Originally Posted by DeepFriar
Cujet
I'm 100% convinced that general aviation is risky, and there are many things pilots do that unnecessarily add to the risk.
It's a matter of degree isn't it. Millions of hours flown safely every year in GA. Billions of miles driven in cars each year with 30K+ casualties, deaths I mean. (Remember to back out the motorcycle deaths from the car wreck statistic). I didn't know Experimentals were 6x the accident rate of GA. Terrible. But to then extend the " OMG we're all gonna die" dynamic to all of GA is not fair. Two different animals. Sincerely sorry to hear about your friend. Those are hard days.
FWIU, operating a piston GA aircraft is about as risky as riding a bike on the street using the metric of passenger miles or hours of operation.
The thing is, most of the risk associated with riding a bike involves collision, not much of a threat in a light aircraft. Midairs aren't that common and there are no trees or guardrails in the sky.
The risks associated with GA flying are mostly manageable by the pilot flying, from what he spends on maintenance to what conditions he operates in, consistent with his skills, experience, ratings and currency.
Even with a homebuilt, as long as the builder pays attention and doesn't just gloss over building procedures he doesn't really understand, he should end up with a safe aircraft, although it may be one that couldn't meet the certification requirements of a type certified aircraft.
GA risks are largely determined by the judgment the pilot brings to the task, so the good news is that flying need not be at all dangerous.
Finally, any GA pilot needs to accept that while the ancient design engines are very reliable, they do occasionally fail, so the pilot needs to be aware of the possibility of an off airport forced landing. Better to land on a street or in a soybean field than to try and fail to stretch a glide back to the airport. You can always coast your car or bike to the side of the road while you have to land an airplane.
