SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Dayuhan who wrote (16110)6/30/2002 1:58:24 AM
From: Michael M  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 21057
 
I also doubt training is done in valleys crossed by cable cars. I haven't seen the accident reports or transcripts of the trials, so I can only speculate about this case.

I can't rely on "because it was widely reported at the time" as a credible source. Nor can I rely on "because the cockpit film...was apparently destroyed because it showed the pilots laughing...".

Hard to believe US pilots had been flying under the cables for years without complaints being made and acted upon. Not saying flights didn't happen more than once but pilots would know the chance of being caught and grounded would be VERY high. Pilots fear grounding more than death itself.

I don't know if the aircraft was from Aviano or carrier-based. If the latter, it's quite possible the pilot was unfamiliar with the area.

As far as pilots laughing at the time of the accident - I've known some fighter pilots who were world class a-holes but I've never known one who would find humor in this sort of thing. Spontaneous laughter in the face of terror or death is not all that unusual though. I've done it, haven't you?

It is also common in the investigation of aviation accidents to provide a degree of immunity so that people will tell the truth and help prevent repeats.

None of the above is meant to defend any actions that contributed to the accident. Just trying to add some background.



To: Dayuhan who wrote (16110)6/30/2002 2:18:31 AM
From: Constant Reader  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 21057
 
It seems to me that assumptions and unprovable assertions are being passed off as fact in that post. I think it says less about the case and more about your personal bias than anything else.