| Subject: Re: Interesting Beechcraft Bonanza article |
Author:
Russ
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: Sun April 06, 2008 16:25:59
In reply to:
Jason
's message, "Re: Interesting Beechcraft Bonanza article" on Sun April 06, 2008 08:44:26
According to the report Peterson had clocked over 700 flight hours in his career, but did not specify what conditions these hours were flown in. However, I would think that a reasonable person, now I am assuming that both Dwyer and Peterson were reasonable people, would have the ability to make a decision based on their experience. All be it a poor decision to fly under these conditions, I would think that by Dwyer giving the go ahead to the flight that he felt Peterson was skilled enough to fly in these conditions. Flight simulators although very useful are not the same as the real deal. Any of you ever remember the old driving simulators used in drivers ed? I remember them being far from accurate, difficult to function etc. Add to the fact that the technology of the day was no were near what it is today leads me to feel that you cannot judge ones abilities based on what he/she did on an ancient flight simulator. In my opinion, those of you that want to blame the crash solely on Peterson, need to add a little common sense to your reasoning. Everything I have stated above and in this post is common sense. Can you not feel when you are sitting, standing still, running, walking, jumping, or moving? Do you rely solely on your eyes and mind to tell you that you are doing these things? No. You can feel them because as stated before you have an inner ear that provides balance and a sense of direction/motion. Now, sinus infections, ear damage and a few other factors can affect the function and or sensitivity of the inner ear but you would still be able to sense movement and therefore whether you are ascending or descending. Also, depending on model of aircraft, whether it has a stick or a wheel, (which matters little in this case because Peterson was familiar with this craft) you either pull back on the wheel to ascend and push it forward to descend again 2 opposite functions. Now had Peterson lost his sense of where he was in the sky I would think he probably would have throttled down a bit and not made any sudden changes in course until he had regained his orientation. According to the report the engine had been at cruising speed when the props hit the ground and snapped off. Also, Peterson would have been able to sense the steep angle at which they were approaching the ground being that the wing tip hit first, leads me to believe that he was un-able to correct the pitch and not that he did not know what was going on. I again firmly believe it was more of a mechanical problem and not strictly pilot error. Had it been ice on the wings, or as someone else stated baggage on the rudder lines, the evidence would not necessarily be there post crash. I do feel the most important error made was the decision to fly in the first place. So, for those of you that feel so compelled to blame the crash on Peterson, please elaborate beyond the poor performance in flight simulation. I am sorry but I feel that even if the plane had gotten away from him he still would have had the skill set to either correct the situation, put out the landing gear or do some other “rescue” action that would have been apparent in the post crash investigation. That is unless the plane was not mechanically capable of doing so.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
