Earlier, Stefan wrote:

I'm more and more, well, surprized,
what you have been experiencing
while flying.

I have seen all of this and much, much worse. I don't say that it's
good or right, because obviously it's suboptimal. But it is what it is,
and everybody has to come to terms with it one way or another.

...And, you may ask, if the other pilot
is doing something I don't like?
Well, if I don't trust the other
pilot, I won't fly with him...

Hypothetical question: Suppose it's your _job_ to fly with this person?
Say, the person is your boss, and if you continue to decline then you
get fired with a bad fitness report that derails your flying career?

And, please, spare us the TS that such situations never happen, or that
they only happen in third-world countries. The records of the NTSB and
other national safety boards show that it happens with depressing
regularity.

I just finished reading an interesting book on the topic: "Darker Shade
of Blue," about rogue pilots in general and their effect on others. I
think it might go a bit over the top, since every pilot has a bit of
rogue to them, and sometimes it is that rogue element that carries the
day. But it is a valuable read regardless.

Furthermore, I'm pleased to see this thread directed more towards human
factors and the real world of soaring flight operations. I think it is
generally too easy to use "pilot error" as an excuse to not look deeper
into accidents and find their root causes. Peter Ladkin has a lot more
to say on that topic, and I generally agree with his assessments.

Following a slightly different tangent, as sailplanes become more
extreme in their complexity and dimension, the margins between early
adopters and the edges of the proven envelope will continue to shrink,
and will more often go negative in unexpected ways. Certification
doesn't _prove_ that a design is safe; it only demonstrates it under
carefully controlled conditions.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.