X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:02:30 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mx3.pshift.com ([216.57.116.8] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.2) with ESMTP id 1565183 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:43:04 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.57.116.8; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net Received: from ccaselt (unverified [216.57.118.64]) by mx3.pshift.com (Vircom SMTPRS 4.35.480.0) with SMTP id for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:42:38 -0500 Received-SPF: none (mx3.pshift.com: domain of colyncase@earthlink.net does not designate any permitted senders) X-Modus-ReverseDNS: Error=0x0000232A X-Modus-BlackList: 216.57.118.64=OK;colyncase@earthlink.net=OK X-Modus-RBL: 216.57.118.64=Excluded X-Modus-Trusted: 216.57.118.64=NO X-Original-Message-ID: <0e0c01c7081c$a2f43b90$ed11020a@nvidia.com> From: "colyncase on earthlink" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: for the record X-Original-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 10:42:24 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C707D9.927D2080" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C707D9.927D2080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Kevin said, I am starting to wonder if it is a bad idea for the LML to be used as =20 a form for speculation regarding the causes of an accident, =20 I suppose speculation and rumor mongering are bad things. On the other hand, respect for vested interests tends to defer attention until it's so old news that no one learns from it. Choosing the lesser of the two evils, I would advocate trying to narrow it to a limited number of scenarios and then thinking about what we = would do. But I would go beyond the procedural answer and try to address the = mental scenario and try to figure out how you would deal with that. I would wager that a good percentage of the pilots no longer with us=20 would have given the right answer on the ground but somehow couldn't get to the right answer in the air. I think THAT particular problem is very worth discussing, and one that procedural training doesn't always solve. I have to relate that my 2nd scary situation in an airplane was resolved by pattern recognition. After reading "aftermath" for a decade, but = still with only 100 hours under my belt, I was out with my family, vfr, on a = murky day which turned into night in the mountains. At some point a mental = alarm went off when I recognized this was starting to sound like an "aftermath" story. At the=20 moment, the repugnance of having monday morning quarterback my crash was highly motivating. I found an airport and landed without incident. Recognizing early that you need to change something is one thing we learn from thinking about these situations. Colyn ------=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C707D9.927D2080 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Kevin said,

I am starting to wonder if it is a = bad idea for=20 the LML to be used as
a form for speculation regarding the = causes of=20 an accident,

I suppose speculation and rumor = mongering=20 are bad things.

On the other hand, respect for vested = interests=20 tends to defer attention

until it's so old news that no one = learns from=20 it.

Choosing the lesser of the two evils, I = would=20 advocate trying to narrow

it to a limited number of scenarios and = then=20 thinking about what we would

do. But I would go beyond = the=20 procedural answer and try to address the mental scenario

and try to figure out how you would = deal with=20 that.

I would wager that a good percentage of = the pilots=20 no longer with us

would have given the right answer on = the ground but=20 somehow

couldn't get to the right answer in the = air. I think THAT particular

problem is very worth discussing, and = one that=20 procedural training

doesn't always solve.

I have to relate that my 2nd scary = situation in an=20 airplane was resolved

by pattern recognition. After = reading=20 "aftermath" for a decade, but still

with only 100 hours under my belt, I = was out with=20 my family, vfr, on a murky

day which turned into night in the=20 mountains. At some point a mental alarm went off when = I

recognized this was starting to sound = like an=20 "aftermath" story. At the

moment, the repugnance of having = <you guys>=20 monday morning quarterback

my crash was highly = motivating. I found=20 an airport and landed without

incident. Recognizing early = that you=20 need to change something is one

thing we learn from thinking about = these=20 situations.

Colyn

------=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C707D9.927D2080--