Comair 5191: Sole Survivor tonight 1/8 on CNN

I agree that he shouldn't be charged with anything, but to play devil's advocate, why is it we charge drivers when there is a legitimate accident?
 
gne in prog said:
I agree that he shouldn't be charged with anything, but to play devil's advocate, why is it we charge drivers when there is a legitimate accident?
Click to expand...

What do you mean by legitimate if they were texting in driving then they should be charged because if they weren't charged people would text and drive more but I don't see a situation where someone is in a legitimate accident where no one was at fault, someone is always at fault.
 
Hopeful Pilot said:
What do you mean by legitimate if they were texting in driving then they should be charged because if they weren't charged people would text and drive more but I don't see a situation where someone is in a legitimate accident where no one was at fault, someone is always at fault.
Click to expand...


True. Someone is always at fault. By a "legitimate accident" I'm not talking about texting, drunk driving, or the like. My friends dad was killed riding a motorcycle. A guy just didn't seem him and pulled out in front of him. He wasn't drunk, he wasn't texting, he just failed to see him.

If you are at fault in a plane and kill people, you aren't charged with any crimes. If you are at fault in a car and kill someone, you're going to see a criminal courtroom.
 
Pilot Fighter said:
Bad situational awareness explains why or how you failed to observe something. I think that bad situational awareness can reach the threshold of recklessness. In the bus driver example, if the bus driver becomes so concerned about the engine warning light that he ignores multiple road signs and eventually ends up going the wrong way on the Interstate and kills all of his passengers, he has exhibited bad SA....and recklessness. If we want to play semantic games, I guess we can all agree that bus drivers and pilots can never be reckless, only subject to varying degrees of situational awareness.
Click to expand...

It is an argument of semantics, of course. When I think "reckless" I think of some a hole who downed 2 cases of beer, snorted some lines, and then went ahead and flew his Seminole and family into a smoking hole in the ground (as an aviation example). A scenario where a logical person could have only predicted failure and/or disaster. I don't disagree that lining up on the wrong runway, one that is 4k feet short of what you need or expected, is a monumental error of awareness or judgement, but I also would be willing to bet my next paycheck that neither him nor the CA meant to take off on that runway. For me, that is the difference between a serious pilot error, and recklessness or negligence.
 
I flew out of there for the first time ever on a clear and a million day in the middle of the afternoon about a year or two and found it somewhat confusing. This was AFTER they "fixed" the airport/runway layout.
 
///AMG said:
It is an argument of semantics, of course. When I think "reckless" I think of some a hole who downed 2 cases of beer, snorted some lines, and then went ahead and flew his Seminole and family into a smoking hole in the ground (as an aviation example). A scenario where a logical person could have only predicted failure and/or disaster. I don't disagree that lining up on the wrong runway, one that is 4k feet short of what you need or expected, is a monumental error of awareness or judgement, but I also would be willing to bet my next paycheck that neither him nor the CA meant to take off on that runway. For me, that is the difference between a serious pilot error, and recklessness or negligence.
Click to expand...
Here is the KRS definition:
(4) "Recklessly" -- A person acts recklessly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.
 
Rocketman99 said:
I flew out of there for the first time ever on a clear and a million day in the middle of the afternoon about a year or two and found it somewhat confusing. This was AFTER they "fixed" the airport/runway layout.
Click to expand...
Whether it is or was confusing is a matter of opinion. Whether the taxiways and runways were correctly marked is not a matter of opinion.
 
BobDDuck said:
Out of curiosity, did you ever taxi out and take off at LEX in the early morning before they "fixed" (and I use the term loosely) the runways?
Click to expand...
I think that was one of the more ra-tarded layouts I've seen. Still pretty confusing.
 
Pilot Fighter said:
Here is the KRS definition:
(4) "Recklessly" -- A person acts recklessly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But now consider the things that get a guy slapped with a reckless driving charge. I think most of those could be described by being fully able to "perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk...." at least an intelligent person should be able to. In those cases, people are fueled by alcohol and impaired judgement, or just a desire to be cool/prove themselves/etc. I think in this specific incident, the guy just didn't taxi far enough around the apron and failed to notice the obvious runway marking in front of him. Motivations? I would guess just simply trying to get the aircraft off the ground in an efficient manner. Not being intentionally careless and knowingly exposing the flight to danger. There would be no benefit to taxiing a few hundred feet less and taking a runway that any jet pilot knows, without ever consulting a manual, that they couldn't safely depart from. Just my thoughts......maybe we should just agree to disagree :)
 
Pilot Fighter said:
Question. Has a retarded layout ever resulted in you not knowing what runway you were on?
Click to expand...
People land at wrong airports more often than you would think. CAL landed on a taxiway and asked if they could cross the runway they were supposed to land on. Do you really think lining up on a wrong runway is really that much of a stretch?

I even had a flight instructor try to force me to line up with the runway edge lights at IND once.

We have been lucky that many of these incidents just ended up being interesting threads on JC rather than accidents.
 
Hopeful Pilot said:
What do you mean by legitimate if they were texting in driving then they should be charged because if they weren't charged people would text and drive more but I don't see a situation where someone is in a legitimate accident where no one was at fault, someone is always at fault.
Click to expand...

So when someone isn't paying attention to something they should be paying attention to, should they be prosecuted if an accident results?

We managed 60+ pages and a lock the last time we discussed how pilots can never be negligent. It's always the 'Human Factors'. Nasty critters. Too much hair.
 
///AMG said:
Fair enough. But now consider the things that get a guy slapped with a reckless driving charge. I think most of those could be described by being fully able to "perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk...." at least an intelligent person should be able to. In those cases, people are fueled by alcohol and impaired judgement, or just a desire to be cool/prove themselves/etc. I think in this specific incident, the guy just didn't taxi far enough around the apron and failed to notice the obvious runway marking in front of him. Motivations? I would guess just simply trying to get the aircraft off the ground in an efficient manner. Not being intentionally careless and knowingly exposing the flight to danger. There would be no benefit to taxiing a few hundred feet less and taking a runway that any jet pilot knows, without ever consulting a manual, that they couldn't safely depart from. Just my thoughts......maybe we should just agree to disagree :)
Click to expand...
Fair enough. You seemed to be hung up on intent, which need not be a component of negligence or recklessness.

We all draw lines. In my opinion, this Comair crew was reckless. They not only took off from the wrong runway, they took off from a closed runway. That's enough for me. Your mileage might differ.
 
NickH said:
So when someone isn't paying attention to something they should be paying attention to, should they be prosecuted if an accident results?
Click to expand...
No. I didn't say or suggest this in any way. Earlier in this thread I stated that few fatal accidents are the result of recklessness.

If you don't think that pilots can be reckless without intent, fine. If you think that pilots can be reckless without intent, it's just a matter of drawing a line and you disagree with my line.

Elvis has left the building.
 
Isnt there another one of these shows interviewing the woman who survived the NWA crash? Not that we should expect her to remember much but apparently this is her first actual interview about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top