Message-ID: <367F1249.2C5A@ibm.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:30:17 -0600
From: Snowbird <snbird@ibm.net>
Reply-To: snbird@ibm.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Re: no preflight
References: <19981221213536.14559.00002719@ngol02.aol.com> <19981221214715.22328.00002339@ng117.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 32.100.136.72
X-Trace: 22 Dec 1998 03:46:49 GMT, 32.100.136.72
Organization: IBM.NET
Lines: 58
X-Notice: Items posted that violate the IBM.NET Acceptable Use Policy
X-Notice: should be reported to postmaster@ibm.net
X-Complaints-To: postmaster@ibm.net
Path: news.jprc.com!dca1-feed2.news.digex.net!dca1-hub1.news.digex.net!digex!newsfeed.cwix.com!165.87.194.242!newsm2.ibm.net!ibm.net!news1.ibm.net!32.100.136.72
Xref: news.jprc.com rec.aviation.student:42595

NAv8or wrote:
 
> >Some owners prefer to find those by doing a post-flight inspection,
> >instead of waiting to find them in the next pre-flight.
> >Some owners go spend an hour or two in the hangar after each
> >cross-country flight.
 
> Granted, but "some" doesn't mean all, else why so many mishaps due to > failures which should have been found on preflight?

Not to rain on the parade, but...it's certainly documented that
sometimes people preflight, and miss items which should have been
found.  Perhaps at times an omission, but at others, I believe it
is "Looking but Not Seeing" phenomenon.  I don't think it can all
be written up to "doesn't preflight".

I think Rod's point was, just because someone sees a person walk up
to the plane, do a cursory walk around and hop in, it is not appropriate
to conclude that they haven't preflighted and perhaps rather more
thoroughly than most people.

Maybe they have, and maybe they haven't, the point is worry about
yourself and your own preflight, not about calling other people names.
Especially as a student.

There ARE a lot of important things whose condition just can't be 
known from the POH preflight checklist, but which probably should
be checked more regularly than every 100 hrs.  And at 100 hrs is the
mechanic in a rented plane really checking it, or just giving it
the ol' paper treatment.

> >I mean no offense, and perhaps shouldn't post this, but your comment
> >seems as superficial as the preflight checklist in the POH.
 
> I disagree.  The student who posted the original to this thread 
> made a valid point.  If people "know" their airplanes so well, why 
> do jokers try to take off with control locks installed

They are perhaps, not the same people?

> I do agree, though, that you should not have posted the apparently 
> slamming end to your statement.. 

Perhaps not, but a student who slams other pilots who in fact
may know a great deal more about the planes they fly, and pay a
lot more attention to those planes condition, as
"short-cutting(complacent, cutting corners", because they don't conduct
the same preflight he does every time they stop to take a 
leak and put fuel in the tanks, will tend draw slams in return.  

Human nature, doncha know; we find what we bring.

Maybe they are short cutting or neglecting a preflight, maybe 
they know their plane very well and know exactly what they want 
to look at and why and when and how.  But I tend to agree with Rod, 
it's superficial to assume it is all the former.

Snowbird

