Message-ID: <001f01c11e15$bd168240$6401a8c0@atilla>
From: "Pat Weston" <patweston@home.com>
To: <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
References: <127.278f562.289de6c5@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: flight
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:18:45 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Ok, ok. You are legally correct. Whether I'd consider such a flight in an
airliner has nothing to do with this discussion.

However, the safe conclusion of a flight is largely dependant upon the
judgement exercised by the PIC. Whether you, the feds or Mickey Mouse think
it was poor judgement on behalf of the PIC in this case you have the right
to that opinion. The pilot who made the call concluded the flight safely so
it would appear his judgement was sound.

Most of the incidents, that raise insurance rates are as a result of poor
judgement. The rules and regulations do not prevent this from happening. An
example is taking off in zero visibility conditions, perfectly legal, but a
sound decision? On the other hand not placarding a dead DG in VFR conditions
is not legal but neither is it life threatening.

We as pilots make judgement calls continuously, are all of them perfect? I
think not, we are merely mortals and make mistakes. Adhering to the regs
doggedly does not guarantee a perfect life or flight, nor does breaking some
of them necessarily result in death and destruction.

Pat Weston
N747PW
"Only Three Short Years To Go!"
http://members.home.com/dylanw12


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://www.olsusa.com/mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>