Originally Posted by
tucumseh
What we know for certain from many threads here is that if the regulations were simply implemented properly, long before you ever saw the aircraft, then many deaths would be avoided. All you're doing is shooting the messenger and supporting those who won't do the job properly.
Avoiding deaths in peacetime is not the job or even an aim of a viable military.
The job of the military is to win a war.
Losing wars loses millions of lives.
The negligible number that dies in peacetime maintaining an unencumbered and capable military force with flexibility and a willingness to take risks without constant worrying about consequences from civil lawsuits is a reasonable price to pay.
Flight safety was not invented to save lives.
I will say that again.
Flight safety was not invented to save lives.
It was invented to "increase operational capability by......."
Somewhere along the way it was infected by health and safety until it became a process where the safest option was always the best.
Safe does not win wars, and losing wars is the most dangerous thing ever.
We now use innovation not to increase capability, but to make doing the same thing we always did safer.
New bigger, more powerful helicopters carry less troops more safely.
Any sane leader in the military knows that inviolable rules are unsuitable for the military environment.
The trick is knowing when to break them and by how much. That goes for pilots and senior officers running aviation programs alike.
We even applaud and revere rule breakers like Nelson.
Nothing has changed since his day.
We are drowning in lawsuits and FOI and their outcomes and the costs are crippling our military.