Transcript FFPLUM
FFPLUM French microlight aircraft pilots federation Air safety, accidents and causalities assessment February 2006 situation Categories of French micro light aircrafts 60 52 50 multi 40 flexwing 30 20 27 motor paraG 17 10 autogyro 3 1 other 0 1 February 2006 situation Simplicity of micro light aircrafts ratio Simple and light design elaborate airframe building 69 % of the French ultra light aircrafts are from simple and basic design Simple systems (no hydraulic device, no VP airscrew…) Simple airframe building (mainly tube or wood & fabric) Weight and balance not questionable, in any configuration Minimum IAS proved and tested without flaps February 2006 situation FFPLUM exists since 1983. Number of recorded members. stayed under 4.500 for the first 15 years. It increases rapidly since 1998 to reach a total of 10.532 at the end of 2005. February 2006 situation Today, our federation represents 80 % of French microlight activity at least. Note: French microlight pilots have no obligation to join FFPLUM. February 2006 situation However, the data concerning Incidents, accidents and casualties are exhaustive as they come from the French civil aviation Government office (DGAC). February 2006 situation 2005 events causes medical (1, suspected only) 20 In flight collision (1 with a bird) 18 airfram breakdown (1) 16 14 Wing assembling mistake (2) 12 investigation not closed (5) petrol run out (5) 10 8 engine breakdown (8) 6 advers weather conditions (10) 4 pilot inducted control losing (16) 2 taxi and hangar events(19) 0 1 Take off and landing (19) February 2006 situation Medical problems Airframe breakdowns Wrong kit assemblies Are statisticaly speaking, anecdotic causes 5 engines in flight malfunctions are on the average, and are not always followed by fatalities. It is doubtful that a certification procedure could prevent from such rare event February 2006 situation The major causes of microlight accidents are obviously : Mishandling ! Misjudgment ! February 2006 situation Such hazards can’t be reduced with a technical regulation Not with a certification Nor with a heavy maintenance procedure February 2006 situation 1983 to 2005 evolution 12000 casualties (deaths x 100) 10000 8000 events (incidents accidents x 50) 6000 4000 FFPLUM members 2000 0 1983 1993 2005 years Total of events (green line) cant' be rigorously presented for the initial period 1983/1989. February 2006 situation Total of events (green line) represents all the recorded events : - fatal accidents (red line) - injuries - material damages For the last ten years, we deplore between 55 and 90 injured peoples each year. A not significant increase results in motor paraglider take off and landing, with more often than not, limited injuries. We can notice annual fluctuations. It is easily understandable, as limited injuries and material damages are not always declared and recorded, mostly depending on actual consequences and insurance policy. So, total of events is not a really conclusive data February 2006 situation 1983 to 2005 Today’s situation 12000 10000 End of 2005: 10 532 FFPLUM pilots 18 deaths casualties (deaths x 100) 8000 6000 FFPLUM members 4000 2000 0 1983 1993 2005 years NOTE : As the total amount of French micro light pilots is 12.300 ( Official data from DGAC ), the actual ratio is better. February 2006 situation Zoom on the last ten years 14000 13 500 active pilotes 12000 FFPLUM members 10000 8000 Microlight pilots (official data) 6000 casualties (death + injuries x 50) 55 casualties 4000 death only (x50) 2000 0 1995 2000 2005 February 2006 situation Despite microlighting reputation in public opinion Accident result is very comparable to the GA one. And reality it is undoubtedly better that this because flying time recording is not mandatory in France. February 2006 situation Fatalities stay around 20 per year, as the micro light aviation activity raised by more than 3 during the last ten years in France. This result is obtained without noticeable modification of the regulation February 2006 situation