FAA Instrument Rating Airplane (IRA)Aeromedical and ADMHard
A pilot continues an IFR flight into an area of known icing despite pilot reports of moderate rime ice, reasoning, 'Other pilots have had problems in there, but I've flown through icing before and it's never been a big deal for me.' This reasoning best illustrates which hazardous attitude?
- AInvulnerability
- BAnti-authority
- CResignation
- DImpulsivity
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: A. Invulnerability
Invulnerability is the hazardous attitude reflected in the belief that 'accidents happen to others but not to me.' The pilot's reasoning that prior personal experience makes the current icing hazard unlikely to affect them, despite evidence from other pilots, demonstrates this attitude and its associated antidote: 'It could happen to me.'
Why the other options are wrong
- B. Anti-authority involves resisting rules or instructions, not underestimating personal risk based on past experience.
- C. Resignation involves feeling that nothing the pilot does will make a difference, not overconfidence in personal immunity.
- D. Impulsivity involves acting hastily without thought, not a reasoned (though flawed) belief in personal immunity.
Invulnerability (Hazardous Attitude)
A hazardous attitude in which a pilot believes accidents happen to other people but not to themselves, leading to underestimation of real risk.
- Antidote thought: 'It could happen to me'
- Often reinforced by a history of past flights without incident
- Can lead pilots to disregard PIREPs or warnings applicable to current conditions
Memory trick: Feeling immune to ice is invulnerability's trap