As I wrote in my earlier post:
People who simply refuse to accept responsibility for their mistakes, people who refuse to listen and to learn will forever remain a danger to themselves, and more importantly, to the wider public.
As well as:
...having a distinct preference for talking rather than listening, and being apparently incapable of accepting any responsibility for their mistakes... [they] never, to my recollection, ever felt they had made a mistake. It was always “because of this, that or the other factor” beyond their control.
How prophetic!
“Mr Hagedorn… insisted today he had ‘done nothing wrong’, and had been following the instructions of air traffic controllers throughout.” That’s the first box ticked – ‘done nothing wrong’ – and of course ATC are to blame, not him.
“it was ‘weird clouds’ which had resulted in him burning more fuel than expected” Now we can add the clouds to the list of culprits, but not our hero Mr H.
“As a pilot, I did everything I should have done.” Still squarely not to blame; re-tick box 1.
“My route was chosen in conjunction with the Dundee control tower, but nobody expected the engine to stop when I still had half an hour worth of fuel.” Still not Mr H to blame for anything, but the net is cast wider to include both Dundee Control Tower and his idiosyncratic engine to blame!
“I had just enough fuel to get to Kinloss but what happened was that I burned my margin.” So apparently there is still absolutely no way it could possibly be Mr H’s fault…
“I was flying above the clouds, which were broken so there was good visibility of the ground.” So presumably he feels that this demonstrates perfectly good airmanship for an inexperienced pilot? But again, presumably still somehow not Mr H’s fault that he found himself above the clouds…
“But there were weird clouds, patches at different heights, and I got permission to fly at 9000 ft while I was going through Edinburgh airspace.” I somehow doubt very much that he gained permission to fly in controlled airspace – rather that ATC felt it better to at least be talking to him once they discovered him there…
“The higher the altitude, the more fuel you burn” Not so, but probably Mr H with his expert knowledge of all things aviation and physics will somehow once again not be mistaken, and most definitely not to blame. I wonder, did he revise his fuel consumption figures and endurance before choosing to climb higher? Possibly Biggles ought to be consulted for definitive fuel consumption figures…
“He said he believed the engine cut-out was caused by a problem with that particular type of aircraft” Absolutely true to form for characters of his sort; there is still absolutely no blame laid at his feet – it is now the fault of the aircraft!
“… [he believed] that the incident would lead to all models being grounded for further investigation to prevent a repeat.” In the vain hope that once again, it will turn out to be absolutely no fault of his whatsoever!
“I said it wasn’t a crash, it was a landing.” Oh, silly me! There I was believing that it was his crash that was being reported. I achieve well over 1,000 landings every year; thankfully they are not newsworthy and the plane or helicopter can be flown again. Other competent pilots do exactly the same. That is what tends to distinguish the difference between a landing and a crash, Mr H.
Never before have I seen such a comprehensive catalogue of deluded self-belief, where everyone and everything is to blame, but not the idiot pilot. Clearly my hopes that Mr H might just reflect on his bad airmanship and his good fortune, then start to realise his mistakes in order to become a better pilot are dashed by this defiant defence of his blameless flying.
My view is becoming loss tolerant. What a complete idiot! PLEASE Mr H, don’t even think of flying again until you can accept that you made serious mistakes, and that you need re-training. And if you do ever find yourself airboune again, please, oh please, not in the same airspace as me.