessment skills and means to minimize those risks. Such skills transfer extremely well to managing businesses. In some ways, flying is the best possible way to acquire an efficient “risk management” approach. I would refute the professor’s contention that one negative event, such as the accident he refers to is sufficient to draw robust conclusions. The professor should do a proper academic study of the performance of companies run by pilot CEOs versus companies in the same industry run by non-pilot CEOs. If he finds that pilot run companies perform worse (or have higher volatility in earnings – translated as “risk”), he can provide empirical evidence that pilot CEOs are excessive risk takers. Otherwise, this Professor is making broad claims with only anecdotal evidence and that is bad science.

Professor Dr. Robert G. Tompkins, Ph.D. CFI/CFII/MEI

By: John Valentine

John Valentine — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:02:37 +0000

Bruce, this man displays all the signs of a mid-level academic horse’s patoot(sorry, channeling Col. Potter), to whit: He displays obvious signs of self-importance and a need to self-aggrandize and denegrate other people to puff up his image against his own wildly displayed insecurity. He tries to overcompensate for his inadequacies by writing wild papers in which he clearly demonstrates his ignorance of the subject matter, and does so in a most inflammatory fashion. His ‘facts’ are so weak that he clearly could not get it passed an objective peer review by real aviation professionals who live outside his tiny little ivory tower. If this knee-walking turkey of a ‘paper’ is ever listed as having passed academic review, it will only be because it was reviewed by pallid little creatures with equally disturbed agendas. I would suggest it be reviewed by actual, competent academics such as a professor or head of aviation studies at Unversity of North Dakota, or perhaps Professor Bob Hamilton of the aviation program at Middle Georgia College. (I will point out that there is nothing new under the sun, even in exactly this type of attempt by bean counters and money weasels to straightjacket the creative spirit and joy of living that the top rank of CEOs display. I submit Robert A. Heinlein’s classic story from 1949, “The Man Who Sold The Moon.” Slap these critters down whenever they appear, and then tell them – ‘Nothing of importance here, move along. These are not the ‘droids you are seeking.’

By: Kevin Collins

Kevin Collins — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:46:00 +0000

Bruce, please provide a link to the NBAA rebuttal once it is available. I imagine you plan to do that anyway, but I just wanted to put in my vote to see it. With respect to the content of the response, I’d love to see Ms. Lublin publish the sources for her statements regarding aviation as the riskiest form of transportation and aviation’s link to a “sensation-seeking personality”.

Thanks!

By: Bob Williams

Bob Williams — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:30:15 +0000

Bruce,
Good comments. Agree with Brian that NBAA and AOPA need to rebut this particular piece and do whatever is appropriate to stay in front of the public debate on flying in general and GA in particular.

Thank you for your continued advocacy.

By: Bruce Landsberg

Bruce Landsberg — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:40:47 +0000

Brian….

We collaborated with NBAA who is responding to WSJ. Aside from the fun I had in writing this for our audience, this is exactly why the AOPA Foundation is engaged in a perceptionof GA education process.

You’ll see more on our website going forward to inform pilots BUT the key point of this project is not us talking to ourselves but to non-aviation people who only know what silliness they see or read in the media.

Thanks for yor thoughts.