Speculating about accidents on this and other Sites (Merged again) [Archive]

View Full Version : Speculating about accidents on this and other Sites (Merged again)

Shaggy Sheep Driver

20th Jul 2006, 14:42

This kind of nonsense reporting by the BBC does no one any good. His family must be going through hell enough without having to adjust for this distasteful and objectionable 'reporting' by our 'state' broadcaster.

That BBC trash really is an appalling report. We don't know the circumstances of this accident yet so what I say below is generic and in no way related to yesterday's tragedy, but looking back to other tragedies the same stuff is regurgitated. Mil pilot in a mid-air collision bangs out immediatley (it's that or die) and the media persist in this 'our hero wrestled with the controls to avoid an orphanage' rubbish. Light aircraft spins in off an aeros manouvre, no possible action by the pilot can affect the outcome once it had spun other than to un-spin it (which doesn't happen). Doesn't stop the ignorant media from churning out the 'heroic' bit, though.:rolleyes:

Does it help the berieved? I can't see how, especially as they will at some stage know pretty much what really happened.

Why are our media so awful?

GJB

20th Jul 2006, 15:28

For christ sake Shaggy - do you really think your rant on this forum is appropriate at this time?

Spare a thought.

Saab Dastard

20th Jul 2006, 18:24

WR and SSD and others:

Might I suggest that you read the item on the BBC website? The paragraphs in question were not invented by the BBC, they are quotes from East of England Ambulance Service spokesman Murray Macgregor.

Would you like to say to him in person that he is "ignorant" and was speaking "rubbish"?

If there has been anything "trashy", "distasteful" or "lazy" it has been on your side, not theirs.

I am rarely angered by what I have come across on these forums over the years, but you two have succeeded.

I will not discuss this further on this thread, as I feel you have dragged it low enough as it is - what you do is entirely up to you.

SD

frostbite

20th Jul 2006, 19:53

Quite agree, SD.

Perhaps those concerned would care to delete their posts?

Failing that, I will reluctantly remove the entire thread tomorrow.

Whirlybird

20th Jul 2006, 19:57

Everyone who has posted is shocked and appalled by this accident. That's the case with every fatality, but perhaps more so with this one owing to the age of the pilot and the specific circumstances. And people react to that kind of thing differently - some feel the need to offer condolences, some speculate as to what happened, some get angry. All of those are perfectly normal reactions to a horrific event. Let's accept that and not get into arguments about what was said by whom and whether it was appropriate or inappropriate.

I appreciate this thread being here. I heard yesterday that there had been a fatal accident, but knew no details. I suspect that this thread has, for many of us, simply provided useful information.

And, again I suspect like many, I don't know what else to say, and fear being misunderstood.......

QDMQDMQDM

21st Jul 2006, 08:33

Lastly, remember that stall speed increases in a decending turn due to reduced power.

Sorry, is this true?!

At first sight, this looks like an all too common and tragic base to final turn stall/spin accident. Posting incorrect comments about the influences on stall speed does no-one any good, especially as there are some pre-solo stuents reading this. Weight, G, wing configuration changes (flaps, ice, vortex generators, leading edge slots etc.) all influence stall speed. Someone correct me here, but I don't think pulling the power off and descending in a turn does. Power setting and thus propwash over the tail surfaces may influence controllability at the point of stall, but I don't see how it can influence stall speed itself. A high power setting may allow you to fly a wing at low speed with high drag and high lift (i.e. full flap) without stalling, but the power setting itself does not influence the stall speed.

To all pre-solo students, post-solo students and any other pilot who hasn't read it, read Stick and Rudder, by Wolfgang Langewiesche, especially the last chapter, 'The Dangers of the Air' by Leighton Collins. Here is the link, go and buy it now:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0070362408/026-3347856-8158829?v=glance&n=266239

QDM

Andy_RR

21st Jul 2006, 09:11

...but the power setting itself does not influence the stall speed.

Power setting will influence the attitude at stall, where a wing will stall at a lower attitude without power, thus perhaps being less obvious in its onset?

A

VFE

23rd Jul 2006, 11:47

As you no doubt know a wing can stall at any speed however the point I was trying to make (and which Andy RR, highlighted) was that power reduces the possibility of a stall. Does a 16 year old student on second solo understand all the Principles of Flight regarding the stall? I know I didn't. Teach them that power in the turn controls airspeed as well as attitude and the potential for a stall decreases. John Farley pointed this out to his instructor in his RAF training days - attitude controls your airpseed but not at 3 feet.

K-I-S-S.

The angle of attack is the datum for a stall. Nose down, decending turn, low power, the high angle of attack is masked by the lower attitude of the aircraft thus making it difficult for a beginner to grasp the concept of increased possibility of stalling and why so many over the years have spun in base turn to final.

VFE.

Sorry, is this true?!
At first sight, this looks like an all too common and tragic base to final turn stall/spin accident. Posting incorrect comments about the influences on stall speed does no-one any good, especially as there are some pre-solo stuents reading this. Weight, G, wing configuration changes (flaps, ice, vortex generators, leading edge slots etc.) all influence stall speed. Someone correct me here, but I don't think pulling the power off and descending in a turn does. Power setting and thus propwash over the tail surfaces may influence controllability at the point of stall, but I don't see how it can influence stall speed itself. A high power setting may allow you to fly a wing at low speed with high drag and high lift (i.e. full flap) without stalling, but the power setting itself does not influence the stall speed.
To all pre-solo students, post-solo students and any other pilot who hasn't read it, read Stick and Rudder, by Wolfgang Langewiesche, especially the last chapter, 'The Dangers of the Air' by Leighton Collins. Here is the link, go and buy it now:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0070362408/026-3347856-8158829?v=glance&n=266239
QDM

Mercenary Pilot

23rd Jul 2006, 13:37

The plane obviously stalled and was spinning
Why because "Brian Nicholas" said so? :confused:

I have my opinions on what probably happend and they are most likely the same as nearly all the pilots reading. However i dont think this is the thread to be discussing it on....I think you'll all agree this one is more appropriate

Watch the speed! = (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=235608)

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=235608

RamboWingman

24th Jul 2006, 00:54

I never said that Brian Nicholas said it stalled. I was merely giving my opinion.

Surely the point of a forum is to give opinions, yes???

And saying that it is speculation and drivel, well thats just as bad as "darkening???" the forum.

So should we all give our condolences and shut the thread down, or is there a possiblity of a reasonable discussion??

Nil Flaps

24th Jul 2006, 02:01

Felix Saddler

24th Jul 2006, 02:35

i can see why your upset about this, however if you think on terms like this then what right do any website/media coverage have to post pictures of tragic events? Also what about aircraft disaster archives with voice recordings that you can listen to and read up on? What about 9/11? video coverage, is that out right sick?

However i can see where your coming from tho!

R.I.P friend

Nil Flaps

24th Jul 2006, 04:05

Maybe you're missing my point Felix. Yes, public exposure of images and film archive of such tragic events by the media etc. is bad enough... but the emergency services?

They join in to complain about traffic bottlenecks on the opposing carriageway after an RTA, thanks to motorists slowing down to take a good long look, yet they emblazon their website with such images as if to promote the practice of rubber-necking? Come on.

As someone who's had to climb over a dead relative in order to exit a vehicle involved in an RTA, I don't think I would've appreciated seeing images of the event on a website that all and sundry could see, especially courtesy of the fire and ambulance service who came to our rescue.

I'm sure the family, friends and FI to this poor 16yr old will feel exactly the same way. They all deserve better. Sorry for going off-topic.

tonyhalsall

24th Jul 2006, 13:30

I have been lurking and using this and other aviation bulletin boards for the last four or five years and without wishing to appear insensitive I find it quite irritating the way that that fatal and/or serious accidents are handled.
There seems to be a majority who almost immediately shun any form of speculation and egotistically demand that we await the findings of the professionals (presumably the AAIB?)
Well, I would like to offer a contrary view in that speculation on boards and forums is GOOD in these cases.
If all accidents were left unreported aside from the obligatory condolonces etc etc then I believe that a valuable opportunity to ram home safety issues is missed. I can say categorically that if I were to ever die in an aircraft accident I would want you all to speculate to your hearts content as long as in the heat of those first emotional days it focused your minds on how I might have killed myself because my dying wish would be that no one else suffer the same fate.
Lets be honest - In flying generally, we have learned everything we know from the mistakes (often tragic) of others. Await the formal AAIB report months down the line and the moment is lost. In my opinion, the dead and the relatives of the deceased would surely prefer the flying community to learn immediately from the mistakes (or otherwise) of the deceased and they certainly will not likely be reading this or any other forum looking for insensitive postings. OK - so facts don't come from speculation but who didn't fly around with an extra good look out after the micro and R22 collision and who isn't thinking that bit harder about base leg turns just at the moment?
I believe that speculation about safety matters is best delivered hot and emotional and that is what makes us humans digest it. It focuses our mind in the present and prevents us slipping into complacency and I for one will be just that little more cautious turning base leg to final for this next few weeks even though I have no cause or reason to do this other than the so called 'insensitive' postings made on another thread.

Rod1

24th Jul 2006, 13:40

I aggree with you 100%.

Rod1

littco

24th Jul 2006, 13:42

Fair comment but talking about speculation is by it's own nature subjective and while we can sit here at our desks and guess the cause, the fact remains that until a full report or known cause can be established it could be deemed disrespectfull to those unfortunately departed.

I for one would like to know the cause simply so I can learn, probably much like everyone else, but firmly believe that suggestive attempts at possible failures with either craft or human when facts are few and far between is not only insensitive but really doesn't achieve much. If this is the type of thing people are after then why not start a thread with a made up incident and then get people to comment on the possible issues, much like they do in some of the flight magazines, in far better taste and probably just as constructive without the need to highlight someone's else misfortune..

I fully understand your point, but inlight of recent events personally feel compassion and reflection is better than speculation and uncalled blame.

Interesting point though.

To add;
Just add, and am possibly being hypocritical , but I have found the "Watch your speed thread" very thought provoking and it will certain take something from it, and while it has taken this unfortunate event to raise this thread, I just go back to my point that should it really take events such as this for us to be able to discuss it in such depth? No, but it has..

Cough

24th Jul 2006, 13:55

I disagree. There are people who may be hurt (relatives, colleagues, friends, and maybe the aircraft operator) by the inaccurate speculation. Thats why a load of us wait for the AAIB report and can then have a factual discussion.

Now encouraging the AAIB to release information alot faster would be a more valid point IMHO.

rustle

24th Jul 2006, 13:55

High Wing Drifter

24th Jul 2006, 14:31

Tony,
n flying generally, we have learned everything we know from the mistakes (often tragic) of others.
I would suggest unexpected events as well as mistakes. I think the problem you are alluding to is that to second guess the AAIB leads to an inevitible conclusion related only to things we have come across either directly or indirectly so don't actually lead to any new knowledge. The usual speculation is stall, carb ice, lost contol in IMC, etc. All things we already imagine can happen to us. The value of AAIB reports is that they tell us stuff that we didn't even consider.

On the other hand, as IO540 said facetiously in one of the other threads (I paraphrase) "At least we have the CVR and FDR data!" Basically, what he is saying is probably true, the AAIB just end up guessing at the end of the day as they probabaly have very little work with and often nobody is any wiser so why not consider and discuss as and when the opportunity arises.

frostbite

24th Jul 2006, 14:42

I agree with Tony in cases where the speculation is relevant and possibly even constructive.

What I don't like is thread drift in a sensitive thread.

selfin

24th Jul 2006, 14:50

An informed dialogue based on hypothetical scenarios is vital. It makes not one whit of difference whether the likely scenarios are representative of the events in question, but that experience and knowledge is shared and used. In this regard our aim ought to be setting ourselves as case-preventers rather than case-crackers. A non-adversarial situation where all parties have a knowledge of the frailties of human judgment is essential. The main problem in other professions (medicine for example) is that no-one is taught how cr#p their decisions are likely to be.

Chequeredflag

24th Jul 2006, 14:54

I wonder if the relatives of the deceased are ever motivated to switch on to this and other sites - I very much doubt it. I must say I do not object to seeing "sensible" speculation, 'cos it might just prevent me and others from getting into such a situation. That such speculation may turn out to be wrong is frankly neither here nor there, and is only natural amongst others that fly and who might say "there but for the grace of God etc..."
I do sometimes wince at the "condolance" messages that always appear here after such terrible accidents. Again, I would very much doubt if the deceased families could give a monkeys for our thoughts at such a time. I guess it makes those that do it feel a bit better?

Paris Dakar

24th Jul 2006, 15:05

This is a difficult and emotive subject.

The difficulty I have with any type of speculation ahead of an enquiry is that friends or family (or the press) may read some comments made on this site.

The tragic loss of the young pilot on his second solo is very sad indeed. I have my own views about what may have taken place but what if I expressed those views and I was wrong. This poor chap may have become incapacitated in the last few moments of his flight - but already there are suggestions that airspeed and angle of attack may be the factor - what if that wasn't the case.

QDMQDMQDM

24th Jul 2006, 15:08

Tony,

Thank God -- some sense on this issue, instead of the politically correct garbage which is usually spouted.

As I have said before, if I drill a smoking hole into a hill I order you all to speculate on the potential causes of the accident. Almost certainly, it will be my own idiocy. My family will not be reading the thread.

QDM

Saab Dastard

24th Jul 2006, 15:26

In the main, the AAIB reports can detail quite conclusively WHAT happened.

Where they often are unable to make definite conclusions - particularly in fatal crashes, for obvious reasons - is WHY it happened.

Speculation on these fora in the immediate aftermath of an accident is speculating not only on why it happened, but also on what actually happened, usually with very little factual information. This speculation may contain some useful general safety advice and warnings; it may not.

But in the context of the specific incident the conjectures may be totally erroneous. In this case, those unfortunately involved have actions or omissions attributed to them that are false, and may well cause unnecessary hurt to friends and relatives.

It may also be considered generally inappropriate and insensitive to be pontificating on the what, why and wherefore of a serious or fatal incident when the tragedy is so recent and the shock and grief of those involved is so great.

I suggest that there is a balance to be struck between safety on the one hand and compassion and consideration on the other.

By all means start a seperate thread about speed control, or carb-icing, or fuel contamination, or IMC currency, or whatever.

But why not wait a decent interval to discuss a SPECIFIC event? Especially when, by waiting until the AAIB report is published, one level of speculation can be removed - and those affected have had time to come to terms with the event.

Perhaps it is no accident that the AAIB takes a long time to publish reports into fatal incidents.

SD

IO540

24th Jul 2006, 15:46

I agree with Tony Halsall.

As regards "speculation" mentioned by others, I have read loads of AAIB reports on GA accidents, and it's obvious to anyone with a reasonable engineering/technical education that most AAIB GA reports are in fact highly speculative as to the cause. They may not say so but one can read it between the lines.

In cases of structural failure, or somebody having left a spanner inside the airframe during maintenance (and jamming the controls), the AAIB should find a good cause for the accident.

But these are rare. The rest of the time they are guessing. There is no CVR, no FDR. The most important crashes are those where everybody died, so no way to tell if somebody was having a fight with the pilot or messing with the controls, no way to tell if somebody was screaming in panic and distracting the pilot to the point where he didn't fly the plane anymore. All they can do is look at the radar return, and many planes don't have a transponder (or don't have it switched on, for various reasons) so they can't tell the altitude.

Nowadays, the AAIB likes to take a cheap swipe at those flying foreign reg planes, especially N-reg, and all those with foreign licenses - even if these observations are wholly irrelevant to the accident.

I have also read loads of analyses of airliner crashes and those are (usually) something else. Nowadays one usually has decent data to work on. But not in GA; the majority of the AAIB reports are pure speculation as to the cause.

rustle

24th Jul 2006, 15:49

But why not wait a decent interval to discuss a SPECIFIC event? Especially when, by waiting until the AAIB report is published, one level of speculation can be removed - and those affected have had time to come to terms with the event.

Perhaps it is no accident that the AAIB takes a long time to publish reports into fatal incidents.

SD
People here and elsewhere don't tend to discuss 6 month old accidents (there are obvious exceptions). Blame human nature if you like, but people tend to want to discuss things that are recent and in their conscious.

The problem with all the hand wringing and "what if someone says the wrong thing" thinking is that it prevents someone saying the right thing as well -- something that might stick in the mind of someone who is about to become a statistic themselves.

kevmusic

24th Jul 2006, 15:53

When I was undergoing my last bout of flying lessons everything was great about the set-up apart from one thing........a bar to unwind in afterwards. For I have had a long and varied flying training (see thread elsewhere) and in most of these FTOs/gliding organisations, we all gravitated to the bar or pub, there to sort out & analyse the day's flying long into the night; and I can say that I learned as much from those discussions as I did from the flying itself! (I know it sounds like I'm off-topic but I'm getting there......:rolleyes:) On one terrible occasion at my gliding club a good friend was killed. Before two days had gone, we, who were shattered by his loss, had built up the entire scenario inside the K8's cockpit in those last few minutes. The report, when it came out, was inconclusive and there was so little left of dear old G. that a meaningful autopsy report was impossible, so that our informed and knowledgeable construction served to explain that awful event, and most of us went with it.

Now I am in the middle of a 4-year flying drought and (hoorah!) I have found pPrune. It's a virtual pub where all the bar flying is done! And, of course, we speculate on the causes of crashes. Aviators have always done it and always will. I know that this is a public forum and that you could argue that that's the essential difference, but I'm sure that very few besides the cogniscenti will bother looking here.

Kev.

tonyhalsall

24th Jul 2006, 15:55

Disagree SD
In a recent accident speculation abounds that it was stall/spin on base/final turn. ie Pilot Error.
I doubt whether the Pilots relatives are sufficiently interested at this time to read on this forum whether or not their deceased relative is somehow being blamed for his own demise and even if that is the case - so what? Just how many GA accidents can you recall recently from major structural failures and how many from Pilot error?
The AAIB report may well be delayed to protect the deceased families feelings because no one wants to believe that their loved one brought about their own demise - but after a passage of time, the emotions felt in the heady post accident days have faded.
Forums such as this enable the living to learn from mistakes and whether those mistakes are real or perceived - it does not really matter. It matters more that we all remind ourselves about the very real dangers that can trip us up and if we end up debating crossed controls, skidding into turns, carb icing, stall/spin, speed on base leg and AoA does it really matter?? Even if the final report comes up with a completely different analysis the original debate will have focused the mind on the very many things that can cause your body to end up in a crumpled aeroplane.
Is there a person on this forum who would not want other Pilots to learn from their own fatal mistake? Discussing all the possibilities, even speculatively, will only serve to remind us all of the hazzards that are out there and in my very humble opinion this is:
a) no bad thing
and
b) what we would all want to happen if on of us were to be so unfortunate one day

Crosswind Limits

24th Jul 2006, 16:15

I agree with Tony 100%! We all need to be sensible and pragmatic about these issues. Discussing safety issues even in general terms after an accident has to be good for safety and perhaps in the future, a life will be saved because of it!

IO540

24th Jul 2006, 17:09

What motivates someone to start a thread about an air crash that has just happened?

To learn from it.

It's hardly done to find out who got killed; if it's somebody you know then you will find out pretty soon, and if it isn't then it doesn't matter. People are killed in large numbers on the roads, daily, and in general this bothers only those who know them personally.

Why should aviation be different?

It's different because it is a massively safety conscious activity, and discussing possible scenarios contributes to knowledge.

Pitts2112

24th Jul 2006, 17:42

Here's my .02 worth based on reading a lot of threads on various newsgroups discussing accidents and incidents. I haven't read all the replies here so pardon me if I retread old territory.

The reason I don't like seeing accidents discussed here or on other newsgroups/bulletin boards is that the discussions very often descend into trying to find blame rather than create a useful learning point and end up assassinating the character of the people concerned or implicated, all of it based on pure speculation and heresay.

If the discussion remains one of "well, xxxxxxx has been known to happen and the consequences are often xxxx" then I'm quite happy to take part in that kind of conversation. What it usually becomes, though, is "well, it clearly must have been xxxx and the pilot/maintainter/whatever was negligent/stupid/careless/whatever" and ends up in rants about procedures, training, individuals' competence and judgement, etc. Very rarely is anything positive or useful said in those kinds of threads. They may appear to be geared toward impoiving safety and learning from others' mishaps, but they often are just masking malicious or, at best, unhelpful gossip based on the words of people who were, by definition, not there. If no one in the conversation was in the cockpit, what value does any of us really think we can add?

The ones that really bug me are the ones that end up accusing the pilot of being negligent or incompetent. It is very easy for us to sit at our computers or around the aero clubhouse and take hours to dissect and rule properly on a situation where a real-life and often scared-witless pilot had mere seconds to act. Any speculation as to the validity of his actions is purely misplaced.

Besides all of that, what good is trying to learn something based on incomplete and innacurate information? Try learning physics using a 1950s text with every third page ripped out and see how far you can get on understanding the theory of relativity. The best we are going to come up with is something we already know or a big question mark when we recognise we don't know enough to have a meaningful dialogue.

That's why I stay off those threads and don't like to see them continued. In my experience they don't really add anything to the cause of safety. If they did, you'd expect to see a noticeable drop in the GA accident rate since the widespread use of the Internet started to make us all much smarter, but that hasn't happened.

Pitts2112

172driver

24th Jul 2006, 18:12

Speculation leads to discussion

Discussion leads to reflection

Reflection leads to learning

Learning leads to safer flying

IO540

24th Jul 2006, 18:19

Whirlybird

24th Jul 2006, 18:23

rustle

24th Jul 2006, 18:25

Good points well made, IO540 :)

tonyhalsall

24th Jul 2006, 18:44

I can quite understand and accept that there are a lot of different views on this. What I find unacceptable is people trying to foist those views on to others.
Those who find it helpful to discuss the possible causes of accidents, go ahead. Those who don't like it - whether friends or relatives or those unconnected with the accident - don't read it. If you feel the need to express condolences, do so. If you don't like it, don't read them.
No-one is forced to read PPRuNe. And no-one has the right to tell anyone else what they should or should not post (except in very extreme cases, perhaps). Does it ever occur to some of these people that their point of view is not the only valid one?

Well, this is the whole reason that I wanted to start this thread so that if/when there is an accident people who want to discuss it can without fear of being branded some kind of insensitive weirdo by the politically correct whose only contribution involves, - condolonces, RIP etc etc which contributes absolutely nothing to flight safety.

If the moral minority don't like what is being discussed in an accident thread, they don't have to read it and they certainly don't have to preach to those that are speculating and discussing legitimate aspects relating to flight safety,

yakker

24th Jul 2006, 20:08

On another forum, a thread was started about a Yak 52 that had made a crash landing injuring the pilot. From the information given (some from the hospitalised pilot), I suggested he may have had a spark plug blow out. I then mentioned a report from the USA about how much power the engine produces with one cylinder down. I suggested that all pilots flying behind an M14 should read it.
I was shot down in flames for suggesting that the pilot could have continued to fly the aircraft, and because others on that forum knew the pilot berated my inference it was pilot error.
That was not my intention, it was to inform others to this potential problem, in the hope they would read the report and be a wiser flyer.
Ps. The AAIB concluded it was a plug blow out that led to the accident.

Therefore, the real problem in these discussions is the ‘pilot error’ part, rather than the possible mechanical failures.

yakker

24th Jul 2006, 20:14

Sorry I have just read the thread on the Yak 52 ftal accident, my previous post is NOT a speculation on what may have happened in this case.

Saab Dastard

24th Jul 2006, 20:24

tonyhalsall,
some kind of insensitive weirdo by the politically correct whose only contribution involves, - condolonces, RIP etc etc which contributes absolutely nothing to flight safety.

And this sweeping generalisation achieves... what, precisely?

This comment of yours pretty much sums up for me what is objectionable about the accident report speculation threads.

The rapid descent from reasonable comments, questions and even speculation about the incident into journo-bashing, bleeding hearts brigade bashing and general argument about who should or should not have said what.

Honestly, it really is like fighting at a funeral.

Slagging off the media contributes nothing to flight safety. Slagging off those who wish to offer condolences contributes nothing to flight safety. Slagging off those who object to this degrading of the topic contributes nothing to flight safety.

Read back over all such previous threads - that's where they all go. It's THAT to which I object. Not any discussion of flight safety.

Just to correct any misapprehensions - I am the very antithesis of Political Correctness! I haven't personally contributed any condolences on any threads. I haven't described anyone as being a weirdo - insensitive, yes. I contribute what I can to flight safety - and try to learn from those who have far more experience than I.

SD

gasax

24th Jul 2006, 21:20

The reason I don't like seeing accidents discussed here or on other newsgroups/bulletin boards is that the discussions very often descend into trying to find blame rather than create a useful learning point and end up assassinating the character of the people concerned or implicated, all of it based on pure speculation and heresay.
If the discussion remains one of "well, xxxxxxx has been known to happen and the consequences are often xxxx" then I'm quite happy to take part in that kind of conversation. What it usually becomes, though, is "well, it clearly must have been xxxx and the pilot/maintainter/whatever was negligent/stupid/careless/whatever" and ends up in rants about procedures, training, individuals' competence and judgement, etc. Very rarely is anything positive or useful said in those kinds of threads. They may appear to be geared toward impoiving safety and learning from others' mishaps, but they often are just masking malicious or, at best, unhelpful gossip based on the words of people who were, by definition, not there. If no one in the conversation was in the cockpit, what value does any of us really think we can add?
The ones that really bug me are the ones that end up accusing the pilot of being negligent or incompetent. It is very easy for us to sit at our computers or around the aero clubhouse and take hours to dissect and rule properly on a situation where a real-life and often scared-witless pilot had mere seconds to act. Any speculation as to the validity of his actions is purely misplaced.
Besides all of that, what good is trying to learn something based on incomplete and innacurate information? Try learning physics using a 1950s text with every third page ripped out and see how far you can get on understanding the theory of relativity. The best we are going to come up with is something we already know or a big question mark when we recognise we don't know enough to have a meaningful dialogue.
That's why I stay off those threads and don't like to see them continued. In my experience they don't really add anything to the cause of safety. If they did, you'd expect to see a noticeable drop in the GA accident rate since the widespread use of the Internet started to make us all much smarter, but that hasn't happened.
Pitts2112
I have a high degree of sympathy for these thoughts but ( there is always a but..) - the internet will never make flying fundementally safer - anymore than any other single element will.
But we all have a high degree of curiosity and I'll admit to it being the reason for looking at (although rarely contributing) to accident threads. I've had a look at the Southend one and cringed at the condolences. It's not a very comfortable feeling but put a gun to my head and I'll say stall/spin. Curiosity satisfied and if people want to wail in public at the loss of a teenager - carry on, I'm not interested anymore.
We have to accept that fora are really little better than pubs, sometimes you find people talking sense, sometimes they are even drunker than you! Try and censor that chat - its like sweeping water uphill. Expecting only noble thought provoking safety comments - probably the same.
Accept that you might find something useful, at worst you're wasted a few minutes of your time. As for the 'thought police' who want no discussion - they need to get a life. Understand that linkages and currency are what makes things memorable, no one is very interested in accidents that happened to people they do not know, that occured many months ago. Currency is nearly everything. I learnt my stall/spin lesson before internet fora, but it was very close and immdiate - I won't forget it. The fora allow us all to have an element of that immediacy - and that is a good thing. I doubt you can measure it but it is a force for good (or at least accident avoidance).
So having quoted Pitts 2112 I'll continue to quibble - look on the net for a snatch of video of an ultralight stalling and crashing into the trees at Sun'n Fun. (its OK he wasn't really hurt!!). Tell me you cann't learnt something from that.
I'll admit that pointing the finger is not nice - but we have an unforgiving hobby (In my case it's a hobby), nature doesn't care for these semantics. But at the end of the day the laws of libel still apply online so there is legal protection.
So I think we should freely speculate on these incidents. Offering condolences - cannot see any reason to - when my father died the last thing on my mind was cruising fora to see what people might be saying. If you know the person a phone call is going to mean a huge amount more. If you don't know the person then what is the point - 3000 people a year died in traffic accidents last year in the UK- should there be an internet memorial where we can all mourne their deaths? Or should we only select 'nice' and 'unusual' people - children killed by lightning - but not those killed by cars.
Carry on posting your condolences - it is a very useful clue to the validity of your opinions. Going back to the Southend crash. Lots of condolences, no one really hitting the nail on the head, a lot of sympathy for everyone - and a lot of discussion about avoiding stall/spin - at least its positive gossip!

Crosswind Limits

24th Jul 2006, 22:03

Censoring what someone has to say just because you don't like it is absurd. We all have valid opinions, some of us will agree, others disagree. If a thread isn't to your liking don't read it, let alone post. I personally can't offer condolences to someone I don't know - for me it doesn't feel right. Others will disagree. I find discussions about possible relevant factors following an accident infinitely more constructive.

Whirlybird

24th Jul 2006, 22:08

Crosswind Limits,

I agree entirely; I said almost the same thing. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone will notice what either of us said. Arguing and having strong opinions is just so much more fun, isn't it. :(

CPilotUK

24th Jul 2006, 22:42

Without wanting to sound hypocritical, I just visited the Essex fire brigade website after reading - in sheer horror and disbelief - that pictures of this incident are posted on a website by the aforementioned authority.
Great for sick and twisted rubber-neckers

Nil Flaps,

Did you re-read your post? :=

Tell me you didn't look at all the photographs. :rolleyes:

PPRuNe Towers

24th Jul 2006, 23:18

Speculation, sharing experiences and discussion is basic PPRuNE policy.

Mawkish, sentimentalising by total strangers after a fatal is loathsome to us and moderators are encouraged to delete it or seperate it into another thread.

We'll take considered speculation over trite, hackneyed sentiment anyday.

Your mileage may well vary but that's how we run the site.

Regards
Rob

k12479

24th Jul 2006, 23:47

Nil Flaps,
With all due respect:
1. That area of the website is clearly for the media. You are not likely to come across it unless you are actively looking for something like that.
2. I appreciate and respect the job that the emergency services do. What is somebody's tragedy is their everyday work. On that particular day they have listed 5 very different incidents. I now appreciate the work they do much more.
3. Today I flew a new type of aeroplane for the first time (a biplane). Its only the 3rd aircraft type I've flown. My speeds were all over the place but there was a very skilled pilot there to save my sorry a*s. Next time though I'll take more care, because I don't want to end up like in the pictures. In my case they are a bit of a wake up call. Maybe they are to some other people too.

Crosswind Limits

25th Jul 2006, 05:58

Why do some people go looking for things they know they wont like and then complain out loud! It makes no sense! :rolleyes:

This was a dreadful accident at an airport I know extremely well. I visited the Essex Fire Brigade web site and looked at the images BUT I knew what was coming. It was a stark reminder to me that whilst flying is fun it can also be dangerous!:(

Crosswind Limits

25th Jul 2006, 06:30

It is news reporting and possibly an attempt to stimulate discussion. We would have all heard about it eventually. Nothing wrong with that. It was news worthy and needed to be reported. That's fact whether you like it or not!

There's another forum on PPRuNe which caters for commercial news items - it's called Rumours and News!

Now what is your exact problem?

Whirlybird

25th Jul 2006, 08:10

Oh, for goodness sake, WR!!!!! (And I nearly said something far, far stronger!!!!!!!)

If just up the road from YOU a light aircraft crashed, are you seriously telling us you'd have no interest whatsoever? That you'd sit there and go, "Oh, right, OK; can you pass the tea please (yawn)". Of course you bloody wouldn't!!!! You'd want to know more. It might be someone you knew. It was close to home and that made it more real. That's human nature, and thank god it is. If we stopped caring about family, then friends, then neighbours, then people we know, we'd be pretty sad and inhuman, don't you think? So, how do you find out what happened? You ask on PPRuNe. Someone will know, if you ask on here.

I heard rumours of that same accident and I wasn't even living close. I nearly asked on here too. Why? Because to me, the whole of the small GA community is a bit of an extended family. It might have been someone I knew, wherever it happened; I've been flying for quite a while and I know a lot of people. And I'd want to know. And I'm sure I speak for quite a lot of us.

So why are threads like this initiated? For all sorts of reasons. To know, to investigate, to learn, etc etc etc. Does the precise reason matter? Why do you have a problem with this?

Jamie-Southend

25th Jul 2006, 08:42

Could not agree with KL12479 more, its a definate wake up call, plus the same could be said for most incidents on the Essex FB site.

As mentioned this area of the site is aimed at the media, but I can assure you that whenever something happens, crash, fire, or cat up a tree, more often than not the Essex FB images are downloaded from the site, and will be used in our local papers, for of course everyone to see.

That`s news i suppose.

Nil Flaps

25th Jul 2006, 11:49

CPilotUK you smart-alec, yes I did re-read my post... now maybe you should.

I went there only because someone on this thread mentioned it and I could not beilieve that the fire service would post these images without having some kind of secure access. If it is designed for the media, it should be password protected.

I saw a number of thumbnails fleetingly. I did not feel the need to open them to have a good gawp. For all the tossers out there who think it's okay for these images to be made public, you obviously have little regard for the family's feelings.

You'd be saying the same thing if it happened to one of your family members or friends. Spare a thought.

We all know there is an element of risk in flying. We all know there are casualties. For those of you who need to see images like these to serve as a wake-up call, maybe you should not be flying in the first place.

bmoorhouse

25th Jul 2006, 13:03

The precise reason does matter if subsequent postings (e.g. analysis) are then taken as being offensive or distasteful.
To take this to its logical conclusion I do not think any of us are mind readers and hence do not know the reason why anybody posts anything unless they tell us. Thus the implied requirement is that we must explain the reason we make each post so that the readers know what is in our mind so that they can respond within the constraints of the original post.

I'll start ...

Dear reader please accept that this post was not made with any intention to offend, cause distress, or start a discussion about any of the following subjects:-
Life of Batteries
Pilot error
Safety record of GPS
Requirement to have a current chart
CAA regulations

It is a statement of fact only for your information and I would be grateful if any posts outside the above stated reasons were posted in a separate thread. Any references to persons living or dead is entirely coincidental, caveat emptor, English Law applies, your house may be at risk if you do not keep up the payments, interest rates may fall as well as rise, God save the Queen.

post BEGINS:-
"My GPS batteries failed on Sunday and for a few moments I was uncertain of my position as I had not packed a spare set - so make sure that this doesn't happen to you"
END of post

May be a wee bit OTT but I think it makes the point.

Whirlybird

25th Jul 2006, 14:33

Thus the implied requirement is that we must explain the reason we make each post so that the readers know what is in our mind so that they can respond within the constraints of the original post.

Well, thanks you so, so much for telling me. After 2600+ posts, I now realise I've been doing it all wrong! :{ Next time I post, just thinking: well, people on Private Flying might like to know about this, as it's aviation-related, I'll think deeply before I do so, and make sure I know the real reason why I'm posting. And I'll try to explain it carefully. If it's a bit of news, catastrophic or otherwise, I'd better explain that all I wanted to do was pass it on, and I don't think I'm feeling good about being the first person to have heard it. But wait, maybe I don't really know my own motives. Maybe I hoped someone would pass on some information. Maybe, deep down, I hoped they'd say: Wow, Whirly, fancy you knowing that! Ooo, this is difficult. I see I'll have to be really, really careful before I post again. In fact, it might be easier to just give it up altogether, and turn into a lurker.

I need a drink. :(

Whirlybird

25th Jul 2006, 14:43

I went there only because someone on this thread mentioned it and I could not beilieve that the fire service would post these images without having some kind of secure access. If it is designed for the media, it should be password protected.

Now let me get this clear. You went there, and you didn't like it. Fair enough. But what gives you the right to say that the rest of us shouldn't go there?

You'd be saying the same thing if it happened to one of your family members or friends. Spare a thought.

When a friend of mine had an extremely nasty flying accident that he was incredibly lucky to survive, he sent me the pictures himself.

We all know there is an element of risk in flying. We all know there are casualties. For those of you who need to see images like these to serve as a wake-up call, maybe you should not be flying in the first place.

Some people know aviation is potentially dangerous and don't want to know the details of accidents. Others read the AAIB reports every month, look at pictures like these, and maybe learn something. Who's to say which is better, or worse, or right, or wrong?

Have you ever heard of the word tolerance? Has it ever occurred to you that another's point of view is as valid as your own?

dublinpilot

25th Jul 2006, 15:06

Whirly,

I'm pretty sure bmoorhouse was being sarcastic when he said that :O

dp

englishal

25th Jul 2006, 15:18

Without wanting to sound hypocritical, I just visited the Essex fire brigade website after reading - in sheer horror and disbelief - that pictures of this incident are posted on a website by the aforementioned authority.
The whole idea of posting such filth made my skin crawl.
It is deplorable that they feel the need to publish images of scenes that they attend including plane crashes, house fires, motor vehicle accidents etc., especially considering that fatalities or severe injuries have been sustained in some of those occurrances, not to mention the distress it would cause family, friends or the people involved by publicly displaying images of terrible misfortune for the entire world to gawp at. What on earth are they thinking?
If it is there to serve as some kind of useful visual investigative record, why not make it private and only accessible to the people who need to see it?
Great for sick and twisted rubber-neckers, awful for family and friends.
Essex Fire Brigade, you should be ashamed.
Don't look then.

Last week I was looking at pictures of severe burns, lacerations, contusions, gunshot wounds, head injuries, severely broken bones, other severe injuries and dead bodies. I was also shown pictures of crashed helicopters, oil rigs on fire, capsized oil rigs, etc.. all supplied by a fire service. This was part of a course I was doing, and was intended that we use this material as part of the course to learn from. I also turned on the telly last night, and Trauma Uncut was on BBC3. It didn't disgust me, though I did turn it off when the Mrs came in as she found it upsetting.

When a friend of mine plowed into a mountain on an instrument approach, killing himself, the second pilot, his two god children and their mother on Christmas eve a couple of years ago, I did go and view the pictures of the crash scene.We speculated very quickly from the evidence available, and using our own interpretation, as pilots, that it was probably pilot error (why else do you fail to go missed at the MAP and fly a nice steady track and altitude with no sign of a problem on the radar traces only to miss the top of a mountain by 15 feet.....in the wrong direction, and at the published minimums). The NTSB, 2½ years on, could find no other cause.

So I will continue to try and learn from accidents in an attempt to stop them from happening to myself, and if by seeing these pictures I then take extra care on a base to final turn, then that is a good thing.