Terrence wrote"
 
"In other words, lets evaluate the designs rather than carp on more and more
training .... this group is fraught with very qualified pilots, and they are
having accidetns.  The cause, imho, is likely elsewhere."

Just wondering how he reaches the conclusion that we are, as a group including the accident pilots, very qualified when no evidence supports it.  Without even getting into the judgment issue, where all of the evidence suggests that the group referenced above is woefully deficient, Jeff's statistics show beyond any doubt that inadequate qualification in type is the most obvious common trait driving the accident statistics.

Technology is a marvelous thing  but it is not a substitute for training or judgment.

(I do wholeheartedly agree that the word "fraught" is apt, however.)