4 ms·
The general public cannot assess the risk of riding in a Taxi, bus, uber, etc. any better than taking a flight with a private pilot.
by sbuttgereit 11y ago
The general public cannot assess the risk of riding in a Taxi, bus, uber, etc. any better than taking a flight with a private pilot.
- vkou 11y agoNear-100% of the public owns a driver's license. 100% of the public has logged thousands of hours on the road, be it at the wheel, or in the passenger's seat. If you feel like your life is in danger, you can always ask your driver to stop, and let you out. Near-100% of the public wouldn't have the first clue about what it takes to fly a two-seater aircraft, how dangerous the conditions they are flying in are, and most definitely can't ask the pilot to pull over half-way through the flight. Your claim is farcical.
- FussyZeus 11y agoI take issue with your claim that the majority of the populace knows how to drive. My experience differs strongly. All kidding aside, the numbers are a big issue. How many cars are on the road versus how many planes in the sky? Add to it the fact that in the sky you have three dimensions of completely free travel ability to evade accidents, where in a car, you typically have at most two and more commonly one completely safe area to "duck into" to avoid an accident. Plus, no one (at least in my mind) is advocating that anyone gets to FLY the plane, they're saying anyone should be able to fly IN a plane. You don't need to know shit about driving a car to know whether or not a car you're getting into is safe, and same goes for a plane. If the exhaust is dragging on the ground and a rear door is missing, you don't need to know anything about cars to know that's probably not the safest car ever.
- sbuttgereit 11y agoNot a lot of of time to respond, but my first observations about your comment are: 1) How many pilots are actually unlicensed? I suspect given the relative difficulty of getting access to aircraft vs. cars that the more pilots in the air are of greater competence than the average driver by a long shot. Moreover, I'll bet that the examination standards for pilot licenses are somewhat more rigorous than the average drivers license. 2) Have you failed to assess that the greatest likely danger in a road trip is not the driver giving you a ride, but other drivers on the road? I use to commute between LA and the Bay Area every week for a couple of years. I guarantee you that not everyone you encounter is sane or competent to be on the road. And yeah, in the middle of nowhere on I-5 (or better still, I-15 between LA and Los Vegas close to Death Valley) you can ask to get out of the car if you are uncomfortable with the way the person is driving... but get out in the middle of nowhere and then what? The complexity of the driving environment and the relatively low barrier to entry for cars don't make the risk assessment as simple as you would like to believe. Finally, unless you are a pilot (you may be) seems like you're merely a member of that ignorant general public that can't make such assessments. If that's the case, how can you possibly be in a position to make a judgement? Or are you just better than everyone else and it's your paternalistic instincts taking over? EDIT: To be clear... I am not arguing that general aviation is safer than driving (last I looked it's not). But I am arguing that the risk assessment may not be a difficult as people here are making it out to be, especially in light of the complexity of driving on the road.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- munificent 11y agoIs this... are you serious or is this some weird rhetorical gambit? Do you really think driving in a motor vehicle—which most passengers are also qualified and certified to do—usually on surface streets less than 40 MPH, is actually equivalent to flying in an airplane?
- F2468 11y agoSir, please keep logic out of this.