Originally Posted by
Flying Binghi
Twenty one thousand hours !
A 21,000 hours airline and helicopter pilot and you think it compares to a new chum 200 hour scud runner. Yer don't get to 21,000 hours by being a bold pilot.
In 21,000 hours that pilot would have been well exposed to all sorts of wx. One thing he probably had no experience of is turbulence down wind of wind turbines.
He obtained 3 seperate forecasts prior to departure each indicating IFR conditions and still launched in a vintage aircraft he only bought that day.
WX was OVC 600' with vis below the base under VMC .
Sure sounds bold to me.
He may have had 21000 hours but that was not the action of a timid pilot.
Add to that how many current instrument rated pilots do not have much in the way of current hand flying IF skills? How many engage auto pilot as soon as possible? (either due SOPs or because they prefer to?)
I do not believe you will find a C140 with an autopilot. Lucky if the venturi driven AI even functions. He just bought the plane that morning.
How much recent time in light aircraft did he have? How much in a 140? A 140 is a sweet little aeroplane but a lower performer even than a 150.
I have recently flown in light aircraft with a couple of current LHS airline pilots and had to take over when they got out of shape, thousands of hours doesn't mean bullet proof or current on type. Especially not in marginal conditions.
Claiming the accident was obviously due turbulence when he was in the clag (the base 600' and he was tracked between 800 and 1500' when he lost control) in an aircraft not equipped to fly in the clag really seems a long stretch. The wind speed was recorded as 6kts. The turbines would be barely turning. How much turbulence would you be expecting?
I don't care how many tens of thousands hours you have - fly a C140 into the clag at low level and you are pushing your luck. If it had been high voltage towers or radio transmission towers that he was avoiding instead of turbines the exact same accident description would not raise an eyebrow. But because it was a wind turbine it suddenly must be turbulence and loss of control in IMC seems unlikely? Really?
Originally Posted by
Flying Binghi
...
As Warren Buffet said in 2014, ….“…we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them”. Wind Energy is the biggest crony capitalism scam in our lifetime. ...Look at wind turbines for what they are: “Subsidy meters”.
[/COLOR]
You obviously have a set against wind turbines which is fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion. That makes me suspect though you will chose to post and argue anything that paints them in a bad light rather than look at the evidence in a dispassionate way.
Which is fine, we all have our pet peeves and biases but if that is the case here, there is not much point discussing this as you have already made up your mind for reasons other than analysis of the evidence.