One of the key elements of aeronautical decision making is the “go/no-go” decision—that process by which you, as pilot in command, decide if you should launch on any given flight.
In the process, you add up all the possible risks and weigh them against the reward of the mission, just as if you were one of those statues of Lady Justice with the scales. Only, you know, as a student pilot, you can’t be wearing a blindfold when you fly.
But you’d be surprised how blindfolded many experienced pilots are when weighing flight risks against flight rewards. More often than we think, aviators get themselves into trouble when they underestimate risk and overvalue reward.
But does this approach place undue emphasis on going?
What if you flipped the decision? Instead of starting off by saying, “I’m flying today, unless…” consider saying, “I’m not flying today, unless…” In other words, reverse the default assumption. Instead of presuming that you’ll fly unless you find some reason not to, look for reasons to talk yourself into flying.
Your thought process might go something like this: I’m not flying today...but, you know, the weather forecast is perfect; I’m well-rested, I feel sharp; and the airplane has zero squawks. Well, OK. I guess I am flying today, after all.
It sounds simple, but this subtle shift in mindset can balance the overriding urge that some pilots feel to proceed with any given flight—along with pressure that other people, or circumstances, may apply—by changing the default decision to not flying, flipping the script to reveal another angle, shifting your perspective on risk.
Next time you fly, try the no-go/go decision on for size, and see if you come to a different decision than you would have if you’d deployed the typical process of putting the "go" ahead of the "no-go."