Careless and reckless operation of an aircraft

[magneto]

I just read another thread where someone asked if they should carry a compass when they hike. Others replied that they don't carry a compass or even maps, leaving the impression that such a thing is a smart thing to do.

So in addition to being a hiker, I am also a aircraft pilot. Travel in the backcountry can be as dangerous as flying, so how about we apply the rules of aviation to our hiking efforts?

There are two big ones pilots concern themselves with:

"14 CFR 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.


(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another."

and

"14 CFR 91.103 Preflight action.


Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include—
(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;
(b) For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff and landing distance information:
(1) For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein; and
(2) For civil aircraft other than those specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, other reliable information appropriate to the aircraft, relating to aircraft performance under expected values of airport elevation and runway slope, aircraft gross weight, and wind and temperature."

So - common sense, right? If you head out to hike, is it too much to ask to be minimally prepared? If you don't carry a map, compass or other navigational tools, isn't that careless and reckless? What if you don't check the weather before you leave? What if you don't carry enough fuel for your body, or the proper clothing to protect yourself from the elements? Shouldn't you figure out your escape routes and alternate plans before you just heading out the door? If you hike on slopes with ice and snow without show shoes, crampons and ice axe, then what?

If you don't do these things, and then need a rescue, will there be any surprise if you are presented with a bill? What about people who look at the stories on these boards of how people got away with doing careless and reckless things, and then do them themselves, only to get hurt, maimed or killed?

What would you say about a pilot who took-off in an aircraft without doing at least what is mentioned in 91.103 above?

[4eyedbuzzard]

The biggest differences are that most hiking doesn't require a license, and the risk to the non-participating public is pretty much non-existent. That said, much of what you say is why several states have "irresponsible hiker" laws to recoup money for S&R, and to send the message that being unprepared puts S&R personnel at risk and costs other people money that should not have to be spent on irresponsible and/or reckless behavior.

[Starchild]

If you don't carry a map, compass or other navigational tools, isn't that careless and reckless?

Could it be? certainly. Is it always that? that is not so clear. Your comparison has merit but it is not linear, not a direct relationship between the two. Carrying over what you know from one and applying to the other has benefits but also has its limits.

People hike for different reasons and different conditions and with different skill sets, a map and compass in not always needed. Carrying such things is however a good guideline, but it is only a guideline, and their are even times where such equipment may be undesirable.

[Odd Man Out]

WRT the comparison between flying and hiking -- There are some parallels, as you observe, but there are also significant differences.

First the threat to others is quite different. If flying a plane in a reckless manner, you could collide with another plane, or someone on the ground and put your passengers at risk. Other than putting SAR personnel at risk, none of these really apply to hikers (I don't buy that being a bad influence on others is putting them at risk).

Second, flying is regulated due to these risks. You must have a license. There are agencies that dictate policies for operators and equipment. Such rules for hiking do not exist. There are certainly guidelines and best practices that should be followed, but these are neither universally agreed upon enforced by a governing body. There are those who say you should never hike alone. If this were "enforced" then there would be precious few AT thru hikers. Other would have a long list of gear that should be carried to be prepared for every possible emergency. If this were "enforced" then we would be back to carrying 80 lb packs.

I'm not disagreeing with the notion that hikers should use common sense.

[magneto]

I once knew another guy who took off on a flight, in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR). Though he was instrument rated, he did not bring his instrument charts with him on the flight because he didn't think he would need them. So when unexpected weather was encountered, he was forced file for an instrument clearance and operate under instrument flight rules (IFR) because he could no longer see the ground. When he neared his destination airport, he asked the approach controller to "confirm" the localizer frequency (the radio navaid that provides guidance for an instrument landing system (ILS) approach). The controller figured out what was going on and then he offered to "confirm" the tower frequency and minimum descent altitudes for the approach with the pilot. The tower was informed and that controller "confirmed" the missed approach procedure with the pilot, before he had to ask. He was able to complete the approach safely thereafter.

Did he "need" his charts? In this case, I guess not. But if he had had a radio failure, he would have been screwed.

Do you "need" to carry emergency gear when you hike? I guess not, if everything goes perfectly and you don't experience more than simple problems. You can just rely on other people you hope to meet along the trail, and ask to borrow their stuff!

[magneto]

As far as the compass thing goes, two years ago I was sitting eating lunch just below the headwall of Tuckerman Ravine on a sunny day in October. It was a nice day, but cold, about 25 degrees. A woman came along, a bit disoriented, head up the trail toward the headwall. She said asked "how much further is it to Pinkham Notch? I've been hiking for quite a while." She was headed the wrong way, away from Pinkham Notch. She had no compass and no map. If there was no one there to ask, would she have kept going the wrong way, until dark and cold then became an issue?

[Slo-go'en]

As far as the compass thing goes, two years ago I was sitting eating lunch just below the headwall of Tuckerman Ravine on a sunny day in October. It was a nice day, but cold, about 25 degrees. A woman came along, a bit disoriented, head up the trail toward the headwall. She said asked "how much further is it to Pinkham Notch? I've been hiking for quite a while." She was headed the wrong way, away from Pinkham Notch. She had no compass and no map. If there was no one there to ask, would she have kept going the wrong way, until dark and cold then became an issue?

I'm not sure a compass would have helped in that situation. Map maybe. Paying attention to the signs would have been the best thing to do. If you don't have a clue where you are to begin with, map and compass do no good as you don't have a starting reference point.

But the question which started this is "do you need a compass on the AT?" and for the AT that answer is no. The AT is the super highway of trails and it's really easy to follow. And with the way the trail twists and turns, you can often be going in any direction but north (or south) at any given time. Add to that the lack of any prominate land marks to take bearings on, a compass is actually pretty useless.

OTOH, if your out west in open country like on the CDT or PCT, you best have a compass and map.

[BobTheBuilder]

Nope - we don't need anybody else creating any more rules for anybody. We got plenty in this world already.

[Namtrag]

It's just common sense to carry a compass and a map. This reminds me of the thread where the guy says the trail in VT is open in April, so don't tell him not to hike in the mud.

[garlic08]

Do you always operate an automobile with a map and compass? No--if you're in a familiar city, or on an interstate highway with excellent signage, you don't need either. Similarly, when I'm out hiking for a day or two in, say, a familiar regional, county or national park with many miles of intersecting, well-marked trails, I won't bring a map or compass. It may have been slightly reckless, but I hiked the AT without either. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else, but I made my own choice based on cost vs. benefit of the maps, the advice of other hikers I respect, and I took the risk.

On my CDT hike, I met an aviator at a campground, right after I'd finished a difficult off-trail section. He asked me about navigation. I showed him my map on which I had noted hourly times and positions throughout the day, along with a few compass bearings noted. He smiled, and said that's what his maps look like after a trip. It would have been nearly suicidal to hike the CDT without map and compass.

[Hops53]

then there are those that carry a map and compass and haven't a clue how to use them - carrying them won't help

[winger]

It's just common sense to carry a compass and a map. This reminds me of the thread where the guy says the trail in VT is open in April, so don't tell him not to hike in the mud.

Totally agree but common sense these days is as rare as home baked bread.

[colorado_rob]

Totally agree but common sense these days is as rare as home baked bread.

Well, what is as common as store bought bread is self-righteousness. That's for sure.

[magneto]

The AT also goes over mountain peaks. Many mountains have more than one trail to the summit. Once on the summit, it is not always obvious which trail is the right one. If a summit is obscured, it might not be easy in which direction any particular trail lies. There was a famous accident on Mt. Lafayette in NH (which is on the AT) which involved a couple that took a trail in the opposite direction of that which they wanted to go. They became snowbound and one died. The rescuers found a compass at the bottom of the dead man's pack. A quick check of that compass would have told them they were going the wrong way and the death might not have occurred.

The back country is an unforgiving environment where even slight error can lead to death. The Whites of NH have the same environmental conditions of the Arctic. There can be cold weather and snow at all times of the year, including high summer. In fact, one of the most famous accidents on Mt. Washington occurred when two Appalachian Mountain Club members (Alan Ormsbee and William Curtis) froze to death in an ice storm in July, 1900. Their deaths lead to the eventual establishment of Lakes of the Clouds Hut. The AT currently runs right over this section.

How many posts have you seen here where people say "Oh - I'm sending all my cold weather stuff home", and then head into the Whites in summer? Some get through, no problem, and post how easy it was. They are blissfully ignorant of Curtis and Ormsbee.

No one would get on a plane and fly to the Arctic Circle to hike unprepared, but they will jump in a car and drive to the mountains of NH (which has the same climactic profile) and hike in sneakers, blue jeans and cotton shirts, probably because it is so easy to do so.

So it seems we will forever hear about people who are injured or killed for lack of simple tools like a compass in an unforgiving environment.

[Son Driven]

Do you always operate an automobile with a map and compass? No--if you're in a familiar city, or on an interstate highway with excellent signage, you don't need either. Similarly, when I'm out hiking for a day or two in, say, a familiar regional, county or national park with many miles of intersecting, well-marked trails, I won't bring a map or compass. It may have been slightly reckless, but I hiked the AT without either. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else, but I made my own choice based on cost vs. benefit of the maps, the advice of other hikers I respect, and I took the risk.

On my CDT hike, I met an aviator at a campground, right after I'd finished a difficult off-trail section. He asked me about navigation. I showed him my map on which I had noted hourly times and positions throughout the day, along with a few compass bearings noted. He smiled, and said that's what his maps look like after a trip. It would have been nearly suicidal to hike the CDT without map and compass.

I agree with your logic. After not referring to my compass in over 1,000 miles of trail, I left it in a hiker box. If I was doing night hiking I probably would of kept it since I think at night one may loose the white blazes, and find themselves on a unmarked trail.

While on the AT a hiker who was using a GPS so friends and family could follow his progress. His mother checked in on him and could see that he was heading the wrong direction. She called him to let him know he was heading the wrong way. He had to explain to his mom how the AT has switch backs, and often times the compass direction one is traveling is misleading.

[Alleghanian Orogeny]

I'm old-school. OK, I'm a dinosaur. Trained as a field geologist during the early 1970s, when a USGS 7.5' topo and a Brunton Pocket Transit were the standard tools universally employed in the field to maintain map position and provide data plotting points for making geologic maps.

IMHO, the frequency in which people get themselves into mortal danger by blindly following a GPS suggestion is sufficient information to conclude no amount of carrying a compass and a map will help those not inclined to know how to use them. I would personally not dream of going afield without a compass and map, even on the AT. I politely disagree with those who suggest a compass is useless along the AT. When the canopy or fog blocks visibility away from the trail, taking a compass bearing on any topographic feature, be it a ravine's axis, a stream bed, the axis of the ridge line you're standing on, or several bearings on the trail itself (thereby plotting the exact twists and turns) can all allow a reasonably proficient user to locate himself on a map. Besides, sometimes folks need or want to bail out from the AT onto lesser trails or on a bushwhack. A compass and a map are much needed in such instances. Bottom line for me is "there is no complete substitute for a map, a compass, and the ability to use them".

AO

[Starchild]

Please remember magneto that your preflight rules are not 'common sense' in any sense of the definition but are actually the direct opposite of common sense. Common sense is of the individual (that which cooensides with the sense of the masses), but you don't need to have any common sense to follow the preflight rules, just the ability to follow orders. That was the point of the preflight rules, to eliminate the need for common sense (and have a accountable quantifiable standard).

Hiking and being in the back country is one of the few remaining places where the human spirit can be challenged on such a individual level - Hard and fast rules such as you must always carry a compass and map run against this basic need of humanity.

"Your papers (and compass) please"
"I was just following orders"
"HYOH"

[fredmugs]

Funny that you should mention pilots and navigating after this happened:

http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/13...suspected.html

[MDSection12]

Where I hike, I know the trail and downhill will get you to a road quick. I don't bother with maps.

[RCBear]

I carry a compass but it's pretty tough anymore to get truly lost, certainly on the east coast.