A remote pilot with over 200 incident-free flights skips several preflight steps, thinking the aircraft has always worked fine. Which hazardous attitude does this reflect, and what is the correct antidote?

Why →Invulnerability is the belief that accidents happen to others but not to the pilot themselves. A long record of safe flights reinforces this feeling and makes it more dangerous over time. The FAA antidote is: 'It could happen to me.' Recognizing that prior safe flights do not guarantee future safety is key to maintaining consistent standards regardless of experience level.

The trap →Anti-authority involves resenting or ignoring rules. This pilot is not opposed to preflight checks. They simply believe nothing will go wrong. That distinction separates invulnerability from anti-authority.

Field note →All five antidotes are worth memorizing: Anti-authority: 'Follow the rules.' Impulsivity: 'Not so fast, think first.' Invulnerability: 'It could happen to me.' Macho: 'Taking chances is foolish.' Resignation: 'I'm not helpless.'