Search results

Such things were not unheard of years ago but it was done to spare the family, not to defraud insurance companies. Falsifying reports for any reason hasn't been kosher for some time now, and I guarantee insurance investigators would be all over such a case these days. The Coroner in this case...

Those who like to argue just to argue won't be satisfied with anything. What more do you expect to find out that requires debating?

You've got the ruling. Unless the media is lying or screwed it up, I suppose.

I trust the coroner's report far more than the media coverage. If he says accident, I believe it.

I suspect people worried that everyone doesn't think the same way or hold the same opinion, right or wrong, do far more harm. Gossip and speculation have been around since there were people, but lately we have to be protected from it.

This is where I'm at as a passenger. I'm all for technology that helps the pilots get me safely where I'm going, but if the SHTF, I want Sully to land me safely on the Hudson rather than a computer try to get me to Teterboro because that is what it "should" do.

Public acceptance might also be considered. As a non-pilot member of the flying public, I can't say for sure how many years of service it would take for me to consider flying in an AI controlled plane, but it would probably be measured in decades. I doubt I'm alone in that.

If I know enough to be the second set of eyes, I know enough to do the work. But yes, I would certainly double check everything that was touched before trusting my life to it.

Really? The FAA didn't provide sufficient "context" in their report? What more "context" could there be? Either 504 people died in 10 years because of maintenance related crashes or they didn't. As stated above, I was surprised by the number of people who die because of mistakes made by...

I got my information here: https://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/faa-aviation-medicine-reports/AM02-23.pdf 504 "maintenance related" fatalities in 10 years attributed by the NTSB.

As someone on the outside looking in, the number of planes that have serious problems shortly after maintenence or repair is surprising. Frankly, it is the only thing I have yet to get past in deciding whether or not to start working toward a PPL. I'm willing to accept the risk of my own...

Is that something he would have been allowed to do himself?

If the pilot had checked the work and found the improper installation, would he have been obligated to give the incompetent another chance to crash his plane or could he have just done it right himself?

I'm not sure what law enforcement agency would have a need, much less the authority, to jam GPS.

Glad to see others are finally coming around.

I suspect it is either the most interesting thing about him, or he's hoping to gen up conflict so he can fight for "equality."

Looks pretty good to me, unless Mesa is a crappy place to work.

Didn't chock the wheels in the hangar.

I think you're right about that. As a relative newcomer to aviation forums, I noticed right away the discourse is a cut above what is normally found.

Many people also fail to understand there IS a difference between correct and incorrect, and rely instead upon whether or not they agree. But, how does it make you FEEL? That's what counts these days.