The only winners in this one will be the lawyers.
'Twas ever thus!
I read the report this morning - we mustn't forget that we're talking about people's deaths here, so a little respect is in order. There was also speculation about the underlying influences in a recent non-microlight fatality - see
other thread
Perhaps the AAIB is just reporting what they see to be relevant facts to the case, as they did in the other case. And don't forget Barshaker, that the AAIB are part of DoT and not part of CAA.
Returning to 912ul's points, I don't think it begs his question at all. Perhaps he'd like to search out and report to us the statistics on serious accidents on microlight trial lessons (or helicopter or Tiger Moth or
Jet Provost trial lessons for that matter).
912ul is clearly trying to provoke argument by his misrepresentation of the AAIB's view about the culture within microlighting; "cavalier" and "prevalent" are not mentioned - for those who have not read the report, I quote "that a minority of their members are inadvertently undermining the positive safety culture being promoted by the BMAA". This is a very different issue and is perhaps worthy of a thread of its own. I partly agree with Barshaker, however, that a couple of sentences in the "Factual" section might have been better placed under "Analysis" - but that's hardly a big enough error to damn the whole report.
Finally, 912ul's dig at the loss to the BMAA of its shortly-to-be-ex-CTO is misplaced. I believe the new incumbent of the post is as well (if not better) qualified for the job than his predecessor was on joining the BMAA.
Madam Breakneck