postings about accidents

[vanHorck]

It never seems to stop.....

Somebody gets killed in a crash, somebody else posts it and then the secodary (PPRuNe) problems starts.....

Some people come to post their condolances, others are curious about the know facts, many of us voice an opinion.

These opinions will vary from cautions ones to the ones who have obviously been angered by another loss, and this results in sometimes insensitive comments.

Then another discussion emerges about whether or not voicing opinions should be allowed or not, in which invariably those who knew him find it distasteful, and others remind us that we can learn from this speculation, not in the least because the AAIB reports often take a year to emerge and many never end up reading them, or if they do, the adrenalin of the recent loss of life is lost and the impact of the report is minimalised..

I learn from reading opinions on this website, along with the facts that sometimes emerge to clarify the accident, such as local MET info.

I wish people would be careful on HOW they post their opinions (being sensitive), but I'd like them to continue posting them, both facts and opinions, to reduce the need for soiling threads with discussions about whether or not these postings should be allowed

Puling threads is in my opinion wrong. Much better would be a PM from a moderator to an insensitive poster to edit his thread, and if he refuses to pull the posting rather than the thread

Freedom of speech

[BossEyed]

I take your point, but in this case there doesn't seem to have been a freedom of speech issue - the original poster (not a mod) pulled the thread themselves. And I can quite understand why. :hmm:

The main issue is that, under such circumstances, bose sorry, "people" should self-censor to avoid his/their usual crass and insensitive comments if they are able.

If an inappropriate comment or unintended interpretation does slip through, then they should reflect that anybody who complains may be understandably emotional after the loss of a friend (or even relative).

They might not then immediately react with the Nuclear option, as is their wont. :yuk:

[vanHorck]

I am aware in this case the poster pulled the thread, he came back later to explain.

He is understandably upset and is a new member. I welcome him with open arms and in due course he will learn the (hard but fast and informative) ways of this forum.

Recently a thread was pulled on another issue. I am not attacking the moderators, I think Paul and friends do a good job. Just I d like them to remove posts rather than close a thread.

And at the same time I want us posters to be more sensitive. Bose has changed his tone recently, I am glad because i value his opinion too, but not always his tone

We re improving, lets continue doing that!

[S-Works]

The main issue is that, under such circumstances, bose sorry, "people" should self-censor to avoid his/their usual crass and insensitive comments if they are able.

Whoa steady there cowboy. Tell me what I said that was crass and insensitive? At no point did I make any comment like that.

I merely questioned the wisdom of a low hours pilot flying at night in marginal weather in a high performance aircraft. A comment agreed with by even those who normally disagree with me.

[BossEyed]

Well, the thread's not there now for me to point to, is it? Handy.

However, those who read your invitation to a clearly upset poster to "step outside" will be able to draw their own conclusions.

A significant proportion of the flame wars on this forum begin with a common denominator - you might wish to pnder on who that might be.

[S-Works]

However, those who read your invitation to a clearly upset poster to "step outside" will be able to draw their own conclusions.

Excuse me! The poster you mention publicly threatened to do me over, I merely mentioned he was welcome to pop behind the bike sheds if he really felt the urge. If you are going to get worked up about something I have done at least have the courtesy to quote correctly.

And I have still to work out what upset the poster that wanted to do me over was actually upset about as I made no contentious or disparaging comments!!! I just asked a question about the wisdom of something.....

[Barcli]

Boss-eyed - spot on , I was just sat here trying to work out how to say it !!

[Barcli]

Bose-x,
I read the post that was deleted and there was no threat to " do you over" as you suggest. Yes the poster was upset at you , possibly because so many of your remarks are contentious. Many show real arrogance.
Pontious the Pilot you are not - you need reminding of this sometimes, particularly recently with regard to recent tragic accidents.
Dont like it ? - "have a go at me behind the bike sheds" if you like , I will PM you my address

[S-Works]

Oh god..... :ugh:

The poster who you are referring to made it clear that it was a good job he had photographs of PPRUNers and if I ever showed my face in his area he would do me over. I still have no idea what my 'contentious' remark was!

I merely responded that if he felt the urge to do so we could pop behind the bike sheds. I assume you now are feeling the urge to take a person you have never met from an anonymous forum and prove your masculinity behind the bike sheds? What are we going to do back there see who has the biggest dick?

But you know what, I don't really give a toss what you think. ;)

[DavidHoul52]

I wish people would be careful on HOW they post their opinions (being sensitive), but I'd like them to continue posting them, both facts and opinions, to reduce the need for soiling threads with discussions about whether or not these postings should be allowed


I agree. These discussions typically overwhelm and ultimately kill off any accident related thread. I vote there be a ban on people complaining in this way - these threads are moderated and that should be sufficient. If you are unhappy then PM the moderator. There seems to be a "more sensitive than thou" culture developing.

As for the "behind the sheds" postings - I originally it was just a joke and the individuals concerned were just playing around. Apparently not!

[S-Works]

As for the "behind the sheds" postings - I originally it was just a joke and the individuals concerned were just playing around. Apparently not!

Well I was with my usual mischief making attempting to diffuse a sitaution with an attempt at humour. Look where that got me! :O:O:p:p

Ho hum, I shan't lose any sleep!

[BossEyed]

Oh, bose - butter wouldn't melt, would it? :rolleyes:

As I say, the people who read the original can draw their own conclusions.

If you really were "attempting humour" - which I seriously doubt, having followed your contributions for some time - you seriously ought to step back and consider cause and effect.

Many's the time that you "attempt humour" here and you upset people. Ever thought, that - just possibly - the problem might not be with them?

Even if you really were "attempting humour", ever thought that - just possibly - a thread on which grieving people post less than 24 hours after learning of their loss might not be the place for "banter" with those same grieving people?

[172driver]

Good grief, this is getting ridiculous :ugh: !

First of all, most of us are here to learn about flying. Sometimes this involves learning through the mistakes of others. For those who can't handle the facts: the vast majority (>90%) of aviation accidents/incidents are caused by human error, one way or another. There is a saying that is unfortunately pretty close to the truth: every rule in aviation is written with the blood of someone. Therefore, any discussion of accidents will almost invariably involve some debate about the human factors involved. For those who find this objectionable, there is a simple answer - don't read Pprune, nobody forces you.

I personally am getting sick and tired of the 'RIP', 'condolences', etc brigade who clutter the discussion here. While I can understand the emotion in some instances (ref. the recent Norfolk accident and the SR22), the calls 'wait for the AAIB report' are nonsense. Speculating means thinking about potential causes and that is what keeps us - hopefully - alive and out of trouble up there. Reading a carefully worded report a year or more hence does not.

Finally, should I ever do something really stupid in an a/c that results in my demise, feel free to speculate to your hearts' delight and call me whatever you feel like - if ONE accident is prevented by doing so, it's all worth it.

rant over

[S-Works]

Oh, bose - butter wouldn't melt, would it?

As I say, the people who read the original can draw their own conclusions.

If you really were "attempting humour" - which I seriously doubt, having followed your contributions for some time - you seriously ought to step back and consider cause and effect.

Many's the time that you "attempt humour" here and you upset people. Ever thought, that - just possibly - the problem might not be with them?

Even if you really were "attempting humour", ever thought that - just possibly - a thread on which grieving people post less than 24 hours after learning of their loss might not be the place for "banter" with those same grieving people?

Oh god, I shan't sleep tonight, you don't like me. Oh hang on no I won't because I don't care.

If you can't stand the heat go and stand in the coal shed. (not to be confused with an invite for you to come behind the bike sheds with me).

:ok::ok::ok:

[Bravo73]

BossEyed and barcli certainly seem to have a distorted memory of that thread.

FWIW, it wasn't Bose who started with the threats. He was just responding to the comment from the poster who said something along the lines of 'it's a good thing that there are photos on pprune because if bose ever comes around here...". The threat of violence (although not actually stated), was very much implied.

[PompeyPaul]

I take your point, but in this case there doesn't seem to have been a freedom of speech issue - the original poster (not a mod) pulled the thread themselves. And I can quite understand why

It is amazing that a post which stated "PLEASE DON'T RESPDOND HERE, BUT PM ME INSTEAD" managed to get to 3+ pages.

No doubt there was the usual collection of tossers posting insensitive comments. Some times people on this forum are total wankers (there I said it). Happily posting things that would earn them a punch on the nose if they said it in real life, in the club bar. The depths that some people have dropped to in the past, speaking extremely ill of the very recently deceased is a truly disgusting, subhuman thing to do.

[englishal]

I merely mentioned he was welcome to pop behind the bike sheds if he really felt the urge.
We used to do that with the girls in my day :};)

[Fuji Abound]

A good friend of mine died in his aircraft a few years back.

He died with his partner, who was also in the aircraft.

Every year since, I have flown a slow roll over his grave so I don’t forget. This was the last year - time to move on. I still miss him.

He had family, he had children, he had close friends.

He was a very good pilot.

I gave as much help to the AAIB investigator as I was able. They were unable to establish the cause of the accident.

His family read PpruNe. They read PpruNe every day for a week.

They understood our desire to discuss what went wrong.

They took solace from the thought that another pilot might take away a lesson from the discussion that could save his or her life.

They were distraught by the ill informed speculation about the pilot’s competence.

They asked how people could question his handling of the events of that day when they had no idea what happened.

They wondered how we could be so needlessly incentive about a fellow pilot.

It is for that reason I believe we should restrict discussion about accidents to demonstrable issue or factors.

We may question whether a pilot was adequately trained, experienced or qualified for the flight, but unless we know what training, experience or qualifications he had, we might do as well to keep those thoughts to ourselves.

Lest we forget, the best pilots make mistakes - we each dance on the head of that pin - hopefully with experience we just make fewer mistakes.

The trouble is in our world it need only take one mistake.

[jumpseater]

Whilst postings should be sensitive and considered regarding accidents and similar issues e.g. libel, it's probably worth reminding ourselves that theres no 'Freedom of Speech' on any internet forum.

The final arbiter will always be the board owner, regardless of whether you've complied with forum rules regulations or ettiquette. If you want Freedom of Speech, you have to own your own bulletin board or forum, it's that simple. I make this comment as I see similar 'FOS' comments and censorship/rights demands and cries on those too, many forget that they do not in fact have any 'rights' to post their comments or feelings at all, they are however 'permitted' to.

[Pace]

Fuji

We had a long thread on this before so here we go again :)

I too have lost good friends and it is a risk we all carry that aviation is an unforgiving mistress.

Firstly I do not believe that "close" relatives are glued to what is said in pprune. I very much doubt they even look in here.

The second point which was made in the previous long thread is that Pilots are more likely to take in lessons when the tragic event is fresh in their minds not a year later when the dust has settled and an AAIB report is hardly given a look.

Most who post do not know the pilot so he might as well be called pilot X and it is quite in order to talk about pilot X scenarios as while the people who post may be well off track on their specualtion there are valuable lessons that can be learnt.

Flying is all about risk management and some of us dont manage those risks as well as we should. 99 out of 100 times we will get away with it but the 100th time our mistress will bite and we end up as an accident statistic.

To fly over water at dusk or night will reduce the chances of survival in the event of an engine failure. Flying a single over heavy seas or poor vis and low cloud also increases that risk factor until it becomes a game of russian roulette.

Of course its dreadful when one of our fraternity is killed doing what we do. It brings home the awful consequences that could befall any of us and there for the grace of God go we.

So any discussion which may result in one PPL thinking a bit and avoiding a simular accident has to be good.

We are a pilot forum and that has to be the guiding principal. If you are a relative who is not aviation minded then maybe you should not be here.
If you are a pilot then through all the heated arguements maybe there may be a lesson which will make us more cautious and thus reduce the risk of something simular happening to another one of us.

Pace

[Whirlygig]

Fuji, well said!

To some of the others; you'd be surprised but close relatives DO read pprune. For example, my husband registered on Pprune mainly because I was reading it and we'd comment on threads and posts. There are also many examples where family can register on Pprune specifically to annouce, say, funeral arrangements or to give general thanks for the sympathies received. When someone close to you dies, there is a need to try and find more about them, to contact friends of whom you may not known, and to try to get some solace from a fraternity of which you may not have been part. Please do not think for one moment that Pprune is a private and secret clubroom.

Secondly, I believe everyone should read the AAIB reports; that way, there is more chance that they will read some facts rather than conjecture. For example, I have been asked to make a witness statement regarding an accident which happened a few years ago. I'd made notes at the time and just recently re-read the historic Pprune threads started at the time. Everyone was under the impression that the person who was killed was a qualified PPL; he wasn't. This only came out in the AAIB report.

I have a secret suspicion that those who think it's fair game to say what they want soon after a fatal accident have never suffered bereavement themselves; if they had, then they'd understand some of the emotions, behaviour and thoughts of those left behind. Either that, or they're just devoid of compassion and sensitivity!

Cheers

Whirls

[Phil Space]

Worth remembering the old saying.......

There are old pilots and bold pilots but no old bold pilots!

[Fuji Abound]

Pace

Firstly I do not believe that "close" relatives are glued to what is said in PPRuNe. I very much doubt they even look in here.

I didnt make it up!

All I can say is that in my limited experience they do - and they hang on to every sentiment.

[BRL]

They most certainly do. Couple of weeks ago I got a letter from the son of one of the pilots involved in a fatality. It's not the first either.

You guys behave now as I am just leaving for a little trip away and will return Friday afternoon so this means the grown-ups will be looking after the forum in my absence...!!! :)

[IO540]

There are old pilots and bold pilots but no old bold pilots!

A much more accurate statement would be

There are old pilots and careless pilots but no old careless pilots!

What exactly is "bold"? It's a meaningless term, used within the PPL training business to justify training which is practically inadequate for going from A to B.

[Bravo73]

What exactly is "bold"? It's a meaningless term, used within the PPL training business to justify training which is practically inadequate for going from A to B.

A 'bold pilot' would, IMHO, be one who was willing to take unnecessary risks. (Which is different to being a 'careless pilot').

And it's got little to do with your pet hobby horse of the PPL training system... :zzz:

[tuscan]

The only time I read a report is when its attached here on these threads.

As for who reads these threads post accident, I know for a fact my wife would and she would be most distressed I am sure. Especially if my character was being torn to shreds.
If however it was entirely my fault she might want others to learn from my mistake. Either way she would be very upset reading the predictable pattern that would appear.

I hope it never happens.

[Phil Space]

Quote:
Originally Posted by IO540 View Post
What exactly is "bold"? It's a meaningless term, used within the PPL training business to justify training which is practically inadequate for going from A to B.
A 'bold pilot' would, IMHO, be one who was willing to take unnecessary risks. (Which is different to being a 'careless pilot').

And it's got little to do with your pet hobby horse of the PPL training system...

Perhaps self confident is another description.

Many of the individuals who take themselves and others to the grave are successful motivated and usually in the driving seat of their chosen occupation.

Rules are something they probably view as open to interpretation and the desire to get home is often too strong to have weather get in the way.

Take a look at this
Investigators searching for cause of plane crash (http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/news/local/4729783.html)

[vanHorck]

"Finally, should I ever do something really stupid in an a/c that results in my demise, feel free to speculate to your hearts' delight and call me whatever you feel like - if ONE accident is prevented by doing so, it's all worth it."

Well done 172 driver! The same applies to me!

[Fuji Abound]

172 driver

Yes, I would echo those sentiments, but of course it is not you this is about - after all to be blunt you are dead and I dont suppose care too much - this is where family and friends come in who as I have said my have different sensibilities from you - that is why I expressed the view that we as a forum can both achieve what you are seeking while at the same time showing restraint in how we discuss the issues.

[vanHorck]

My GF sometimes reads here too, and I ve told her not to stop any thread if ever it s about me after i ve died in flight

[DavidHoul52]

If someone close to you dies unexpectedly an initial reaction is to often to ask "why" and "how". I don't believe we serve the bereaved well by wrapping them in cotton wool and offering them no more than kind words.

If someone close to the accident victim comes looking for possible answers on this forum, then give them the freedom to do it. Whatever is written here by way of speculation will be no more than what they have already pondered.

My dad died of a heart attack. He was 81 but otherwise in good health. He was five minutes drive from the nearest hospital but no one called an ambulance. I would not want to blame anyone - most probably it was his own disinclination to cause a fuss, but when one asks questions all one gets is "well he had a dodgy heart and he was in his eighties".

[Whirlygig]

I don't believe we serve the bereaved well by wrapping them in cotton wool and offering them no more than kind words.
Does that mean you think the family and friends left behind would be better off hearing the views of some strangers saying that the deceased was an idjit and an incompetent aviator?

Personally, I believe that "the bereaved" need no more than kind words; they certainly do not need to read about ill-informed speculation. If a pilot is to blame for an accident, let that come out from "official" sources; even then it can be hard for a family to accept.

Unfortunately, mud has a habit of sticking and that is the danger with post-accident speculation so soon after an accident.

Cheers

Whirls

[Fuji Abound]

I would agree Whirls.

The real danger is completely unfounded speculation - of which I have seen a great deal in the past.

Unfounded is the key here.

Not even close to the sad loss of life but my last engine failure in a twin was extensively debated elsewhere. The debate was based on almost a complete absence of any "facts" and yet there were a few wags who were happy to not only create the evidence but also provide their services as judge and jury. The only problem was clearly they were commenting on a different incident - their version was so far removed from what actually occurred.

Whilst it kept me entertained in different circumstances it could have been unnecessarily distressing because so much of the speculation was unfounded.

In short stay with the facts, keep the specualtion for another thread and give it the title - "what might happen if"

[C172 Hawk XP]

Does that mean you think the family and friends left behind would be better off hearing the views of some strangers saying that the deceased was an idiot and an incompetent aviator?

Actually, that is exactly what is happening right now, in another thread on here about pilots who were drunk, unlicensed and overweight, thereby killing themselves and an innocent passenger.

Furthermore, on a forum like this, these people are not so much "strangers", but rather fellow enthusiasts of the passion we all love, and whose views are therefore worth listening to.

[Fuji Abound]

I think you have missed the point.

The thread you are talking about is a reaction to a report which sets outs the evidence of the circumstances surrounding the accident,

On other threads the reaction is often to speculation that has absolutely no susbstance in fact.

Two very different things.

In the very thread you mention before the report was published it is quite possible we might have commented that the pilot was reckless because he flew in IMC without being qualified to do so and was drunk at the time which would have been deeply distressing to relatives and friends if our specualtion was without substance.

[C172 Hawk XP]

we might have commented that the pilot was reckless because he flew in IMC without being qualified to do so and was drunk at the time which would have been deeply distressing to relatives and friends if our speculation was without substance

Yes, I'd accept that. Taken literally, probably quite true. But this is something which happens nowadays, and to try to ignore it is pointless and unrealistic. At every level in society, from the national news headlines to two neighbours just chatting in the pub, some speculation takes place. Would we really want our freedom of speech to be curbed to a point where speculation were not possible ?

And I'd just like to repeat my previous point that

Furthermore, on a forum like this, these people are not so much "strangers", but rather fellow enthusiasts of the passion we all love, and whose views are therefore worth listening to

[Whirlygig]

And I'd just like to repeat my previous point that

Quote:
Furthermore, on a forum like this, these people are not so much "strangers", but rather fellow enthusiasts of the passion we all love, and whose views are therefore worth listening to

I'm afraid I will have to disagree there. Some people on these forums are personal friends; others are complete and utter strangers. Whether we are "fellow enthusiasts" is irrelevant to, say, my mother or husband. And, just because we're fellow enthusiasts does not make yours, or my views any more or less worth listening to. We can all be prone to being full of bull****, some to a greater or lesser degree than others. The trouble is, the less experienced forum readers may not appreciate the difference!

There is no such thing as "freedom of speech". Every day of our lives we have to bite our tongues; it's called society and awareness of propriety and is what makes us a civilised race. The trouble is, the anonymity of an internet forum makes us impervious to the social mores of what is acceptable to say and what isn't.

Some of the comments I have read on fatal accidents beggar belief. If any of those posters genuinely believe that they would make the same comments to a grieving widow at the wake to her face, then fine (although I'd suggest your social skills are somewhat lacking). If you think it inappropriate to say something to someone's face, then why say it here?

There is a major difference between comments written on a public forum and two friends chatting in a pub. When you're chatting in the pub, you KNOW the person to whom you ae talking, you know their viewpoints and you know their attitudes. It is not the same on a public forum which anyone can read. As I said before, anyone who thinks Pprune (and aviation in general) is a private club, get real!

Cheers

Whirls

[Pace]

Firstly this is a PILOT forum not a bereaved relatives forum.Should it be true that such people do read these forums then they have to understand that what we say is speculation and not especially fact.

It is natural and good that we do discuss the possibilities because while 90% may be off the mark that 90% may still include possible reasons for a simular accident.

While an accident is fresh in our minds we take note and if taking note saves one life then these forums are worth it.

This maybe blunt but this is a Pilots forum should anyone be offended or upset by what is said here than dont come here and if you do realise that it is speculation not fact.

The interesting thing is that the message is wait for the AAIB reports but even there as in the drunken pilot report we have the same protect the feelings of the relatives so you cannot win regardless with some people.

Pace

[Phil Space]

From the AAIB report it is evident that it was known by some at his home base that he flew in cloud on previous sorties with no IMC rating. I would question his fellow group members as to why they let him fly on an expired licence.
Most groups make sure all the paperwork is in place and members comply.

I am sure there are a few other pilots out there doing exactly the same without
being called to order.

[172driver]

Firstly this is a PILOT forum not a bereaved relatives forum.Should it be true that such people do read these forums then they have to understand that what we say is speculation and not especially fact.

Amen to that Pace :ok:

Nobody forces the 'bereaved' (real or imagined) to read PPrune. If you can't handle speculation - stay away (or start 'BAFF' - the Bereaved Aviators' Families Forum).

[Fuji Abound]

It is natural and good that we do discuss the possibilities because while 90% may be off the mark that 90% may still include possible reasons for a simular accident.

Aside from the relatives, there is something inherently pointless about hypothetical discussion. Perhaps it has something to do with my training as a scientist and perhaps it is why I don’t read the Sun.

Of course you can take just about any factor and surmise it might have been involved in an accident - it could have hit another aircraft, a spar might have failed, the pilot may have passed out, he could have been drunk, but what would the point be? If the forecast was nearly CAVOK the pilot might have gone into a bit of cloud, but in reality he almost certainly didn’t.

In short, far more useful and productive to restrict speculation to the facts, to what we know about the accident, and what factors might realistic have been involved. Not least this shows we might know what we are talking about.

I would hope our community is a little better able to rise above the sensational Sun style reporting.

[mm_flynn]

The glacial speed of releasing the facts encourages the speculation. I think it is only natural for people to think about 'what if' when some significant (and normally tragic) incident brings it to mind. Much less compelling when you read about it a year or two years later mixed into a list of relatively minor events and removed from the shock of the event.

[IO540]

I think one learns far more from the internet than from other sources.

[DavidHoul52]

Refraining from insulting the dead or apportioning blame without knowing all the facts does not mean we should not speculate about possible causes.

And as been pointed out this is a pilots forum. It is not the media. If there is any place to discuss an accident surely it is here.

I emphasize again that one can go too far with being "sensitive" towards the bereaved. They appreciate your condolences but they also have a need to talk about the deceased and the circumstances surrounding their death. If they want to be left alone they are free to do just that. No one is forcing them to log in to Pprune.

In any discussion of any accident there are going to be points raised and within minutes a posting by someone who disagrees. This in itself creates a lot more balance than what one would find in the media.

Consensus on PPrune? Never happens!

[wsmempson]

I think the clue here, for any freinds, relations, colleagues etc. who log-on to this site to see what is being said, is in the name of the site; I think that if I logged on to a site which described itself as a "rumour networks", I would expect to see a variety of opinions and rumours being discussed - not all of them pleasant or factually correct: Such is the nature of a "rumour network".

I think that it is important for us to discuss these accidents in a frank and open way - especially when many of the topics under discussion are live issues which are relevant to all of us.

Frankly, if I plummet out of the sky into a puppy-farm run by nuns tomorrow, do feel free to speculate - I couldn't give a toss and neither will my rellies - and if it stops someone else repeating my mistake, so much the better.:D

[Fuji Abound]

Well obviously the pilot was drunk, clearly he had flown into a cloud without an instrument rating, I bet the aircraft's C of A had expired, the weather was dreadful, obvioulsy he was lacking in currency, in fact the classic spiral spin accident waiting to happen - there that should cover most of the usual possibilites - all we have to do now is work out which accident it was and who the pilot was.

I love a good rumour.

Goodness knows why we have a go at the press when they mention the local school and the white knuckle moments before the pilot narrowly missed the play ground - there is probably more basis in fact in what they have to say than us so called informed pilots.

Never let get a good rumour get in the way of fact based, mature and balanced discussion - thats what I say.

Oh and when the friends and relatives have a bit of a page through here on the basis that it is a Professional Pilots Rumour Network and they might read an informed account of what could have gone wrong they should jolly well expect us professionals to rumour that their nearest and dearest commrad in arms of ours, now that he is in no position to defend himself, is free game for us to speculate he was a complete **** - based on - ah yes, I know, not a lot.

Very uplifting and edifying I must say.

What is so wrong staying with the facts? What satisfaction or benefit is there in making it up?

:ok:

[madflyer26]

Fuji Abound,

Alas someone with a reasonable and considered post with regards to posts on accidents.

There appears to be many pilots claiming moral high ground and berating the pilot or pilots on the Oban thread. I just wonder how many of them have flown or driven after a night where alcohol has been consumed. No person is perfect or infallible and we all make mistakes and some ultimately pay with their life. It's a little crass to use the words like ''he got what he deserved'' this has no place on this forum and suggests that the posters are taking some sort of satisfaction out of the accident. It could be said that the pilot did flaunt the rules and took unnecessary risks but he didn't set out to kill his wife and daughter. Being a local pilot of North Connel it's my opinion on the day of the accident the weather was the main factor in leading to the crash. All other factors wouldn't have helped but to dissect them in detail detracts from the most likely and probable cause.

I do concur that discussion is healthy and promote thought, and hopefully challenges a pilot to look at his own style of flying thus preventing a similar accident. But personal attacks on dead pilots is a touch spineless and shows the type of people who post on here under the cover of anonynimity. It wouldn't be nice for this mans surviving daughter to read some of the posts that have been written on the Oban thread clearly attacking a dead man, speaks volumes for these people.:=

Regards MF26

[S-Works]

There appears to be many pilots claiming moral high ground and berating the pilot or pilots on the Oban thread. I just wonder how many of them have flown or driven after a night where alcohol has been consumed

Indeed, I asked the question several posts ago and it went unanswered.

While I have no doubt the alcohol contributed to the incident it seems that the other factors have greater blame.

Take aside the medical and alcohol issues.

We have an untrained pilot attempting a flight in IMC using the AP as the tool. This failed and as the pilot was untrained to deal with the issue control of the aircraft was last and game over. The fact that the pilot was flying illegally both in terms of medical and alcohol are ancillary factors in the bigger picture. Imagine a scenario, father wife and daughter, out on a happy family outing in scotland have dinner together, a couple of bottles of wine and a late night. Early morning weather is poor but pressing appointments mean they 'need' to get home, oh well lets give it a shot, the forecast is clearer south and we have the AP. Off they go and the AP failure results in disaster. Taking aside the accident itself is the rest of the scenario one close to home for many people?

So who is going to answer my post and admit to flying with a hangover?

[Pace]

It could be said that the pilot did flaunt the rules and took unnecessary risks but he didn't set out to kill his wife and daughter.

Madflyer

No neither did the football star who drank because his girlfriend was seeing someone else, slept for two hours and then decided to drive to see his girlfriend and have it out with her.

The result of that drive was that he killed two innocent children, destroyed their lives and has probably wrecked the life of their Mother.

I am sure he is a lovely chap in normal circumstances but still got sent to prison for seven years and has ruined his career as a footballer. he had the same alcohol levels as this Pilot.

Yes we all do silly or stupid things but equally we have to live with the consequences if they go wrong. Especially in aviation it is an unforgiving mistress at the best of times.

Mix into aviation the absurd cocktail that this pilot did and I am sure the odds were pretty small of a successful outcome to the flight.
Vacuum failures occur I had one solid IMC years ago in a single but any competant IR pilot will identify that and deal with it. This pilot was not competant and sadly innocent people were relying on his competancy and descision making for their safety.

Pace

[PompeyPaul]

So who is going to answer my post and admit to flying with a hangover?Same question was posed at a flight safety evening at my local flying club. Nobody put their hand up. Then a couple of instructors admitted they had once, then a bunch of other people admitted it, then most people in the room (some 100+ pilots) put their hand up.

I did on one occasion, haven't since and plan never to do it again.

Before I did my PPL I really had no idea that alcohol stuck around in your system so long. I wonder how many people on the roads, in the morning, are actually drinking and driving, without realising it, having had beers the night before ?

5 pints of Stella is 15 units. You start @ 19:00 means you are not clear until 10:00 the next day. If you got up at 7:00 to drive somewhere then you are well over the limit.

[englishal]

Fuji has some good points as usual.

I think that we should refrain from insulting but not refrain from questioning. By that I mean statements like "what a pillock he was taking off into OC 200'" is an insult because to some, OC at 200' is a calculated risk and normally safe. For a new PPL it would indeed be stupid but for a 1000 hr IR pilot it could be a non event. On the other hand, asking about "it was 200' OC, was he qualified to go" would not be insulting the dead.....the dead don't care, it is their families that would remember.

However one thing that I have learned in almost 9 years of flying is that in 80-85% of accidents, the loose nut at the wheel is to blame (pilot). When the accident investigators can't find an answer, it is usually because there is no reason for the aeroplane to crash.......

I used to implicitly trust pilots who had more experience than me, thinking that they probably knew best. That changed Christmas Eve several years ago when my friend and had-been CPL / ME instructor flew into a mountain killing all 5 (& two visiting children) onboard in IMC . Now I ALWAYS question, and is why I like to question on Pprune when accidents happen.

[madflyer26]

Pace,

I agree with most of your post but what grips me is the self righteous attitude of some people on this subject. I am sure there is plenty of examples of people inadvertently killing loved ones but it's rather sad to be picking one factor from an accident and using it as an excuse for shaming the dead. I am certain if the guy could speak from the dead he would agree that he made an arse of his decision making process but he can't and he has paid along with his wife and daughter.

There probably is many questions that will go unanswered with this case but it's fair to say that the weather was the biggest factor attributing to the accident. Pilots can argue all day and night about all the other casual factors but bottom line the weather brought about the demise of this aircraft and this is what we should discuss and learn from.

Regards MF26

[collectivefriction]

If a low hours Cirrus pilot decides, before the AAIB report is published, that despite being in a state of the art aircraft that he wont chance it in marginal VFR conditions and hence possibly saves his and others lives - then all the speculation is worth it. Irrespective of what was is finally found to be the cause in this sad accident.

If we post here and speculate then a large number of Pilots WILL read it and someones life MAY be saved as a result. Contrast this against the possibility that one, very unfortunate, pilots family MIGHT read a thread and subsequently they MIGHT be upset by what they read.

Not speculating does none of us any favours. We all know that it is speculation and we all know that the likely cause may be far removed from the theories proferred on these and other forums.

Speculate away I say, and to those who are offended I say try and look beyond what is being said and understand why it is being said.

[Fuji Abound]

If a low hours Cirrus pilot decides, before the AAIB report is published, that despite being in a state of the art aircraft that he wont chance it in marginal VFR conditions and hence possibly saves his and others lives - then all the speculation is worth it. Irrespective of what was is finally found to be the cause in this sad accident.

I think you have missed my point.

If you know the pilot had low hours, inadequate training and evidence that pilot error may have caused the accident then it is reasonable to speculate that these factors may have been causal - if you don’t have the evidence it is rumour mungering, and you might just as well say the pilot was probably drunk, or he was known to be erratic.

As pilots I suspect most of us know the usual suspects in an accident - pretty pointless to select a few items off the suspect list and suggest they could be factors. Being pilots I would hope we might take a more analytical approach - but as I said earlier nothing like a quick bit of personality assassination or holier than though rebuke - Bose’s point I think.

Of course you can do this in anonymity on here, but would you do it if you were the AAIB examiner meeting with the relatives?

The relatives dont have to read this forum. If the press decide to publish some unfounded scandal about your personal life you dont have to read it. You dont even need to read it when friends tell you your mate is widely rumoured on PPruNe to have been drunk in charge.

Here is a question the relatives ask a lot - how do you know that? How do you know the pilot lost control? How do you know the engine quit? How do you know the aircraft entered a spin?

I know .. .. ..

.. .. .. we thought we would make it up to spice things up a bit. :)

I know it might seem more exciting, but perhaps this is one occasion it would be more responsible to stay with the facts.

BTW recent evidence is all the campaigns telling you smoking will kill you is probably counter productive - perhaps telling pilots that if they are flying drunk they are complete tw***s and will kill themselves is equally counter productive - so dont think you are necessarily doing your peers a good turn.

There are more effective ways.

[IO540]

We should discuss these matters pretty freely. I am sure most pilots who participate on here (actively or not) learn a lot here. I have certainly learnt a lot from the internet - far more than from the rather sterile world of the flight training establishment which in any case tends to turf you out when they can see you have no more bits of paper to go for.

I do however wish that pprune was moderated more, to completely eliminate the crude personal attacks which have given it such a bad name in some places. This isn't hard to do IMHO - the rules would be pretty clear.

As regards accident discussions, calling a pilot a pillock or whatever for flying in such and such weather doesn't add anything to knowledge.

[S-Works]

I do however wish that PPRuNe was moderated more, to completely eliminate the crude personal attacks which have given it such a bad name in some places. This isn't hard to do IMHO - the rules would be pretty clear.

Then perhaps we should think about that before embarking on our own little private message campaigns and sharing personal information on individuals just because we may feel we may have been wronged in the past.

and yes all those people we think we are befriending and trying to help out with such information are just as quick to stab us in the back and take great delight in telling where the information came from........

If we want rules then we have to play by them...... :=

[vanHorck]

Emotions come into things.....

I started this thread but was also a poster on the Oban accident where I said the pilot was a disgrace to the flying community.

Why did I do this!?

I guess the combination of alcohol, invalid license, no medical and flight into IMC without the proper rating realy angered me more than I expected.

I would never fly with an invalid license just like i would never fly or drive with any alcohol in my blood, but I guess I am the exception to the rule maybe? I dont drink much anyway...

The interresting thing is that I took the high ground on what (not) to post but actually broke my own rule.... Sorry... Call if Forum-itis

On the Oban issue, let me refrase: My personal opinion is that flying with excess alcohol or with any alcohol in the blood whatsoever is totally unacceptable. It is also my opinion that flying without a valid medical or lapsed license is not a wise thing to do. I do of course feel sorry for those who lost loved ones. I am sure they will also remember the good things these people did in their lives

[Slopey]

I don't recall seeing any posts by relatives on any of the accident threads recently - if they don't already frequent here, then they're not likely to stumble on it by chance, unless directed. Granted, if they do then wish to complain they're unlikely to do it in the thread, and complain to management instead, but that's their prerogative to do so, and for the mods to take the action they deem fit (after all, it's their train set).

As a low hours pilot myself, I greatly value the speculation - even it if turns out subsequently not to be a causal factor in the accident, it always gets you thinking about other issues, and I'm careful to ensure that the "swiss cheese" factor doesn't strike my own flying - all the better for being reinforced by the various threads on here.

I don't see anything wrong with an unbiased view or speculation on the cause of an accident by other flyers - it goes without saying that personal attacks or slander is unacceptable, but comments repeating known facts can't be out of place if the information is correct and in the public domain.

So, I for one benefit greatly from the discussion/speculation/knowledge passed on in these threads, and hope they continue. To not speculate or discuss an incident denies everyone an opportunity to ensure that something similar doesn't happen to them, and it's not something you can get anywhere else.

(and no, I've never flown with a hangover, and specifically avoid all alcohol if I expect to be flying the next day :) - I fully intend to keep it up!)

[IO540]

sharing personal information on individuals

I've never done anything like that, bose x; in fact I know hardly anything about you. That seriously sticky situation you got yourself into on flyer.co.uk (thread now deleted, I've noticed) was entirely your own doing over the years, and I am sure you will agree that the less said about that the better :ok:

[plus7g]

"If we want rules then we have to play by them...... "
I agree ,rules and regulations as a pilot are there for a reason Bose-x.:=:=:=

Ditto Io-540,s post above.

[Fuji Abound]

I don't recall seeing any posts by relatives on any of the accident threads recently - if they don't already frequent here, then they're not likely to stumble on it by chance

Slopey - I do respect your views, but you must accept what others say.

Whirly and I have both said relatives do read these threads - honest we are not making it up. I have been around PPruNe to long, so I can tell you they also post here on occasions.

Relatives and friends have a strong desire to know what others are saying about their loved ones - it is human nature.

[IO540]

I don't see a solution to the 'relatives' issue, Fuji.

The whole flying scene appears pretty bizzare to outsiders. The regs for a start are utterly bizzare, as is the % of time pilots spend debating the most obscure quirks of the regs. The various ways one can kill oneself, if read by the uninitiated, can make flying look incredibly dangerous. For example, most non-pilots I know think that if you stall a plane, it just tips over and plummets uncontrollably into the ground. The rather technical nature of instrument flight appears obscure and it seems impossible to achieve safe flight. Yet the same people are happy to step into a 737 and just 'trust' the pilots - as if the pilots were doing something completely different to what we do.

If/when I ever kill myself flying, I'd like the incident to be fully discussed, with no holds barred.

[Fuji Abound]

I don't see a solution to the 'relatives' issue, Fuji.

The solution is, as I said earlier, stay with the facts.

All I am really saying is it is tiresome when contirbutors simly want to invent possible scenarios when there is nothing we know about the accident that would rule such scenarios in (or out).

I have sat through an AAIB "interview" with the relatives. As you might expect they take the relatives through the events that occurred before the accident, explaining carefully on what evidence they are relying or why it is reasonable to speculate a particular event took place. The result is a balanced and professional interpretation of the events that lead or contributed to the accident.

At least we can all make an effort to achieve the same level of professionalism on a thread where we are specifically discussing a particular accident.

For example, on a recent thread there were repeated suggestions that an engine failure was the cause. In fact there was not a shred of evidence to support that position. Of course, one thing lead to another, and the pilot was clearly incpable of handling an engine failure. What a load of b*lls.

In that case because I have a particular interest I have a pretty good idea what caused the accident based on reliable evidence but that evidence is not in the public domain. I cant therefore support any speculation I might wish to contribute, and for that reason I dont see I can justify posting.

Anyway I appreciate that not everyone agrees with my views and I have more than had my say.

[IO540]

OK, I agree, but we don't have much in the way of facts.

The 'facts' are a closely guarded secret. Cannot get ATC data, cannot get flight plan data, even finding out the type and registration takes some digging sometimes. Cannot find historical TAFs (it seems).

All we can do is speculate and discuss hypothetical scenarios.

[collectivefriction]

It may be tiresome to you but a lot of us, as shown in the posts on this thread find value in it.

As to professionalism

The AAIB and the discussions on this forum serve two different ends.

The AAIB want to determine the probable cause.

The different posters want to discuss possibilities rather than probabilities and are quite happy to to speculate as to things that may have cause an incident irrespective of whether there is any supporting evidence.

It's basic human nature, it's what makes us look at something and say "I can do better than that", it's curiosity, it's why we say why?, and I believe it's part of what makes us better pilots.

Whenever I screw up when flying I spend the next few days/weeks running through the events that led up to my cockup working out what went wrong and what I can do to make sure that it doesn't happen again. Occasionally I read something on here (irrespective of whether it is relevant to the incident being discussed) that sparks a similar train of thought - and that might possibly save my life one day.

If we stop discussing these things or posters start making all their comments nice and fluffy because it might offend someone who might read it - then we have lost a valuable resource.

[Nibbler]

When an accidental death occurs the painful need to understand and find answers remains. The time it takes to get the 'facts' can sadly take years but the void this creates can be very difficult to deal with.

Is it not feasible the coulda, woulda, shoulda, opinion, debate, argument and fact allows relatives and friends, who may have little or no experience of aviation, to explore and come to understand the possibilities, from the realistic and probable to the ludicrous?

Of course people would never say to a grieving relative what they would write here, as such this medium allows for an open, honest (however misguided), full and frank exchange. To have this forum, even with its faults, must be of great benefit to those who are desperately trying to understand.

I hope you never have cause to debate it but should the unthinkable happen this would be the first place my wife would come to get more information.

[BRL]

I don't recall seeing any posts by relatives on any of the accident threads recently - if they don't already frequent here, then they're not likely to stumble on it by chance, unless directed. Granted, if they do then wish to complain they're unlikely to do it in the thread, and complain to management instead, but that's their prerogative to do so, and for the mods to take the action they deem fit (after all, it's their train set).

They do read these forums and they do get in touch with us.

[Fuji Abound]

The different posters want to discuss possibilities rather than probabilities and are quite happy to to speculate as to things that may have cause an incident irrespective of whether there is any supporting evidence.

I did say I'd said my lot, but you do make a good point.

I agree it is a fine line.

However, the probabilities seem a lot more relevant to me, otherwise every "accident thread" deteriorates into the usual collection of probabilities, usually followed by the pilot was a complete pi**ock, which I wouldn’t have thought actually helps anyone.

By all means discuss the possibilities, but why not take this to another thread - along the lines of "why do accidents occur"?

[collectivefriction]

usually followed by the pilot was a complete pi**ock, which I wouldn’t have thought actually helps anyone.

Agreed but unfortunately that is the nature of the internet. I think we all know who the real pillock is in those posts so easier to ignore it.

By all means discuss the possibilities, but why not take this to another thread - along the lines of "why do accidents occur"?

That would work in theory but unlikely in practice because people are lazy and it is much easier to hit reply.


At the end of the day we each have our opinions and all are relevant and they are usually aired everytime there is an incident like this. The fact of the matter is that neither your opinion on here nor mine is likely to make one jot of difference to what happens next time. c'est la vie.

[IO540]

The fact of the matter is that neither your opinion on here nor mine is likely to make one jot of difference to what happens next time

I would disagree. I learnt a lot (post PPL qualification) from the internet, and I know that others do too. That is why I post here; not for promoting some kind of image etc etc. I think most of the people (those who take care to write something meaningful) post here for the same reason.

[collectivefriction]

IO540

I think you have misunderstood - if you read my posts you will understand my stance.

I meant fuji will not stop people speculating etc.

[Slopey]

Quote:
I don't recall seeing any posts by relatives on any of the accident threads recently - if they don't already frequent here, then they're not likely to stumble on it by chance
Slopey - I do respect your views, but you must accept what others say.

Whirly and I have both said relatives do read these threads - honest we are not making it up. I have been around PPruNe to long, so I can tell you they also post here on occasions.

Absolutely - as others have said, sticking to the facts should be the m.o. and relevant speculation regarding those facts (as far as they are available).

Obviously, it's perfectly reasonable for relatives to request that threads are removed should they deviate from facts and enter into the realms of unfounded criticism, however, if criticism is warranted, imho on this forum it should be able to be aired. The value of these threads should not be diminished as imho it adds to the bank of "I don't want to end up like him" checks I subconciously run through before flying.

Ultimately, the mods have final say what is or isn't on here, and I'd presume upon their judgement if that was needed. And of course, the interests and feelings of relatives are paramount, and if needed, discussion should be conducted in a more "generic" thread.

[BossEyed]

....however, if criticism is warranted, imho on this forum it should be able to be aired.

Quite so, but the key phrase is "...if it is warranted".

There is an enormous sifference between criticism on the day after the AAIB report is published (i.e. when we know what happened), and criticism on the day after the accident (i.e. when we don't; and neither does anyone else).

It's fairly simple - in the immediate aftermath of the accident, the following tone is reasonable:

"I wonder if X happened, given that it appears Y and Z?"

The following is not:

"What an irresponsible idiot; anyone could see that X happened, and if he hadn't done Y..."

The above often isn't said explicitly, but strongly implied by thoughtless posters. That causes unwarranted pain - why would anyone wish to do that?

[Pace]

Firstly if relatives do view the contents of these forums then they have to appreciate that the posts are speculation.

I am no expert on loss but have been through the process of loosing people who are close.

Emotions will go in every direction from sadness to anger but a needed part of that process is not to be cotton woooled. "oh there is X dont talk to him about Y as he might get upset" so everyone avoids talking to you or if they do they avoid "THE SUBJECT" and that doesnt help anyone.

I am of the camp that these accidents should be dissected and torn apart because it only when such accidents occur that pilots are more open to thinking.

We tend to go through a shock stage because it is close to home.

There for the grace of god go I. None of us ever want to know that a good pilot in a good aircraft has been killed because that opens up our own vulnerability.

If its an accident pilot waiting to happen flying a load of junk then we feel more comfortable that he asked for it and its unlikely to occur to us.

In that process of taking the accident apart we too go through processes. Some of that process is to discuss every scenario real or unreal where such a tragic event could happen. In that way we become alert to the possibilities so that we can avoid a simular situation.

A year down the line when the AAIB reports are released the event is forgotten, hardly anyone reads the accident report and they are less likely to take in the messages.

When one of my best friends was killed flying into a hill covered in cloud for three weeks I didnt fly, I didnt read my aviation magazines. Then I forced myself to climb the hill to examine the crash site rather than hiding away from my fears. Then on my first flight I overflew the hill as some sort of mental fly past and a salute to him but also so that I could move on from the accident and face what was totally a pilot fault accident.

With regards to relatives I am sure in all reality with their limited knowledge that they too think the unspoken word the unsavoury possibilities that their loved one has done something stupid. Most accidents are pilot mistakes and that is fact so reading about speculative possibilities is probably helping to prepare the relative to accept their worst fears that their loved one is only human and not some invincible God.

Finally as in anything in life beware where you look if your not prepared to see what you dont want to find and that is the only advice I could give those relatives. This is a Pilot forum and if you cant come here with an open mind then dont or do when you feel you can.

Pace

[fredfred]

I read this thread originally a few days ago and have left if a while to collect my thoughts and try and make sense of conflicting emotions. I came here because I had heard that the family and friends of a fellow pilot had been really upset by comments on a previous thread. The poster has pulled the thread - but I believe in good faith he believed his family member / friend had "friends" on this site who would want to know of his demise and perhaps show compassion and condolence in the usual way and was shocked by the judgmentalism of some of the responses. I'm sure you'll correct me if I am way off mark here as the original thread has been pulled so I'm only going on the remaining thread. So what is so offensive about Bose's comment - he probably said what most reasonable thinking people have concluded. I have been involved in some speculation as to the accident too - and we really don't know. I think what is offensive is the lack of compassion, the judgementalism and the wisdom questioning. The subtlety of the issue I suppose is - and I ask you directly Bose - would you go up to a family member or friend of the deceased and say what you said on this site? I wouldn't. I might privately share your thoughts but my thoughts would be with the family and friends who need to hear what an amazingly unique person the deceased was - and will have the rest of their lives to ponder on the circumstances of his death. So Bose, I am asking you "Where was the love and compassion in your comment?" Is the truth as you see it always justification for comments that leave those around you battered and emotionally bruised. You say you don't care - well a lot of us do and if you look in your heart, I think you do care but maybe noone cares about you and that's what this is really about.