'Condolences' are not suitable fare for public display

[capt waffoo]

I have long felt uncomfortable at the mawkish and inappropriate "condolences" offered on this forum whenever there has been a death. That is not to suggest that I, nor anyone else, do not regret a fatal accident (as some berk is doubtless about to accuse me of), but I cannot see the need for an ostentatious public display of sackcloth and ashes for someone you have never met - ie the Diana syndrome as luoto so correctly called it.

We do not post condolences for evry victim of car crashes or heart attacks do we? Sure, aviation is out chosen field and fatalities are close to home, but I still feel uncomfortable with the public nature of these statements, just as I (and the Bible) do with ostentatious displays of public God-bothering whch, like grief is usually kept private in our society.

Surely such condolences are, if necessary, a private matter between yourself and the relatives and not suitable fare for public display? Would you go up to the bereaved at a stranger's funeral and offer condolences? The hell you would, so why do it here?

And no, I'm not callous, unfeeling or whatever the PPRuNe hotheads are likely to call me, I just don't think it is appropriate. Thats all.

I've started a new thread with your post because, in my view, it was inappropriate to leave it where you posted it. Those who don't share your views can now continue to express their sadness, condolences, hopes for the souls of those who died etc without being distracted by a discussion about whether it's appropriate for them to do so.
Heliport
Moderator

[widgeon]

wow 2378 views and no replies , is this a record ?.

[Heliport]

Well spotted - but no record.
The number of views is misleading because the post was split from another thread.
This thread started at 2363 views!

300 posts, and no opinion on this topic - is this a record? :confused:

[Attila]

So where's the new thread, Heliport???

You're in it. The first post (by Capt Waffoo) was moved away from another thread to start this one. Duh! ;)

[bliptune]

On a motorcycle forum I frequent there is an occasional thread that comes up with people posting such condolences, often times with replies of support by random people but sometimes its a forum member that we all know fairly well and the thread becomes emotionally charged with sincere responses. Its up to the forum moderators to set guidelines but I imagine most people see such threads as doing more good than harm when they appear, quite unfortunately, on occasion.

[Flare Dammit!]

I think it's because we all feel a certain universal kinship with each other that goes beyond national boundaries, whether we are acquainted personally or not. Ours is a tiny industry - at least, our little corner of Aviation is. And I have to admit to feeling a sense of sadness whenever I hear of the demise of other professionals who were out there, doing their job, risking their lives (do we not?) to fly these strange contraptions.

Sometimes I think the messages of condolences are...maybe not so much "mawkish," as capt waffoo calls them...maybe just more open, emotionally, than I care to be. But I see no harm in them, and I'd like to think that upon reading of my own demise, someone might offer up a similar sentiment.

God love all of you bahstids!

[nonradio]

"groupthink"

[t'aint natural]

I'm with Flare Dammit.
It might not seem wholly appropriate, but what else you gonna do?
We all feel a sense of loss, of helplessness, tragedy. One (or more) of us bought the farm.
If somebody had invented the right thing to do or say in all circumstances, it'd be easy.
Until they do, it's just - Jeez. Bummer.
Or to put it another way, 'my thoughts go out to the families.'

[ShyTorque]

I think "mawkish" is an insulting and inappropriate description. :(

Such condolences are probably always well meant. If you don't like it, don't do it or read others' comments but I don't see why anyone should suffer criticism because they choose to pass on their thoughts at a sad time.

Each to his own.

[Red Wine]

Capt Waffoo,

Your a brave man indeed.........

I feel "Flare Dammitt" has indentified the word "Kinship" which is apt in these circumstances.

I disagree with your suggestion of other groups not responding in the same manner as our members.........just look at the obtiuaries in the various newspapers, people don't need to know you directly or personally to feel sadened by your mimise.

Within our industry in Australia, all the Offshore crews regardless of which company they belong are known to each other, and I am sure it is the same in the UK........and with the cross flow of people across the industry there is a high propability that paths will cross at some time.
That probability increases when you narrow down the crews that fly the S76 Offshore.......hence "Kinship".

[What-ho Squiffy!]

I am with Flaredammit this time (!).

Capt Wafty, I think you and your obdurate views are wide of the mark here. People DO offer strangers condolence and comfort after tragedy, which does help during rough times.

If people directly connected to an accident find sympathetic messages in a thread it a good thing - people like you (and others) may be uncomfortable with it, but stiff bikkies - it's not all about you and your offended sensibilities.

I'm not suggesting we all go and take warm showers together, but just try and be empathetic for one second.

QED

[md 600 driver]

on tv last night the queen sent her condolences she did not know them either
if its good enough for her its good enough for me
at a time when berevement is happening kind words and the thoughs of others are comforting

sorry cant spell is there a speller checker on pprune

[Hoverman]

I couldn't disagree more with every word Capt Waffoo has written. If he feels uncomfortable expressing his feelings publicly, I respect his right not to do so. But I don't understand why he should be so critical and patronising about people who do feel able to.
When we hear fellow pilots in our small sector of the industry have been killed at work, expressing sorrow, sympathy for their families and a hope they rest in peace is hardly "an ostentatious public display of sackcloth and ashes". What a patronising remark.

md600driver
I agree with your sentiments, but your first line made me cringe. I'm no republican, but 'the Queen sends condolences' has to be the worst argument for saying it's OK.
And HM's not exactly the best advert for the helicopter industry - good thing her loyal subjects don't follow her example there or lots of us would be out of work!

[Autorotate]

One interesting thing that everyone seems to have overlooked is the possibility of friends and families of those crew members that sometimes visit sites such as these. I know for a fact that the children of a helicopter pilot killed here downunder last year took great comfort after reading all the condolences from other helicopter industry people from around the world.

In times like this we dont know who is reading, the forum. They might not put their names to any posts but if they do drop in lets give them the support of the industry. There is enough bitching and backstabbing in the normal day to day operations, lets leave it there and ensure that in times like this its the positives that come through.

Just my two cents worth. Condolences to those connected to the crew.

Its a small industry and times like this we stick together. Capt Wafoo, maybe its your comments that are uncalled for at this time.

Autorotate.

[Whirlybird]

I'm with Flare and almost everyone else on this. People post how they feel. They don't always put it perfectly, but that's not the point. If you don't like it, don't do it. I personally rarely post condolences - because I just don't know what to say. Is that better or worse than saying how you feel, or than not not feeling anything because you didn't personally know the people involved? Or are we just all different?

[pilotwolf]

I and my collegues in the other emergency services see more than our fair share of death and mutilation and to an extent you become 'hardened' to it.

BUT that doesn't stop you feeling sadness and remorse for the family and friends left behind.

If I never offered condolenses to families of my patients I would be seen as cold and heartless.

As is said above we are all members of a fairly elite group in rotary wing flying and I have always felt part of a family around other rotary and fixed wing pilots.

Lets morn or show our sadness and pass our condolenses in whatever way each individual feels appropiate.

LETS STOP BICKERING AND HAVING SLANGING MATCHES AT A TIME LIKE THIS. THERE FOR THE GRACE OF (YOUR) GOD GO YOU OR I.

My thoughts are with those families who have lost loved ones. Remember there are 11 more family without sons, husbands or fathers now.

[Irlandés]

I think it's very easy to take a polarised way of looking at this. I would have to say that both 'camps' have legitimate arguments. If I felt that people were posting condolences without even knowing the crews or persons involved then I understand Capt Waffoo's sentiments entirely. I don't think that just working in the same industry is a good enough reason to post condolences. Actually it seems a bit elitist to me as if some people are worth more mention than others. I mean what's the difference between some pilot you never knew and half a million people killed in the Rwanda massacre (to mention just one example)??? Both events are tragic but a little consistency is needed. I do however feel that it is a good opportunity for people who genuinely knew the victims to post condolences or remembrances if they wish to. If I one day don't make it home, frankly I wouldn't give a fiddler's if some pilot I have never met in my life expresses condolences for my tragic demise. I am sure however that family and friends would get a lot of benefit reading genuine expressions of sympathy from my friends and colleagues in the industry if they happened to choose this forum for that expression. At the end of the day each person must choose for themselves what they consider the best course of action. But as I said before, a little consistency is needed. We are afterall humans first, and pilots second. And if you keep honest with yourself, you can't go wrong.

[Hoverman]

Irlandes
If I read that someone who's a pilot is killed in a car crash I'm interested that he was a pilot, maybe wonder where he worked etc but if I didn't know him, it's just another sad car accident.
If I read that a helicopter pilot is killed in a helicopter crash it hits me more, even if I didn't know him personally.
Ilogical? To you maybe, but not to me, and not to most helicopter pilots.
We're a small community and it's just human nature to be hit harder when one of your own is killed doing the same job.
Of course I feel sad about people being killed in Rwanda. But I don't identify personally with them in the same way.
If you can't understand the difference I suspect you're either not a professional pilot, or you're an exception.
And if you're not a professional pilot, please remember Rotorheads is a forum where those of us who are talk to each other, just like we do in the crewroom.

[NigD]

I think this has got to be an "each to their own" view on condolences.

Personally, if I lost someone close to me, helicopter pilot or whatever, I don't think I would take much great comfort from messages of condolences from people who never knew the lost loved one, but hey, thats just me.

If you want to do it, if you don't then don't, simple as.

NigD

[Thomas coupling]

I suspect Capt wafoo is an (ex) navy pilot???
Because of his nom d'plume. If that is the case I believe I can see where he is coming from. Being ex mil, we tend(ed) to adopt a more casual approach to colleagues when they died doing what they loved best - flying. When you die doing what you enjoy, is there a better way to go? I know you might not have wanted to go then, but that's the chance you take when you get airborne in one of these machines. It comes with the territory!
We used black humour to get us by thus protecting us from the sadness of it all. We never 'gushed' about our feelings for a lost one, it was just fate...ce la vie. Lets all have a drink on his/her expense account. Thats' the way they would have wanted it.
So on reading the first statement on this subject I tended to agree with CW, then changed my mind when Squiffey spoke then changed again later.... :confused:
I do believe, on the one hand it's just tough luck when you snuff it, but on the other for those outside the profession who may 'drop in', it can be seen as comforting. As long as either side don't question the other, thats the main thing....

[What-ho Squiffy!]

These are all good, logical replies, and I agree with some of the points. However, if you don't happen to agree with people expressing sympathy etc that's fine, but what I objected to was the time and the place of these recent "spleen ventings".

This is a forum for ideas and opinion and rumour - BUT, when it comes to people losing their lives, a little bit of tact goes a long way. Sometimes it is what you don't say that makes the biggest difference.

[capt waffoo]

First and foremost, I seem to have put myself into the firing line and if I have offended anyone, anyone at all, especially anyone related to those lost in accidents then please accept my sincere apologies.

As usual in posts that are viewed in haste and heat on this forun there is a large amount of bullshine written without due regard to previous posts, and some good common sense too.

As an example of common sense read irlandes' post above.

I thought I had made it perfectly plain I was not being callous and had made my feelings for fallen colleagues clear, but sadly it seems that the forum moderator in particular saw fit to disregard this and to highlight my post in a most disparaging way without due regard to the way we do bereavement in the cold bits of the Northern Hemisphere.

I can only think to remind PRuNers of the old quote about power corrupting, and absolute power corrupting absolutely.



Heliport, this is "absolutely" your trainset.

Bravo Zulu.

Over?

:o :o :o

[motionlotion]

Come on chaps, this may be the place but it certainly isn't the time. Whatever your "gripes" - "opinions" etc and PWolf, please don't shout, - could it be we are starting to drift a tad off track.


Heliport : May I suggest a "Condolences Book" placed as a separate Topic. Then those that want to could and those that don't needn't.


I personally feel that these "thirst for info" / speculative threads are not the place for such sentiment. Thoughts of "Oh and by the way" spring to mind.

[Red Wine]

Heliport.........

Perhaps a special sand box in the corner for the minority....

That leaves the normal member to remember colleagues, and express their sympathies as they see fit, without having to answer for their quite normal human expressions........

[Irlandés]

I must take this opportunity to thank Hoverman and Notsoneutral99. Both of you in your infinite wisdom are of course correct. I am not yet a professional pilot (as it states quite clealy in my profile) and as such who am I to have the audacity to give my opinion on such a matter! It doesn't matter of course that I'm studying for my CPL or that I've made a lot of sacrifices to have the opportunity to study for my CPL. No, you're right, that doesn't make me one of your oh so special 'club'. It is perfectly acceptable of you to be disdainful of anybody who might threaten your narrow way of looking at things. And no, don't worry about misrepresenting me, or what I have previously posted, or giving it a neanderthal interpretation that only serves to rest credibility from your own simplistic readings of other peoples' genuinely well intentioned ideas. And it's perfectly alright to attack me personally instead of simply dealing sensibly and intelligently with the issues. I understand it's an emotive issue and as such I understand perfectly your emotive responses. And of course being an emotive issue it's pefectly alright to leave intellect on the sidelines. I mean, that's what we as humans are good at as you both so cleverly demonstrate, is it not? And thanks for making posting on this forum such a positive experience. I mean, you guys in such a few lines have really taught me so much. I am truly humbled and quite firmly put in my place. I will of course thing more than twice before posting in the future. Keep up the good work!

Irlandés

P.S. The irony of my 'emotive' response does not escape me.

[pilotwolf]

Sorry felt the need to shout.

..thats what you have to do to naughty children who squabble amongst themselves.

In my opinion thats whats happening and getting off the subject.

Sorry if you don't agree.

[motionlotion]

PWolf

No problem - just have sensitive ears is all. Too much Turbine time in pre-moded helmets.

Hope the sentiment is understand?

[newswatcher]

Hoverman, you said - ".......I'm no republican, but 'the Queen sends condolences' has to be the worst argument for saying it's OK. And HM's not exactly the best advert for the helicopter industry - good thing her loyal subjects don't follow her example there or lots of us would be out of work!":o :o

It is reported that the Queen and DofE were in an S-76 on the evening of the incident, flying from London to Norfolk. The day afterwards they made a further flight, from Sandringham to Ipswich.

[motionlotion]

There is little or no comparison between Commercial and QF S76's - apart from the looks that is!

Don't confuse the issue.

[newswatcher]

motionlotion,

Have no wish to sidetrack this thread, but understood that the mechanics - engines, drives etc. were not very different between a modified S-76A+, which I believe the Bristows was, and the QF S-76C+? Would most of the differences be in the interior fittings, plus some additional safety devices because it is used by HRH?

[capt waffoo]

N99, interesting points, but...

My first issue is the application of the word "bereave" which my dictionary defines as, "rob, disposess, leave desolate, deprive of a relation, wife, &c." As I said above surely none of us fail to regret the death of a fellow aviator, though why one should regret this over the death of a bricklayer or busdriver seems, as someone noted above a little like elitism. Even so, the definition of that word surely indicates the inappropriateness of "condolences for a bereavement" in the case of a stranger. Grief relates to the deep personal sense of loss one feels at the death of someone close. With all due respect I dispute the suggestion that you, I or anyone else feels a deep and personal sense of loss at the death of a person (fellow aviator or not) who is nor known to you. Please reconsider my statement re approaching stragers at a funeral and offering "condolences". You wouldn't dream of it, would you, even with your lack of interest in traditional behaviour and etiquette?

Sure, sometimes we do know the deceased in which case such sentiments are likely to be expressed, but I still feel it a bit ostentatious to post them on a public forum such as this. Unfortunately it is clear on most occasions when such postings are made that this is not so, and the "condolence" usually takes the form of a rather cheesy "RIP" style footnote, hence my possibly overstated "mawkish" remark which I do not, nonetheless, chose to retract.

And no, I am not "stuck in a time warp" as you so gratuitously suggest (see my remarks about hotheaded comment), I just have a traditional sense of decency and normality and am reluctant to rip up same for the sake of it. (You'll note I'm not a Blairist) Neither does that view make you "wrong" if you chose to disagree with it, it's just that it makes me uncomfortable, just as the recent fad for roadside shrines of flowers at accident sites does. It is simply the public display which sometimes appears overly theatrical - contrived is perhaps a beter word, that I object to. Perhaps its that in our non-religious society we have lost the ability, or the awareness of the traditional places for grief and the healing that follows it.

My objection to the moderator's action (inappropriate description really, when his actions seemed planned to inflame rather than moderate) was his statement that he had moved my post and started a new topic with it (without my say-so) in order that "people who objected to it could do so elsewhere". A partisan and thoroughly biased opinion that seems unworthy of a "moderator".

I have been most interested to see the generally neutral nature of most of the posts, and am indeed a little surprised that I have not taken more flak. I take that to be an indication that my views are not so very far from those of the majority. If I highlighted the posts of supporting views it seems a cheap shot to suggest this is somehow underhand, don't we all quote the posts of those who enhance our own views?

Over!

[Vfrpilotpb]

CapT W,

Your understanding of the "lack of flak" seems to make you think your views are shared by most, Not me chum, as I have stated earlier on another post "get real" if we cannot as individual's make a comment as to the passing however it happens of a fellow aviator, racing driver, rugby player , cricket player or just an all round good egg of a man or woman, then this world is going to be populated by Tony Clones and people who care for nowt but themselves, look into the mirror, which one are you!

[Flying Lawyer]

Can I try to take the heat out of this.

Irlandes
You've misunderstood Hoverman's point. He didn't suggest that it was audacious of you or any other PPL to give your opinion on this matter. He didn't suggest that professional helicopter pilots belonged to some "oh so special 'club'." Nor was he disdainful of you.
He explained that professional helicopter pilots are a small sector of the industry, that they feel a bond or cameraderie with each other and, although it might seem illogical to people outside that community, when one of their number is killed in a flying accident, they identify with him and feel it personally even if they've never met him. Somebody else described it as 'kinship'.
Surely that's understandable? And not unreasonable?
He suspected you weren't a professional helicopter pilot because your views were so out of line with the 'norm'; the inference being if you were, you'd understand. I wonder if you'll hold the same views when you become a professional pilot and have spent a few years in the industry.
Hoverman wasn't rude to you. Shame you felt the need to be quite so rude in response.

newswatcher
The point was "HM's not exactly the best advert for the helicopter industry." I think you'll find if you speak to those in a position to know these things that the Queen doesn't like flying in helicopters. It's probably a tribute to the S-76 that HM has modified her views (slightly) in recent years, but she is still not keen on the idea and uses alternative transport whenever possible.

Capt Waffoo
I respect your absolute right not to express condolences when you feel they are inapprpriate, but still can't see why you disapprove of others doing so.
Perhaps the fault is mine, but I can't follow why the definition of 'bereave' indicates the inappropriateness of "condolences for a bereavement" in the case of a stranger? Those who choose to do so aren't grieving, they are merely expressing sympathy for those who have been left 'desolate', or have been 'deprived of a relation'?
Even though the pilot and his family may be 'strangers', many people clearly feel a bond through belonging to the same small sector of the industry.

If I may offer an answer to the question you've asked twice, I don't think it would be in the slightest inappropriate for someone to express condolences to a bereaved family who are strangers, saying something like: "I never worked with your husband/father, but I'm a helicopter pilot myself and I'd just like to say how sorry I was to hear about the accident and to express my sympathy to you in your loss. We all face the same dangers and we feel it when one of us loses his life flying." I think it would be a very odd bereaved family who considered that "inappropriate".

Your suggestion that it is "elitist" of professional helicopter pilots to feel more when they hear another professional has been killed in a flying accident than when they hear of the death of a bricklayer or busdriver is a terrible distortion of what people have said. It's nothing to do with elitism.
Is it so unreasonable of people to identify more with someone in their own sphere being killed doing the same job, than with (for example) someone in a completely different industry being killed - whether he's a worker on the shop floor or a captain of industry. Isn't simply a product of there being a bond? And identifying with someone in the same job being being killed whilst doing that same job?
"rather cheesy "RIP" style footnotes"
It's often difficult to find the right words to use on such occasions. Some people are better at expressing themselves than others. Aren't 'RIP style' condolences just a convenient, and universally understood, way of saying "I'm sorry this chap lost his life. I feel sorry for his family."?


(Edited to say I didn't realise how long this post had become until I saw it 'in print'. Lawyers do tend to go on a little once they start. Sorry.)

[Flare Dammit!]

capt waffoo wrote:
My objection to the moderator's action (inappropriate description really, when his actions seemed planned to inflame rather than moderate) was his statement that he had moved my post and started a new topic with it (without my say-so) in order that "people who objected to it could do so elsewhere". A partisan and thoroughly biased opinion that seems unworthy of a "moderator".

I've also noted that the moderator sometimes does this. And yes, it does sometimes seem rather intended to inflame. I guess that's the privilege one enjoys when one is empowered. Oh well. I guess I could go start my own rumor message board and be the dictat-..umm, moderator. Hmm, at least then I'd be able to prohibit Robbo drivers from coming aboard!

[Helmut Visorcover]

Best you do then, flare. Last time I looked, Pprune wasn't a dictatorship. I believe the moderator was correct in moving the non-normal human responses to another thread. Sorry if you get bored with the way of the aviation game or maybe you have no understanding? Whatever.

It may appear to be a regular occurance but it still doesn't make it routine when one of our fellow aviators 'buys the farm'.

[SASless]

Flying Lawyer,

Your post was very well put together as most of yours are. The paragraph, way down towards the bottom of the page, seemed to hit the mark. I read the paragraph to state you supported the concept of total strangers offering condolences to those who have suffered a loss. I support that completely. I also interpreted it to mean "in person", " face to face."..".toes to toes."...fashion. I also support that completely. Is that an accurate interpretation I arrived at?

Was that the message you wished to get across?

Is it also your personal opinion that impersonal, offerings of such condolences , in public forums, from anonymous sources, with the vague hope that some time in the future, some one might read them and be somehow comforted from that reading , is really a valid effort to comfort the bereaved next-of-kin?

Or.....is it somehow a well intentioned method of some anonymous individual to record the fact of some pour soul's passing through a tragic event and in some way salve the contributor's internal need.

Is it, in your view the correct thing to do socially, ethically, and morally, that is, to anonymously post a condolence message or would a more personal approach better meet the dictates of standards of etiquette, ethics, and morality.

The internet and computers have led us to have more contact with other people but at the same time , fosters a more impersonal method of communicating.

Is this debate we are having, more a debate on that , rather than who is right and who is wrong.....those like myself who are opposed to these anonymous offers and those who support them?

Should we all not take that famous step back, reconsider what we are saying, and determine if we have allowed ourselves to slide over to the impersonal and abandon the more correct and proper method of rendering condolences.

[helmet fire]

Perhaps yet another perspective?

The internet is a relatively new form of interaction which is continuing to evolve accepted methods, norms, and etiquette of that type of communication. Whilst those norms are develping, there will always be a diverse view on the direction and magnitude of the changes.

An example: When I were a lad ( :) ) we used to throw beer at people who were so rude that they answered, and then spoke, on their mobile 'phone near the bar. Nowadays, it is becomming the norm for your friend to interupt your conversation with them to answer and speak on his mobile.

The second point about this evolution of norms relates to the persistant point that it is such a "public display" that offends. If it WAS so public, surely we would all use our real names? I think the internet has allowed people to communicate with a large degree of privacy and intamacy, whilst also being able to communicate widely - something that just is not possible to achieve with our previous mass communication methods. So I am not convinced we can use our thoughts about the norms of traditional communication methods to apply to something so different (although those norms are the necessary starting point).

Lastly, we are skirting around the issue of "tribalisim". It is human nature to identify with a group of people, and to bring out the similarities within that group when referring to them. Rugby is a good example here. If you play for your school, you dislike all the other schools. Once you make the Combined Schools team, all those previously disliked people are in your group now, and collectively, you are against the other combined schools team. Then you make the Counties team, etc, etc, on to the National team where you dislike all the other national teams. Finally, to top it off, ALL rugby players can dislike the players of other sports (especially football which, as we all know, is for poofs ;) ).

It is this tribalism we see expressed. It is not elitism. When we look at it in a wider perspective, they were helicopter pilots just like us. I am sure that even those fixed wing pilots will express sympathy too - for they can identify as aviators. I think the condolences are merely an expression of that connection/identification.

[What-ho Squiffy!]

Helmet, very eloquent post. Nicely put.

To dumb it down a little (as Homer says), I think there are three groups of people in this forum:

1. Those that explicitly express their sympathy,
2. Those that don't and find it objectionable to do so, and
3. Those that don't explicitly express sympathy, but can understand the motivation behind such posts, and the value that it may have for other people involved.

No particuar "species" of poster is right (flying lawyer?); and to argue that one is, is akin to arguing for Hinduism against Shintoism - completely subjective and endless.

[HeloTeacher]

I will add my 2 bits. I'll try to keep emotion out of it as much as possible.

So many leave anonymous condolences on the long threads about the most publicized crashes.

If you are truly that moved, a name would mean so much more.

It especially hits home as this week, for both the fatal accidents that are close to me.

Wade Pelly

[Nick Lappos]

The issue of condolences on the pprune site is compelling. I feel that we post condolences because we are all of the same ilk, and the same need to communicate our experiences drives us to communicate our fears.

Few of us fly because it is a job, or that we are compelled to by outside forces. We fly because we love it, we like its challenge, its rarity. We like to tell people that we fly. Perhaps we fly helicopters because they are even more difficult, more unusual.

We are in the same club.

We like to fly because it is an uncompromising endevour, one that brooks few errors, that embarasses, maims and even kills for cause and sometimes almost in a whim. We are not fools, we know that this danger makes the sauce spicier. With the cost of failure so high, the pride of success is that much greater, and we welcome it. When one of ours dies while flying, we know that there is a chance, under odds that we control, that it could have been us.


Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

-John Donne

[Flying Lawyer]

SASless
My answers to the questions you've asked me .....
Re "the concept of total strangers offering condolences to those who have suffered a loss."
I meant 'in person' because I was responding to Capt Waffoo's assertion but I wouldn't limit it to 'in person.'
"Is it also your personal opinion that impersonal offerings of such condolences, in public forums, from anonymous sources, with the vague hope that some time in the future, some one might read them and be somehow comforted from that reading, is really a valid effort to comfort the bereaved next-of-kin?
Yes. I believe those who offer condolences here genuinely mean what they say and hope the families (or friends/colleagues of the pilot) see them. And I know pilots' families who have found comfort in them.
"Or.....is it somehow a well intentioned method of some anonymous individual to record the fact of some pour soul's passing through a tragic event and in some way salve the contributor's internal need."
Hmm. Very interesting question. I'm not a psychiatrist but, for what it's worth, I think for some people there is an element of salving an internal need - I think there probably is in my case. But the two motives are not mutually exclusive, and the 'internal need' element (if present) doesn't devalue the condolence offered, nor detract from its sincerity.
" Is it, in your view the correct thing to do socially, ethically, and morally, that is, to anonymously post a condolence message or would a more personal approach better meet the dictates of standards of etiquette, ethics, and morality."
I think it is perfectly acceptable "socially, ethically, and morally."
A personal approach is preferable but it's not always practical and, given the anonymous nature of Pprune, not possible.
I don't think anonymous messages are a breach of etiquette, and can't see how they could possibly be considered unethical or immoral.

What-ho
As you correctly guessed, I don't think any one of the three categories is 'right' or 'wrong'. I happen to fall nearer (1) than (3) because I do sometimes express condolences. Although I disagree with those in category (2) I respect their right to hold those views.
What in my view is 'wrong' is to spoil a thread in which people are expressing condolences by criticising in disparaging and patronising terms. That is not only insensitive, but plain bad manners. Respect for others' views cuts both ways. I suspect Capt Waffoo must be the only one who doesn't understand why his post was from a crash thread.

[soggyboxers]

Capt W,

Sure, sometimes we do know the deceased in which case such sentiments are likely to be expressed, but I still feel it a bit ostentatious to post them on a public forum such as this

Yes, now the names have been released, I discover that I did indeed know one of the deceased, in common with many of us here. I am glad that the moderator chose to move your view from the original thread in case any of his family or close fiends were reading it (even if the comments accompanying it were rather unnecessary).

Irlandes,

Keep on posting. I have been a professional helicopter pilot for many years, but this is a discussion forum and views from those who are about to enter our profession should always be welcomed even if we do not agree with them. The world would be a very dull place if we all agreed on everything.

Nick,

Totally agree. I particularly like the quote from John Donne. Having seen so many friends and colleagues lose their lives over the years whilst engaged in this profession which most of us love, I always feel that I am diminished a bit whenever one of us dies in a crash.

[Heliport]

Rotorheads policy
Thanks for all your contributions to the discussion. Having considered and discussed the various arguments, we have decided that the following policy reflects the wishes of the majority of members.

Anyone who wishes to post messages of condolence is free to do so.
We entirely agree with the point made by Hoverman and others that the helicopter world is a small one and many members wish to use Rotorheads to express their sadness at the death of a fellow pilot / sympathy for the bereaved family whether or not they knew the pilot personally.

Posts cricising condolence messages are unacceptable.
Some members consider condolence messages to be inappropriate; they are entitled to their views. However, criticising others for doing so is entirely unacceptable and will not be permitted.

Heliport
PedalStop
Rotorheads Moderators