A Lieberman wrote:

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:31:38 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:


Yes, I was intentionally contriving a high risk operation, but giving a
good reason for doing it. You conducted a high risk operation with no
good reason. That is exactly what is wrong with your picture.


Sorry, don't buy it.

You don't have to.


You are getting behind an airplane not entirely focused on flying which
makes you much more dangerous then me VFR over the top.

I'm a very focused person when flying.


In my opinion, if you get behind a yoke for your stated reasons, that you
have get home itis to get to your destination, you are making the ultimate
poorest pilot decision to fly where as in my situation, I didn't have get
home itis, and have alternatives when I flew VFR over the top.

What would be the difference with your situation and had I pressed on for
an ILS at 800 foot ceilings if the outcome is the POTENTIALLY the same
given the same weather conditions and piloting skills.?

The difference is I'd have a good reason for taking the risk.


My risk factor would be much lower as I had choices then your stated
reasons.

Risk factors are higher in your situation since you are not completely
focused on flying, but getting there.

The risk factors are probably higher, that was the point of the
scenario. The difference is that the reward was also MUCH higher. Risk
isn't an absolute, it is about cost vs. benefit. My scenario has a very
high benefit/cost, whereas yours had almost none.


Get home itis will kill you if you are not mentally prepared to fly an
airplane.

No, get home itis never killed anyone. A poor decision, or more likely
a series of poor decisions, is the killer. Every time I fly I want to
get to my destination. If I didn't want to get there, I wouldn't be
going in the first place!

Matt