![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
snoop wrote:
GC, you may say "ALWAYS, but I like to say "never say never". I'm usually pretty cautious that way myself. Put your lawyer hat back on for a second. What if, for the sake of discussion, its 3 o'clock in the morning on a freeway, and you hit the guy on the bike, having not seen him, until the last second? You the big car driver have done everything right, but the bike did not make himself seen, and he was on the freeway where he was not suppose to be. As we've seen in all these threads, lots of variables to wade through. All those may or may not be true but if the reason HE gives is that he was in a big car travelling at a speed too high for him to reasonably be expected to take any avoiding action, then I would say he has no defence. That's the analogy with the power pilots on r.a.p. They say "How can WE possibly be expected to avoid a glider at the speeds we're travelling and with many other important things to occupy us". A sample quote is "How can you avoid what you haven't seen?" I wanted to remind them that the law REQUIRES them to travel at such a speed that they CAN see gliders. There are two aspects here. First - how we need to fly to stay alive. The discussion on ras has mostly been on this area and I'm in complete agreement with its defensive tone. Second - who's at fault if there is a collision. Here, I found the defensive discourse (My wife taught me that word!) on ras a bit puzzling. It assumed power aircraft held all the cards and this is untrue. The glider had right of way. This isn't everything but it IS the starting point. If you don't assert your rights every now and then, they disappear. Nobody else is going to grant you rights which you don't claim yourself. If YOU don't believe in your own case, why would anybody else see it from your point of view? I guess you have the same aggressive cycling lobby groups that we have here. Think of how they never tire of asserting their rights to be on the road, their right to hold up traffic, their green credentials. I know soaring won't do it but a tenth of their self-assertion would be nice to see here. I entirely agree that being right won't bring you back to life and I certainly try to fly on the basis that everyone else is out to kill me but I was trying to inject a little reality into the group with which this was originally cross-posted - rec.aviation.piloting. You'll notice I've taken the x-posting out. Finally, it will be interesting if the glider and the jet have different underwriters. GC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hawker vs. Glider Midair - with photo! | Darkwing | Piloting | 151 | September 5th 06 05:19 PM |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
NTSB: USAF included? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 10 | September 11th 05 10:33 AM |
Bad publicity | David Starer | Soaring | 18 | March 8th 04 03:57 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |