...it's right up there with mountain climbing and such sports. Even very experienced pilots, including professional pilots, instructors etc, can make mistakes, get distracted. And the gods of flight can be very unforgiving if that mistake occurs at the wrong time.

My first instructor, a very capable woman with over 15 years of flight experience, died when her plane crashed into a mountainside while on an aerial photography job.

Flying in a busy urban airspace is very distracting and stressful. Add in weather constraints, and you have a potentially dangerous situation for any VFR pilot. For people who've never been up in a small plane (ie, four or six seater -- not those bigger 12+ seater commuter planes), it can be hard to relate to the potential disorientation when you're veering a tiny tin can across the sky.

One flight instructor of my acquaintance says that every new pilot makes a serious, potentially fatal, careless error somewhere between 100-300 flight hours. It's just enough experience to get overly confident about what they can handle, and they get sloppy or cocky. Most new pilots survive that first big mistake. A few don't.

If Cory Lidle was flying solo or with a non-pilot passenger, Patrick's thesis could hold water. However, it seems Lidle was accompanied by a certified-to-type Flight Instructor, the scenario protrayed doesn't seem probable.

The SR-20 had a "glass-cockpit," and an experienced flight instructor would not have become confused.

It appears more likely to me, a catastrophic failure occurred to something in the primary flight control system, making the SR-20 uncontrollable. That "failure" could be as simple as a loss of a bolt or nut.

Pat, according to news reports, there was a flight instructor aboard.Does that not make your argument of pilot inexperience moot?

I got my pilot's license in 1981 and stopped flying in the mid-1990s because of the cost, and not because I feared small airplanes. Small airplanes are about as safe as the pilots who fly them, I think. My policy when I flew was to avoid marginal VFR conditions and turn back if the weather was even threatening. Call me chicken, but I had only a couple of real scares in a small plane.

On Wednesday night, I drove 60 miles north on I-75, I-275, and Veterans Memorial Highway near Tampa to visit a relative and watch the first game of the NLCS (canceled, unfortunately, due to rain). I saw people in all types of vehicles driving like maniacs, speeding, weaving, tail-gating, etc. But we accept the risks of driving, and I never hear anyone saying, after yet another SUV flips over in the median of a highway or another multi-car accident at a traffic light that it's time to get rid of all cars. But let a Cessna, Piper, Cirrus, Beechcraft, etc., make an emergency landing or -- heaven forfend -- crash, and suddenly something has to be done.

If you think Florida's roads are dangerous, consider the number of boating accidents that happen. At least with general aviation, there are rules and regulations governing training and vehicle certification, and they are taken more serious. True, I see community notices for boating training, but I wonder how many people really attend those.

I watched the coverage of the Cory Lidle crash from the relative's house, until it got repetitive. I feel for his family, and hope for the best for them.

It's never nice reading about a plane crash, but I hope lessons have been learned.

I am a retired flight instructor with over 8,000 hours of dual given (CFI CFII ASMELS ATI etc.) and one thought that came to my mind was I wondered if there might have been Instrument practice going on with the pilot wearing a 'hood'... there are lots of different designs of 'hood' and some of them also can obscure the vision of the instructor to the left and left front especially. now I retired before the age of the glass cockpit but if this training was also 'partial panel' or 'needle, ball and airspeed' to simulate electrical problems then how about this as a possibility?

they are flying north up the east river doing this practice/instruction the instructor commands the 180 deg turn to the left to head back south before he runs out of legal airspace south of the tip of rosevelt island. something distracts the instructor (who might have partialy obscured vision to the left front fron the hood being worn by the pilot) and the pilot makes his turn too wide under reduced panel and or also has loss of control without enough altitude/space to recover.

What do you think Patrick?

how do they do partial panel training with the glass cockpits? does the instructor tape sheets of pape over the displays or do they turn them off?

It will be interesting to know if instrument instruction was being given

I fly approximately 200 hours/year (mostly commuting to work in the San Francisco bay area). Those of you who know SF bay know the weather, and yes I am instrument rated.

General aviation is a central part of my personal and business life. I hate sitting in traffic and if I couldn't fly I probably wouldn't go anywhere.

Those of you who are insisting on mandatory flight plans, etc. have an unrealistic expectation of the pilot/ATC relationship. ATC can help, but they cannot fly the plane for us. And frankly, the people down at "center" have bad days just like the rest of us. Apart from just being human, they are busy and remote (unable to see the local weather conditions). I'll fly my own course, thank you.

I have to agree w/some of the earlier comments: nobody thinks anything of multi-car pileups or SUV rollovers, but when a C-150 lands in a parking lot it makes national news. I personally feel much more threatened by minivans lurching down the road than small aircraft. (Yes, I do live near the published ILS approach for our local airport).

How was your drive to work today? Get cut off? A little road rage? Witness an accident? My flight home will hopefully be "routine" and I feel sorry for you. Think about the contrast next time USA Today starts screeching "the sky is falling". Routine flight or seething road rage - which is more dangerous?