Comair Pilot Error

Ron Lee wrote:

"Peter Duniho" wrote:


"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Peter Duniho wrote:


You have never made a single mistake, ever, while flying an airplane?

Apples and oranges, IMO. One cannot compare the skills of GA pilots to
those of professional pilots

But we're not talking about skills here. We're talking about human error.
There is no human in the world immune to error. Do you get angry at every
error a human makes? If not, what's your threshold and why do you think
that you are justified in getting angry at these particular humans for this
particular error in this particular case?


49 deaths?

Will your anger bring them back?

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:


49 deaths?

Will your anger bring them back?

Matt

Nothing will bring them back. So we should do nothing?

"Morgans" wrote in message
...
If your family was on that plane, would you be angry? Damn straight, you
would be.

I don't know. Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. I've experienced what I
consider to be tragic loss in the past without feeling anger at anyone.

But that's not the question here. Andrew's family wasn't on the plane, and
his anger is misplaced, even if it could be understandable (albeit
irrational) on the part of people who had relationships with the people who
died.

Intentional does not have anything to do whether anger is justified.

If you are talking about anger directed at the pilots, then of course it
does. Anger may be understandable, but justified implies that there is some
rational basis for the anger.

It may turn out that there is indeed some rational basis for the anger, but
for the moment there is absolutely no information that would support that
conclusion.

These
were two professional pilots that made a mistake that is without reason

How do you know that the mistake was made without reason?

, a kind of mistake not in any way permitted for professional pilot.

Are there mistakes that are permitted for professional pilots? What
mistakes would those be?

If they
had survived, I would expect that they would never be allowed to again
hold
an ATP.

Unless there's new news I haven't heard, one did survive. I guess we'll see
if he loses his pilot certificate or not. How that's relevant to the
question of justified anger, I don't know. Maybe you could explain it.

For what ever reason, they did not have the right stuff, that day. The
right stuff is absolutely essential, every time, for an ATP to do his
thing,
and if the mistake were survived this time, you can not know if they would
make a critical mistake in the future. We, the "riding public," have a
right to expect better than that.

I'd agree you have a right to expect to not be killed on an airline flight,
or on any flight for that matter. As a society, we tend to value our
expectation that we won't be killed.

But in what way does that justify anger against at least one person who
suffered the same dire consequences that all the passengers did, and who for
all we know was doing the very best they were capable of in their situation
to perform their duties?

I know...I'm just spitting in the wind here. Perhaps on Usenet more than
anywhere else, but certainly in society as a whole, people LOVE to judge.
They LOVE to make accusations and pretend they know EXACTLY what the score
is, long before they really do. Still, that doesn't make it right, and when
you and others insist on going around doing so, I'm going to speak up if I'm
around to see it.

Pete

"Morgans" wrote in message
...
Anger, and a person's reasons for becoming angry, is a very personal,
experience driven reaction.

Frankly, if all Andrew has said was that he was angry, that would've been
fine. But he took it further. He made unfounded accusations of the pilots.
Angry or not, that's not reasonable.

I would suggest that you accept and respect other's anger, produced in
reaction to the incident, and that others respect your need to withhold
feelings of anger in reaction to the incident.

Then why can't you accept and respect my anger, produced in reaction to a
person throwing around unfounded accusations?

Okay, I admit...I'm not exactly angry. Extremely annoyed is probably more
accurate. But still...your "live and let live" advice cuts both ways. Want
to practice what you preach? Then stay out of it.

Nobody is going to change the other's mind in this case. Best to respect,
accept, and move along.

See above.

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:


49 deaths?

Will your anger bring them back?

Matt


Nothing will bring them back. So we should do nothing?

No, we should do useful things that might prevent a similar accident
from happening again. Anger doesn't do that.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:


No, we should do useful things that might prevent a similar accident
from happening again. Anger doesn't do that.

Matt

I am puzzled why you find anger due to loss of life, which is a normal
human emotion, to be so objectionable.
We are not talking about taking rash decision like invading a country.

Ron Lee wrote:
If he still flies let me know so I can avoid that airline. Or at
least any plane he is piloting.



You think he will repeat the mistake, assuming there was one? It must be nice
to be so perfect.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Morgans wrote:
We are not talking about shooting a
non-precision approach to minimums in a thunderstorm after a full day
of flying. A pilot should be able to do this even if he had partied all
night at the bar. What happened was gross negligence.



How's the view from in there?

HuH ???



With his head buried in his ass, I would think the view was limiting.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

"Peter Duniho" wrote

Okay, I admit...I'm not exactly angry. Extremely annoyed is probably more
accurate. But still...your "live and let live" advice cuts both ways.
Want
to practice what you preach? Then stay out of it.


Once again pete, You prove what an ass you are capable of being.
--
Jim in NC

I suspect this pilot's professional future, assuming he survives, is
bleak. His resume is going to be compared to others, isn't it? If you
were the decision maker, would you be interested in hiring a man who
will most likely have a serious FAA citation on his record if there are
others with about the same qualifications who do not? That would be the
arm's length decision process based on a factual record, but the hiring
authority has still another consideration -- will the public be
willing to buy tickets on the carrier who hires a pilot involved in
this incident?

Those are the criteria I'd be interested in as a hiring authority. One
might claim in an abstract world it ain't 'fair', but boys and girls
this isn't an abstract world we're living in.

It was very likely an unforced error that led to the accident, but the
key word is 'error'.

It's awful stuff, the whole damned thing.

-- CLEAR!--



Peter Duniho wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message
...
If your family was on that plane, would you be angry? Damn straight, you
would be.

I don't know. Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. I've experienced what I
consider to be tragic loss in the past without feeling anger at anyone.

But that's not the question here. Andrew's family wasn't on the plane, and
his anger is misplaced, even if it could be understandable (albeit
irrational) on the part of people who had relationships with the people who
died.

Intentional does not have anything to do whether anger is justified.

If you are talking about anger directed at the pilots, then of course it
does. Anger may be understandable, but justified implies that there is some
rational basis for the anger.

It may turn out that there is indeed some rational basis for the anger, but
for the moment there is absolutely no information that would support that
conclusion.

These
were two professional pilots that made a mistake that is without reason

How do you know that the mistake was made without reason?

, a kind of mistake not in any way permitted for professional pilot.

Are there mistakes that are permitted for professional pilots? What
mistakes would those be?

If they
had survived, I would expect that they would never be allowed to again
hold
an ATP.

Unless there's new news I haven't heard, one did survive. I guess we'll see
if he loses his pilot certificate or not. How that's relevant to the
question of justified anger, I don't know. Maybe you could explain it.

For what ever reason, they did not have the right stuff, that day. The
right stuff is absolutely essential, every time, for an ATP to do his
thing,
and if the mistake were survived this time, you can not know if they would
make a critical mistake in the future. We, the "riding public," have a
right to expect better than that.

I'd agree you have a right to expect to not be killed on an airline flight,
or on any flight for that matter. As a society, we tend to value our
expectation that we won't be killed.

But in what way does that justify anger against at least one person who
suffered the same dire consequences that all the passengers did, and who for
all we know was doing the very best they were capable of in their situation
to perform their duties?

I know...I'm just spitting in the wind here. Perhaps on Usenet more than
anywhere else, but certainly in society as a whole, people LOVE to judge.
They LOVE to make accusations and pretend they know EXACTLY what the score
is, long before they really do. Still, that doesn't make it right, and when
you and others insist on going around doing so, I'm going to speak up if I'm
around to see it.

Pete