3 ms·

Yes we can argue how effective the regulations are etc and yes there is a validity to the fact that they can fail since they clearly have. What I was talking ab

Yes we can argue how effective the regulations are etc and yes there is a validity to the fact that they can fail since they clearly have. What I was talking about is that the concept of regulations exist because we don't just trust the pilots on any inherent basis so we need checks like regulations which try to shift the trust from the individual to the process which is much more comforting to the average passenger. Air travel is weird in the sense that pilots do have an immense amount of power and the fact that there have been so few pilot suicide cases shows that regulations for that are somewhat working.

Nextgrid 2mo ago
> which is much more comforting to the average passenger Indeed I wonder how much of aviation-related security theatre is more for the perception of safety than any measurable safety improvements. > there have been so few pilot suicide cases I'm not sure it's conclusively possible to attribute this to regulations without a "control case" of a different profession lacking such regulations and that has a higher rate of murder-suicide-by-vehicle. It could just be that the low rates are because there just aren't that many suicidal people willing to kill innocent bystanders in the process. To be clear I'm not arguing for less regulations as I'm not qualified and don't have all the facts, but bringing up a counterpoint that the current regulations might cause people to conceal their mental health troubles until they escalate (and the current low - but non-zero - rates of incidents are in spite of the regulations rather than because).