Definition
A flawed decision-making belief that the probability of a future independent event is influenced by past outcomes — for example, assuming that because a hazardous condition has not caused a problem on previous flights, it is unlikely to cause a problem on the next one.
Plain English
The mistaken idea that just because something bad has not happened yet, it is less likely to happen now. In flying, this shows up when a pilot assumes that getting away with a risky choice in the past means it will be safe again.
Context Anchor
Seen in aviation decision-making, risk management, weather judgment, and discussions of pilot judgment errors.
Derivation
Named after the way gamblers reason at games of chance — believing that a long run of one outcome makes the opposite outcome 'due' next, even though each event is independent. The term carries directly into aviation as a recognized thinking trap.
Why Pilots Care
Prevents flawed go/no-go choices or over-reliance on perceived trends in weather, maintenance, or performance data.
Analogy
A coin does not remember the last toss. If it lands heads several times in a row, that alone does not make tails “due” on the next toss.
Grounding Statement
The key idea is that past events only matter if they actually change the condition you are judging now.
Intuition Check
Do not assume a streak creates a guarantee. Ask: did the past event actually change the airplane, the weather, or the situation? If not, it should not change the odds by itself.
Example Sentence 1
The instructor warned that flying VFR into deteriorating weather just because 'it worked out last time' is a classic example of the gambler's fallacy.
Example Sentence 2
The instructor pointed out the gambler's fallacy when the student expected an easy crosswind landing simply because the last two had been difficult.