Now now boys!
It should have been notam'd as a hazard, but as Sam taxied past it and saw it,
he should have recognised it as such, regardless.
He has actually admitted that he does not know why he didn't, thereby
acknowledging that he was at fault in not doing so.
And that is what accidents are all about.
We have to be vigilant at all times, regardless of external pressures, and that
is much easier said than done.
Enough said?
Paul B.
Quoting JMasal@...:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Are you serioously asking this Mike Perry??? Get your head outta your hiney and talk to an FAA or NTSB inspector.
Excuse me Jim, but I don't get it. If it's not in a NOTAM how are we supposed to know? Once we land, what are we supposed to do?
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...>
To: Q-LIST <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Thu, Sep 5, 2013 12:48 pm
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] The Offending Puddle
Excuse me Jim, but I don't get it. If it's not in a NOTAM how are we supposed to know? Once we land, what are we supposed to do?
The runway is in seriously bad shape and there was no NOTAM. That's an error, but it isn't pilot error.
If this happened landing on Farmer Brown's dirt track, or at some sailplane port -- OK, Pilot error. Otherwise, I disagree.
Mike Perry
On 9/4/2013 6:48 PM, JMasal@... wrote:
There is an elephant in the room that no one sees... pilot error.
FAA regs put the onus on the pilot to know ABSOLUTELY EVERYthing about the flight we are about to take.
Do we do it... NO, and we are all guilty of it and 99% of the time we get away with it.
The puddle didn't jump out and attack Sam.
j. (a past remorseful victim of pilot error)
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...>
To: Quickie List <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wed, Sep 4, 2013 7:21 pm
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] The Offending Puddle
That's kind of what the FAA said.
Sam
Sent via wireless gizmo.
On Sep 4, 2013 6:53 PM, "John Hartley" <john.hartley1@...> wrote:
