Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in
m:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

I wouldn't say you're a nazi, but to say that a piece of paper makes
someone a good pilot is not what I'd call reason.
I read the preliminary reoprt and there is no indication that it was
pilot error. It might have been, but you've leapt well beyond what
the evidence suggests. You might well be right about it, and chances
are good, but a piece of paperis, of itself, meaningless.
And, as is often said, a private pilot's licence is a licence to
learn. It might also be aptly applied to any licence. I've seen ATRs,
examiners and people you would most definitely not expect to do so
make even bigger errors in judgement than that which you are accucing
this guy. A fully fueled 172 with three SOB taking off out of a 4,000
foot strip with a 3,500 foot density altitude is not what could even
remotely be called a tight situation.


Bertie


Of course a piece of paper doesn't make someone a good pilot. But the
lack of one would be enough in most states to show beyond a reasonable
doubt that what this guy did was a violation under the scope and
spirit of most state's child endangerment laws even if an accident had
not happened. The fact that an accident did happen just makes the case
easier.



For the record the ONLY error in judgment I'm accusing this guy of is
flying without a license and specifically doing it with his wife and
child aboard.

What has that got do do with the accident, then?


Bertie