turboplanner Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 The pilot himself has a more difficult situation because of the layers of the law descending on him. Enforcement officials may bne looking for a confession so they can prosecute, the Coroner is usually strictly evidence based, and while the civil case may also be evidence based, the pilot's/land owner's/operator's behaviour can change the outcome quite a bit. From our perspective where we are wanting to find out what happened so we can learn from it and perhaps build in some skills to avoid a repeat, the more the incident is discussed the better, and speculation/wrong reasons are not critical because each different scenario, wrong or not adds to the knowledge tool box. This is frustrating to some people who make the usual comments like "wait until the report comes out" but history has a way of sometimes coupling almost identical accidents together, and what we should set out to do is break those statistics. So, in some cases, frustrating for the Pilot involved who may well know what caused the crash and in others very helpful for the pilot because he may have thought he caused it when in fact he didn't.
Vev Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Absolutely agree in principal,however, in the litigious society that we have become, would speaking openly and freely and admitting fault to causing an accident, be leaving the pilot open to litigation?I dare say it would! Frank Frank, An interesting question you have put forward. However rather than I answer you directly, may I suggest you have a read of the lead story in the current Flight Safety magazine "Accidental Justice" Here's the link http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_91346 Cheers Vev
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now