Experts and fairness seem to be common themes here and all in the context of whom?
There are very many here who express derision upon those pilots who might hold a different view because they dare to post in a particular part of the forum. Yet we know that accidents are no respecters of either the time or type of flying a pilot has done in the past, in fact this accident is a case in point.
Specifically regarding this forum/thread blame the person Above the Clouds for starting it, blame the owners or administrators of the site for allowing the "wrong" person to subsequently post, register or view particular elements - but of course that isn't going to stop some else, somewhere else.
Back to experts and fairness. Sometimes these experts wish to confuse the non-experts of what they are seeing. Wish to suggest that things that look dodgy are actually normal, if only you really knew what you were looking at....
In the fullness of time things will be as clear as they are going to be, even if that is a "we don't really know". I hope the pilot in this particular case is left alone to get on with his life in peace because his burden is already more than it should be. No doubt that is equally so for the victims.
Yet for the victims I don't know how you square these two recent posts:
Flying Lawyer posted:
PPRuNe is widely known as, and often referred to in the media as, a 'professional pilots forum' I believe we have a corresponding responsibility to behave responsibly. More weight is likely to be attached to what is posted here than in some enthusiasts'/spotters' forum.
Courtney Mil posted:
...people with little understanding of the circumstances feel they can hide behind the anonymity of their user name and the fact that they are not actually confronting the pilot in question and announce all manner of conclusions - conclusions that may well turn out to be right, but that are completely inappropriate to declare in public at this stage.
So at what point do the expert elements within PPRuNe speak up or speak out against dodgy practice? Do they never speak up? Only speak up to other they consider also to be as expert? Isn't this perhaps why this type of event happens?
As for anonymity isn't that exactly what is afforded to those "experts" who have perhaps failed not only the victims, included in that is the pilot himself.
What about if these conclusions that might turn out to be right aren't dealt with in the official AAIB report? Does that mean they are less right??
Of course there is also the review of aircraft display rules and regulation, should that wait for fear of allowing any conclusions to be drawn on current gaps?