grumpytroll:
The author of the report implies that the pilot decided to do a go-around or that one was discussed. An experienced helicopter pilot could infer that the forward airspeed was attained as a result of the go-around maneuver, after the failed attempt at a hovering landing. If that was the case, then unfortunately, not enough power was pulled or the aircraft was IMC and situational awarerness was further degraded. Therefore, brown out could still play a major roll in the accident.
Yes, an experienced pilot might infer this. An experienced
reader might have gleaned from the voluminous accident report (did you read it yet?) that the V-22 never did slow down to a hover. Good luck with that hypothesis! I doubt even our resident lovers...err, V-22 lovers would put much stock in that.
I have no idea what you comment about ETL adds to this.
Of course you don't. Wait- didn't you say you were a
helicopter pilot?? Come on, man!
So what's ETL got to do with it? Ohhhh, I dunno...maybe
above that speed they'd be outrunning their dust cloud is all. But I'm just a dumb helicopter pilot.
Interesting that you admit you would lie to investigators if you were the pilot involved in an accident. I take it then, that if in fact the black box was quickly destroyed to evade the truth, you agree with that plan.
Saying one does not remember is not the same as lying. Memory can be faulty, and/or play tricks. One might remember "some" things, but be hazy or confused on others. Good lawyers (and good FAA people) can trip and trick you up. In *any* accident where the pilot survives, the best bet is to just say, "Sorry guys, I really don't remember any of it."
You guys can think what you want about me. Make this about me and not about the V-22 and its inherent weaknesses and faults as a (doomed) combat aircraft. I don't care. I'm just the messenger. And who wants to kill the messenger?
Ohhhhh, that's right: mcpave.