Safe But Sorry

Bumpass Hell in Mt. Lassen National Park - photo by JoAnn Sturman

“The safest flight is the one that never takes off.”
Lt. Colonel Mike Micheals 1976

Scott Sturman
fliesinyoureyes.com

“Regulations are just guidelines,” Captain Henry told lieutenants Bob Wade, W.R. Priskna and me when we reported to the detachment. “You’re supposed to fly 500 feet above the ground unless there is a good reason not to - like takeoffs and landings. But if you fly like that, you’ll never be any good. We fly low level as soon as the helicopter is out of controlled airspace and radar conduct. I know you’re going to do it. Just don’t get caught or have an accident.”

So with this advice in mind and being twenty-three years old, Captain Henry’s words were an open invitation to push the envelop and see what the helicopter could do. Some pilots played it by the book and rarely if ever deviated from regulations, while others rarely complied with them unless someone was looking. For most of the latter group aggressive flying was not so much a matter of recklessness, but an attempt to master flying a helicopter.

Excepting check rides, several of us probably never conducted a flight without inadvertently or intentionally breaking some regulation. The price of failure was high: death or injury if we crashed or loss of our flight wings if caught. We low leveled inches above the ground while flying full speed, landed in remote, confined areas high in the mountains under all weather conditions, chased javelinas along the arroyos, buzzed villages in Mexico, performed autorotations to the ground rather than power recover, practiced hovering autorotations from 75 feet rather than 10 feet, flew to over 18000 feet without oxygen, gave unofficial flight orientations to coeds from the local college, and practiced sham air to air dogfights with other Hueys. As my roommate Lt. Bob Wade observed, “Twice a day we strap the chopper on our back and see what it will do.”

Our air rescue unit was not involved in combat, but for not being shot at we were very good at what we did. How can an aircraft commander who has never flown on the edge during training flights be expected to fly a hoist rescue mission at night in a narrow mountain canyon with buffeting winds with the temperature over 100 degrees? He probably cannot. He will survive by aborting the mission and informing his commander that it is “too dangerous,” or kill himself and the crew while attempting it. The victim may die for lack of immediate medical attention, but usually commanders will not criticize a cautious pilot for being “too safe”. On the other hand, a pilot who has mastered these maneuvers during formal and informal training sessions is the victim’s best chance for survival. See Night Rescue

What if you are not a natural leader or a good pilot but want to make the Air Force a career? Moreover, you are unwilling to learn complicated aircraft maneuvers from more experienced, savvy pilots, who could teach you the tricks of the trade. Under these circumstances another profession would seem to be the only recourse - unless your commander’s skill set and personality are similar to your own. The ploy won’t work with dynamic commanders like Captain Henry, but it’s a different story with the likes of the insipid Lt. Colonel Michaels. In the latter case dig the chap stick and knee pads out of the closet, and in no time the other pilots in the unit will be working for you. It is the path to the top for many professions nowadays: safe, calculated, vacuous, and self serving.

Politicians and elitist bureaucrats who have mastered the system favor those who think like they do or at least those who tell them everything they want to hear. They detest the Bell shaped curve and those troublesome outliers who challenge their authority - it is best to squish the graph from both sides and place everyone in the middle. Within a generation or two the boat rockers will be blended into an amalgam of utter sameness. Lives controlled to the most minuscule detail by pilots who can’t fly, businessmen who can’t make money, and lawyers who can’t seem to tell the truth. Hearing them preach, it is a small price to pay for security.

In June of this year in Berlin, Vaclav Klaus, an economist and president of the Czech Republic, lectured a visiting group from Hillsdale College about the failures of the European Union.

“Why is Europe less successful and less relevant today? I see it basically as a result of two interrelated phenomena - the European integration process on the one hand, and the evolution of the European economic and social system on the other - both of which have been undergoing a fundamental change in the context of the “brave new world” of our permissive, anti market, redistributive society, a society that has forgotten ideas on which the greatness of Europe was built.”

He continues later in the lecture:

“Europeans today prefer leisure to performance, security to risk-taking, paternalism to free markets, collectivism and group entitlements to individualism. ...They are eager to defend their non-economic freedoms - the easiness, looseness, laxity, and permissiveness of modern or post modern European society - but when it comes to their economic freedoms, they are quite indifferent.”

This observation accurately describes modern Europe; it’s just too safe. Life may continue comfortably for a short time, but at some point forced mediocrity will take its toll. An ennui has overwhelmed Europe to the point that most of the young do not have children. Their non economic freedoms are preferable to extinction of their ancient cultures.

America’s progressives mean to mirror Europe, and they will succeed if we mindlessly continue to elect poor leaders and punish risks takers who propel innovation and economic development. A general may have four stars on his shoulders, an entrepreneur a billion dollars in the bank, and a cabinet member an Ivy League pedigree, but these accomplishments do not automatically insure they are experts in their fields or great leaders. It depends how they got there.