Yo, "Thomas Coupling"
"Who, exactly is supervising this aspect of FAA operations, to CONTINUE to allow crash after crash in the US EMS world. When will you guys learn, enough is enough. I thought EMS had been flushed through and a safer regime adopted. Obviously not."
The accident flight was not an EMS flight. This was a charter to harvest a donated organ.
Far as I know, nobody in the FAA is "allowing crash after crash in the US EMS world" or any other facet of US aviation. Mostly, I find relying on equipment- lots of engines, gauges, second pilots and autopilots, cooperative passengers and ATC to be very bad risk management. They all present issues and that stuff won't make the PIC smarter or errors made any less difficult. If the very real prospect of a killing oneself by accepting too much hazard isn't sufficient discouragement, all the regulations, risk assessment matrices in the world won't keep you out of a smoking hole.
Not saying I don't wish for power redundancy, etc. I do, often, and I can make it work. But I've also been way down in the bottom of that bucket scrabbling hard to get out, I have no illusions about invulnerability.
There seem to me to be many factors in common with a long list of accidents in this flight. The fact that this was a single, older pilot and a 206 isn't high on my list of potential issues.
Last edited by Devil 49; 28th Dec 2011 at 14:47.
Reason: point clarification