Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #51977
From: Tim Olson <Tim@5000feet.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Diplomacy and Tact
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:12:09 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
I don't know that you can actually allow yourself to feel
as responsible as you are, when people do such stupid things.
Myself, I had numerous conversations and comments to the
RV-10 driver that this thread started on.  I'm sure people
would accuse me of not doing and saying enough, or being
harsh enough.  The only thing more harsh I could have
done was get very very public and involve the feds in
every little thing I could.  Perhaps that is what
I should have done.  But, what happened to me in this
situation is that the more I confronted him and told him
when he was doing stupid things, the less he would be willing
to talk to me.  It's the same ol' stupid things your kids
do....you yell at them about something, and pretty soon
they'll just do it all behind your back and not talk to
you about it.  So can we really be feeling that
deeply responsible when these people are purposely avoiding
us and avoiding our conversations because they KNOW that
we are going to be encouraging them towards different
behavior?  Like I said, short of just blowing the whistle
and alerting everyone I could have, there is not much that
could have had any impact.  And, the whistle blowing
would only become a real option once something ILLEGAL
was going on.  Nobody's going to come down on you
and bust your butt when you're not even flying your plane
yet....they have to wait until you actually fly something
that isn't legal.  This guy knew when he crossed the lines
of legality, and didn't care.  That being the case, I just
don't know that other than continuing to encourage people
to do the right thing, there is much we can do.  Certainly
though, if I could re-live this situation again, I'd actually
pull the trigger on a couple more harsh options.  But, it's
a self-responsibility issue...something we severely lack
in this country these days.  Fortunately, when you see how
blame is assigned after an incident, the FAA still understands
that the pilot is the final authority and sole responsible
party for the safety of his flight.

Tim

Smith, Stuart wrote:
I agree with Rob.  I was in contact with an owner who decided he didn't need transition training, amoung other things, when his legacy was finished.  I politely sat down and discussed various scenarios and outcomes with him three times, but he finished the last conversation by saying he was an old man, this is what he wanted to do, he was going to do it his way, and if he died in the process.... that's okay.  How can you respond to that?
 
I learned that an acquaintance was flying with this owner during test flights.  Again, I had several polite conversations with the passenger pointing out the dangers of his decisions, and I was assured that everything would be okay.  After they both perished at the end of a dumb and dumber scenario, I learned that the passenger had three small children at home.  I feel that if I had come unglued and started yelling at this gentleman, maybe he would still be a father to his children.  I should not have been polite and I should have been more than gently persuasive.
 
You can't fix stupid.  You need to care, you need to be curious and you need training to stay healthy in this hobby.  Since we don't have the homebuilt airplane police, one only needs money to get into these fabulous airplanes.  The large majority of homebuilders I know are concerned and safety oriented, but it only takes a few ding dongs who insist on rejecting reality to continually demonstrate Darwin's theory.  You can pick them out of a crowd.  I think the best we can do is to identify them and try to help limit collatoral damage.

    -----Original Message-----
    *From:* Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]*On
    Behalf Of *Chuck Jensen
    *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2009 8:24 AM
    *To:* lml@lancaironline.net
    *Subject:* [LML] Re: Diplomacy and Tact

    Did you inquire if he was using a Technical Advisor or other
    resource?  Aand then go around, by way of the back door, to gain
    entry that way?          I'm not saying you didn't do due diligence in this instance, but if
    we have a high degree of certainty that a person's life might be on
    the line; or even worse, an unsuspecting buyer may later purchase
    this accident-waiting-to-happen, then 3 attempts to warn someone of
    a foreseeable, very serious problem does not sound like overkill
    (pun intended).          I've been stupid, and sometimes I've been stupid 3 times in a row,
    but I would hope that anyone that saw I was making such a serious
    mistake, would not simply walk away, satisified that they'd 'done
    their duty'.

    Chuck Jensen

     
        -----Original Message-----
        *From:* Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]*On
        Behalf Of *rwolf99@aol.com
        *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2009 8:14 AM
        *To:* lml@lancaironline.net
        *Subject:* [LML] Diplomacy and Tact

        As I grow older, I realize that I can say what needs to be said
        without insulting people.  And yes, I can be more blunt with my
        friends.  However, a couple of years ago I was being shown a
        Legendary Mustang kit at the local airport, which is
        surprisingly similar in construction technique to our Lancairs.         Some construction aspects were done very well and some were
        not.  The bad ones that I remember all involved the wing fuel
        tanks.  The fuel tank sealer was poorly applied without good
        coverage -- there was exposed fiberglass in many places.  But
        worse were the holes in the ribs that were not closed out with
        micro.  THERE WOULD BE HONEYCOMB DIRECTLY EXPOSED TO FUEL.  I
        told the builder that he needed to close out the holes so as not
        to allow fuel to contact the honeycomb and gradually soak thru
        the entire wing skin.  His response was appalling -- he had
        taken the hole that he cut out and stuck it in a jar of avgas to
        see if it would break down over time.  It looked okay after six
        months, so he was unconcerned.

        I told him three times that he needed to close out the holes
        that were to be exposed to fuel.  I was polite about it.  I told
        him how I o make sure to get good coverage with the fuel tank
        sealer.  Did he listen?  No.  However, I stopped short of
        calling him a f**king idiot with a death wish because it would
        not have made a bit of difference.  If he ever finishes his
        plane, he WILL be an accident statistic.  Guaranteed.

        What would you have me do?  Talk to the brick wall a little
        longer?  Call the "homebuilt airplane police"?  I said what
        needed to be said, three times, and was rebuffed every time.         No, I walked away and told myself that Darwin still works, but
        in this case it will take a little longer.         - Rob Wolf

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Save energy, paper and money -- *get the Green Toolbar
        <http://toolbar.aol.com/green/download.html?ncid=emlweusdown00000038>.*

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster