Thanks grizzled. 
It’s worth the effort as I only fly as pax now!
fullforward, “… is completely justifiable by the perpetrator …” au contraire. Exploration of ‘why’ should not seek to justify a particular view, only to provide understanding. Judgement should be considered elsewhere, and perhaps similar to Dekker’s views on just culture, it does not depend on where the line is drawn, but on who draws it.
If an accident investigation seeks justification then it risks the blindness of blame, whereas seeking understanding for the crew’s actions might enhance wisdom – or at least some safety learning.
Many apparent failings in awareness might be identified as normal human weaknesses; mental map slip, lack of emphasis on terrain (briefing), distraction, etc, but the dismissal of the TAWS warning is more disturbing.
The effectiveness of human factors training (CRM) will be limited by human variability in a given situation, thus perhaps we need to protect humans from themselves. Automatic / FD guidance demanding a pull-up after a TAWS warning; this should add further emphasis (cf Airbus studies)?
Last edited by PEI_3721; 21st Jun 2012 at 13:20.