Back when I was a VFR only pilot, I couldn’t fly a lot because of clouds or weather. Now that I’m an IFR pilot I can’t seem to get clouds when I’m available to fly. This makes me think that the best way to get VFR weather is to become an IFR pilot.
Of course, it’s so cold here right now that the clouds are probably all sub-freezing.
I’ve been studying safety analysis and process lately and I saw this item about the Washington DC metro:
A team of independent safety inspectors was nearly hit last month by a Metro train that appeared to be traveling at full speed and making no attempt to slow, as required by agency rules.
Wow, way to go; that’s how to impress those safety experts! There’s a history of track worker injury and death with the Metro, and the article says there’s some history of antagonism between train operators and track workers. I have no idea of the issues there - the article doesn’t go into that depth. But clearly the track workers get the short end of that stick.
Safety issues seem to be largely system issues. Safety problems are caused less by single problems but by a set of things happening together in just the wrong combination. In aviation that’s usually taught as the chain of errors leading to an accident. Or sometimes as the swiss-cheese shield against errors - where the holes line up an error can get through.
But then there’s the obvious single problem here - slow down in a work area!
At work I’m tasked with creating what is basically an “introduction to aviation” for people who are not pilots, don’t necessarily want to be pilots, but work in an aviation-related consulting business with the FAA and other aviation entities internationally. Thus, they need to know something about aviation.
What would you want to put in such an introduction? What would you want to see in such an introduction? (Comments and emails much appreciated!)
The kinds of things I have so far include:
I’m in the early stages of pulling this together so would appreciate any suggestions you might have.
In an otherwise irrelevant post today James Fallows has a nice parenthetical comment and proposal:
Yes, children, there was a “Department of War” all through American history, until the creation of the “Department of Defense” in 1947. More was involved in creation of the DOD than the change in name; but in retrospect “Department of War” seems a breathtakingly and admirably honest term. I think we should change the Pentagon’s name back to “Department of War,” and re-assign “Department of Defense” to the organization that now bears the loathsome name “Department of Homeland Security.” But I digress.
I think that’s a good idea. The DoD’s been involved in more offensive action than defensive for quite a while now. Truth in advertising would be good. And frankly the “Homeland” in DHS gives me the creeps. It’s too much like the wrong side in WWII.
