SS
You could argue that they both people potentially put others lives at risk, while the comparison is not ideal it goes to show that each one of us is different in perceived risk and who would do what in a given circumstance.
Mr A was told by a doctor that someone might die so he took the risk
Mr B ( who I take my hat off to and thank you sir ) despite being injured accepted the risk of rescuing his comrades in a selfless act
Both had great outcomes, but as one had said if Mr A had ,had a heart attack while flying then the lawyers would have been involved and a different outcome in everyones eyes
Suppose Mr B had not been successful and others had died trying to retrieve him as well as his comrades, what would some people be saying then, if it ever got to the press that is ???
It would seem that there are too many people around the world that pontificate from on high but I suppose this is what what makes us human some will and some won't. I am sure that Mr A hadn't even thought about a Dick Dastedly medal or come to that anyone else who puts their lives on the line to perhaps save others. So do away with the crass comparison, it does you no favours. Before you say it my comparison is not crass it serves as an example on the way the human mind works and how risk adverse some are and how some are not.
Basically there is not a correct answer to this