This piece is modified from a letter originally written to Skywings in response to letters about the example we set to others. It was very difficult to write and I am still not sure that it really conveys the message I am trying to put across. Nevertheless I think it is worthwhile.

Pilots who like to do low level aerobatics are frequently criticised for setting a bad example to others. Seeing accidents upsets me badly. There was a time in the early days of paragliding when, although I felt safe myself, the accident rate amongst my friends was extremely high. In order to continue flying I had to make a concious decision to accept that I would almost certainly encounter serious incidents and possibly the death of a friend. Since then I have witnessed a number of accidents including one fatality and lost three friends in a single sailplane accident. I may well be more sensitive than most, but all these incidents hurt me and have significantly degraded my flying. They have also caused grief to others and absorbed considerable rescue, medical and investigation resources. There has to be a limit to what is acceptable, but there is always some risk. I accept that no matter what I do to try and avoid it, there is always the possiblility of a serious accident.

No one takes off or initiates a manoeuvre believing that they are going to crash as a result. There seem to be two factors in any accident resulting from a questionable manoeuvre. One is the inherent risk, either from the manoeuvre itself or the limits of the pilot's skill. The other is how appreciative the pilot is of the actual risk he is taking and I suspect that this is where the difficulty lies. From this perspective it appears that nearly all accidents can ultimately be attributed to pilots failing to understand the level of risk they are taking, rather than the actual limits of their skill or simple bad luck. Put a different way, to stay safe, a pilot has to keep the image of risks in his mind consistent with the risks he actually takes.

Our image of the risks we take is an amalgamation of training, personal experience, observation of others and what we read or hear. As well as low level aerobatics, the term 'questionable manoeuvres' also includes flying low over sharp edged ridges. I once heard a pilot being criticised for flying low over a ridge I would not have attempted myself. He was an experienced pilot, flew that hill more often than I did, and seemed to understand the conditions. I felt he was right to do it and that I had learnt something from listening to him. He was, however, also criticised for setting a bad example to others. He was chastised for what others might think, not for what he had actually done.

On another occasion I witnessed a number of pilots take off one at a time and fly downwind low over a sharpish edge to the landing field. Knowing the hill and observing the conditions it was obvious to me from my viewpoint elsewhere that this was very dangerous. What none of the pilots could see from the take off was that as each pilot got just out of sight he encountered severe rotor. To the best of my knowledge, one of those pilots is now permanently unable to walk, let alone fly. Here was a whole bunch of pilots who misunderstood basic conditions. More importantly, they failed to understand what the risks of their limited understanding really were and followed each other instead.

There is no simple answer other than to give pilots increased training, possibly to an impractical level. What we can do is to watch out for others, talk truthfully to each other about what we are doing, listen, perhaps sceptically, to what others have to say and be prepared to accept criticism ourselves.

Low level aerobatics can be regarded as unnecessary, but so can any form of recreational flight. We all understand the more obvious risks and it is up to us to decide whether we wish to take them ourselves. It may be that our basic training does not emphasise the responsibilities we carry and self reliance we need as 'free flying' pilots. We do not have the regular 'check flights' of more conventional aviation by which a pilot's development can be monitored and corrected by instructors. Personally I do not engage in low level aerobatics as such, but I do sometimes make tight manoeuvres near to the hill in order to catch small thermals. Although I have 'practiced' such tight turns at height, I sometimes doubt if my lower antics are safe enough and have certainly had moments when the canopy has gone horribly slack. I cannot criticise pilots who do aerobatics on grounds of the example they set to others. However, I would remind them of the effect accidents can have on others and the cost the community has to bear for rescue and 'repairs'.