here is a better one “don’t crash”
It’s very much the same as “don’t stall when turning base” as Paul B is talking about. According to him, all the acres of forest used to make the paper to write about that, including every single accident report, have not made even a tiny dent in the statistics 
This also includes every AOA display that has been installed in GA aircrafts.
Yet, all it takes is to get our heads out of our behinds Still, here we are discussing accident reports.
IMO lots of us are indeed capable of getting hour heads at the right place, at least more than others. Maybe this is because we know from experience that this sort of things can easily happen to us if we start letting it slip. While the ones who crash and burn only were unlucky with the first defining experience, when the rest got lucky? Who knows?
Ibra wrote:
That is not a procedure or technique at least you can’t test it objectively,
Agreed! A very colloquial expression of a person who is resistant to applying good judgement and skill, and following good practices. More to the point, a person who personally has been normalizing their deviation from the good practice that they were taught in their initial pilot training, and is resistant to to being told so.
I’ve certainly had many occasions while flying, when I’ve said to myself: “I’m about to do something unusual, what additional safety measures will I apply to make this unusual action safe?”.
As with most things in life, admitting that you have a problem, is the first step!
Don’t do low level aerobatics
Flying the unofficial VOR approach at Goodwood, the NDB/DME at welshpool or the NDB/DME at halfpenny green is far saver than scud running.
Simply getting our heads out of our a$$es helps tremendously
That is not a procedure or technique at least you can’t test it objectively, here is a better one “don’t crash”
LeSving wrote:
Simply getting our heads out of our a$$es helps tremendously
Yes. I never thought I was invincible, though after a failed routing training flight, during which I took my eye off my student at the wrong time, and woke up in hospital four days later, I’ve been getting more risk adverse – so head out of a$$ as much as I can!
I keep a list on my phone titled „GA fails“ where I note down my f—k ups and some keywords. It’s a long list!
Highlights of recent times:
Ferried a plane on short notice, didn’t realize it had two static port plug-sticks and happily flew with one still inserted. It was still there after landing.
Forgot Stratux on roof and blew it off during engine start.
I now do a final, slow, focused walkaround and „squat check“ (squat down, look at plane carefully) as last thing before getting aboard.
I think Paul Bertorelly hits the nail pretty good (as usual). Simply getting our heads out of our a$$es helps tremendously
“Just replacing private pilot with a pair of professional pilots, and the risk is close to none.”
Or: Just replace the private pilot with a more current private pilot, the aircraft with one with more inertia, and the airfield with one meeting international standards.
The reference to a “just land” approach is specific to helicopters, which, for my experience seem to be regularly flown to landing spots from which a go around would be impossible. These make me (low skill helicopter pilot) nervous, so I like to approach to a hover site, which if not go around able, at least has more room to adjust my approach.
As for airplanes, there have been a few water landings I’ve flown from which a go around would not be possible because of terrain – in one way, out the other. In these cases, of course (like a forced landing) you’re extra focused on the approach being as good as possible, as far back as possible. That said, in an SEP, every approach could become a forced approach, so having a plan to restabilize [a perhaps suddenly different] approach is a good idea. My present plane has a less than admirable glide ratio, and my home runway is two miles of forest up to my fence, so I fly high approaches, which others might struggle to see as having a nice “gate” anywhere until short final. A curving approach keeps me over fields longer, and I used to fly those in my previous plane, but a curved approach is even less stable in my present plane, so straight in high is my preference.
Another example of an approach becoming less stable can be found in the Cessna Caravan. You’re set up just beautifully, and really proud of what a great approach you’re in, with the power set to about 500 foot pounds of torque, and you reduce power… The propeller blade angle changes as designed, and it really begins to slow down! You just destabilized you own approach, with a power change which would have been hardly noticeable in a piston powered plane. Great, if you’re trying to change your approach at the last few moments to tuck it in somewhere tight with good skill. Poor, if you were trying to just fly a smooth approach. The experience to know that a Caravan is designed with that characteristic can prevent you to need to apply skill to fix things, or a sudden go around….
@Pilot_DAR, whilst I concurred with what you wrote in the early part of your last post, I cannot agree with the “just land” approach. All you have to do is read incidence and accident reports from around the world and one thing leaps out and that is the amount of times pilots would have been better to go round.
I, for one would not fly with anyone who thinks he can always pull off a good landing when being unstable going into the round out,and that includes some top class aerobatic pilots in aerobatic aircraft.
