Originally Posted by
flying-saint
I would add that one of the stark lessons in this case is that the cause of accidents is not always as a result of what initially on its face appears most probable. .
If there is an aircraft accident there is almost never one cause. You will almost always find there is a sequence of related events prior to the actual accident that in some way large or small, helped contribute to the accident.
A few posters seem bound and determined to convince everyone that the accident pilot was totally blameless and that he was smote out of the sky by forces over which he had no control.
My expert opinion as an aerobatic instructor is that there was a clear pattern of reckless flying exhibited that day. No amount of glossing over the facts of what happened on the first flight will change what happened on the first flight and to say the attitude towards flying he demonstrated by his reckless maneuvering is irrelevant to the accident flight simply does not make sense to me.
I agree that the actual sequence of the accident maneuver is in doubt but so is the fact that what ever precipitated the upset had to result in a fatal outcome. It is equally likely that a more professional approach to flying the aircraft including a significantly more complete training program combined with sensible flight profiles could have resulted in a recovery and uneventful landing.
From a legal perspective I agree, Not Guilty was an appropriate verdict, but that does not mean he should also escapes taking any responsibility for the accident. Bad choices were by this pilot on the day of this accident and indeed even before that. I am sure he is very regretful for the distress that has resulted from this tragedy and he has already paid a heavy personal price.
We can choose to learn from this tragedy.....or not. It appears two posters in particular see no greater flight safety lesson here, I think they are very wrong.....