A comparison of general aviation accidents involving airline pilots and instrument-rated private pilots

Abstract Introduction: The extremely low accident rate for U.S air carriers relative to that of general aviation (?1 and ?60/million flight hours respectively) partly reflects advanced airman certification, more demanding recurrency training stringent operational regulations. However, whether such skillset/training/regulations translate into improved safety airline pilots operating in the environment is unknown aim this study. Methods: Accidents (1998–2017) involving instrument-rated private (PPL-IFR) non-revenue light aircraft were identified from NTSB database. An online survey informed exposure both pilot cohorts. Statistics used proportion testing Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: In degraded visibility, 0 40% (?2 p?=?0.043) fatal accidents PPL-IFR airmen due in-flight loss-of-control, respectively. For landing accidents, under-represented mishaps related airspeed mismanagement (p?=?0.036) but showed a dis-proportionate count (2X) ground loss-of-directional control (p?=?0.009) latter likely reflecting preference tail-wheel aircraft. FAA rule violation-related by was >2X (7 vs. 3%) airmen. Moreover, disproportionate p?=?0.021) flights below legal minimum altitudes. Not performing an official preflight weather briefing or intentionally instrument conditions without IFR plan represented 43% infractions. Conclusions: These findings inform deficiencies for: (a) pilots, landing/ground operations lack 14CFR 91 familiarization regulations regarding altitudes (b) loss-of-control poor speed management. Practical Applications: airmen, training/recurrency should focus on unusual attitude recovery managing approach speeds. Airline seek additional instructional time become familiar with rules covering