Dozy
He describes a flight that appears to have been observing the "16,000' descent limit". He goes on to describe the next flight as one that clearly wasn't.
Thats right. So on the 14th November, Simpson, who had been to the same briefing, maintained MSA even in good weather. (I imagine it was the 6000ft visual MSA not the FL160 IMC MSA).
In the prevailing conditions and knowing how previous flights had been conducted, who on here can hold their hand on their heart and say they would not have done the same?
Well I imagine Simpson could, considering he went to the same briefing but still respected the minimum altitudes even though the weather was better.
Except in this case Wilson was the company-appointed briefing pilot who told them that the rule could be broken and Simpson was the pilot who attended the same briefing and did in fact come home safely. The crew had every right to trust that they would be too if they followed instructions which - as I said - they did *to the letter*.
So are you saying that Simpson didn't follow the instructions to the letter? Why on earth was Simpson floating around up so high when he had been instructed to descend prior to the descent area?
Because they had been told it was safe to do so
Again , why did Simpson not do it then?
your arguments are based around an ideal-world interpretation of what they could and should have done, rather than what they were required to do in the real-world situation.
But Simpsons flight was in the real world, respecting the MSA's didn't do him any harm did it?
I'm not attacking the pilots here, I'm attacking your guys arguments that they are absolved of all responsibility because they were told it was safe, they were told to do it etc etc. You even say it would have happened to any crew. Well obviously it wouldn't have happened to the flight on the 14th November Captained by someone who was at the same briefing, because he was too high to hit anything.