Eric Greenwell wrote:
Scott wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:


RAS isn't a court of law trying to issue a fair judgment. We don't
need "all the facts" to have discussions that leaven the pain of
losing a fellow pilot, or goad us into rethinking about what we do
when get into our towplane or glider, and what we should be doing.

That is just the way most of us work.

Yes, you have said facts. Did the Pawnee lose a wing? Stall? Carb
Ice? What is the lesson in a Pawnee that crashed in Oregon with a
fatality, other vehicle OK, etc.? What lesson do you take away from
this? Keep the wings on? Use carb heat? Fly the airplane? All good
advice, but something we ordinarily do on every (normal) flight....

Two things, I think:

1) Ti think it is the "something we ordinarily do on every (normal)
flight" that worries people: this flight seemed like a normal, every day
flight, and yet it went badly wrong. The other pilots on this thread are
likely worried they could be caught in the same circumstance, and they
want to know *now* how to avoid it, not a year from now.

2) Your goal in this situation seems to lie with knowing how and why the
accident occurred, but without the urgency to apply to your actions.
This makes you willing to wait a year for the dust to settle. Nothing
wrong with that, particularly if you aren't a towpilot or don't tow
behind Pawnees, but perhaps you can understand the urgency the other
pilots feel and how that means getting information, even it it's
incomplete and ocasionally wrong, sooner rather than later is an asset,
not a liability.


I'm not disputing that time may be of the essence, but until there are
more facts to go on, it could be a disservice, if you will, to say (for
example) Pawnees are known to have higher post crash fires, when the
fire could have occured during flight. In other words, I could put out
a hundred guesses as to what happened and most, if not all, would be
incorrect because the only facts I have to go on are it was a Pawnee,
there was a fire and there was a fatality.