>What did the pilot have to gain by not shutting down before he let the PAX >exit. A little time, less wear and tear on the starter and battery. What did >he have to lose by not shutting down ,a lot of sleepless nights.
Agreed. But keep in mind that all those things apply to skydivers - and we've had skydivers struck by props - and we still load hot.
I find there to be a difference between skydivers loading behind a spinning prop in the daytime and a single unescorted indiviaul at night around a moving prop. It's a matter of cognizance of risk. Sure, we have ignorant tandems getting on and off - and escorted every step. Skydivers unescorted who are pretty damned knowledgeable about staying the hell clear of that spnning slicer.
I know my thinking is pretty subjective. I simply look at what cognizance people have of the respective risks involved. Tandems spend time beforehand watching Bill Booth tell them about how dangerous it is, then get videoed telling the camera about how they understand they will die doing this, etc.
Someone walking into a prop? Nope. Some pilot looking for a piece of ass from some model ended up with a piece of arm instead.
>I find there to be a difference between skydivers loading behind a >spinning prop in the daytime and a single unescorted indiviaul at night >around a moving prop. It's a matter of cognizance of risk.
I agree. However, because we do not have the access controls that airports do, non-skydivers often end up around the aircraft as well. And of course tandem passengers do not learn much about aircraft safety during their 10 minute ground instruction other than "wait for your instructor." Which is why even skydiving aircraft loading skydivers have had prop vs person accidents.
But we still load hot. Why? For a lot of reasons that have to do with convenience and saving a buck and nothing to do with safety. "It's faster." "It's easier on the engines." We load hot because we want to save a minute or two; hard to condemn someone else for doing the same.
>Some pilot looking for a piece of ass from some model ended up with a >piece of arm instead.
================ Estonian Skydiver Killed by Spinning Aircraft Propeller
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 1:50:52 PM by scottdeus12
TALLINN, Estonia — Authorities say a skydiver was killed when she walked into a spinning aircraft propeller at an airfield in Estonia. ================
And some DZO was looking for a piece of ass ended up with a lot of pieces of a skydiver instead. But still we are OK with hot loading.
We load hot because we want to save a minute or two; hard to condemn someone else for doing the same.
I understand totally, Bill. And if there were facts that came out that she was thoroughly briefed and did not follow the procedure then my position will change. Part of me is operating off of the assumption that she wasn't briefed about it.
I know my position draws a line in the sand. I'm not coming to it from a legal standpoint (the risk v. utility discussion that you opened) but from a completely subjective standpoint that is "this is what I think."
About experience and habits - there are two pretty common versions of Russian MIL-8 helicopter: Mi-8MT and Mi-8MTV.
One day I have seen very experienced aircraft engineer (Afghan War veteran) when he was doing his pre-flight check and walking counterclockwise around the bird, which was already powered up and spinning; he was saved by another guy just seconds before he walks into tail rotor.
The thing was that during last few month he flew Mi 8MT which has right-side tail rotor; MTV version has it on a left side...
He surely knows what he was doing and he surely was aware of the danger - but the outcome could be fatal. Habits are hard to beat.
forgot: past participle, past tense of for·get (Verb) (1) Fail to remember. (2) Inadvertently neglect to attend to, do, or mention something: "she forgot to lock her door"; "I'm sorry, I just forgot".
It would seem to me, that there's some overlap between negligence and forgetfulness. When in a court of law, the word "negligence" vs "forgetfulness" can be debated, but the fact that debate happens show what a fine line there is. I think my spouse (training as a paralegal) would be able to answer this better. There's a batch of words (forgetfulness, inconsideration, negligence, etc) that can become quite controversial without clearly defining everything.
Now, we can define the specifics of "forget": Does "forget" refer to the action of moment in time, or does "forget" refer to the training about how to pull? Maybe Squeak is talking about the latter, and billyvon is talking about the former?
Of course, Squeak, I agree with you that you DO NOT "forget" your training of pull. You're absolutely right. But, agreeing with Billyvon and others too, there are people who "forgot" to pull at the RIGHT time, and have been saved by the Cypres. Forgetting to lock a door because you were focussed on recovering from tripping on the stairs. Forgetting to pull a parachute at the correct time because you were focussed on a tumble. Same thing about the momentary forgetfulness.
Then, if this was brought into court, I'm sure a lawyer (lawrocket?) would be happy to chime in. Context is very important in law.
(This post was edited by mdrejhon on Apr 27, 2012, 10:29 AM)