Yeah, I'm a bit confused, too. I mean he definitely shouldn't have made that manoeuvre given his altitude and whatnot, right? And he decided to anyway. So how is he not culpable?Originally Posted by Sir C
Cleared? CLEARED?
Yeah, I'm a bit confused, too. I mean he definitely shouldn't have made that manoeuvre given his altitude and whatnot, right? And he decided to anyway. So how is he not culpable?Cleared? CLEARED?
Well, according to what I've just read, he claimed 'cognitive impairment' (?) and the defence even brought up 'hypoxia'.
Christ. My natural sympathies, as you can imagine, are with the pilot; we've all been there, we've all pushed on a bit beyond the envelope because, you know... but fúck me, what he did was fúcking miles beyond sensible and that defence is risisble.
He destroyed a fine aeroplane and potentially endangered the lives of other display pilots on the ground. For that he derserves some sanction.
He also put members of the public at risk. Why do you focus purely on other display pilots on the ground?
I give not a flying fart for groundlings. These appalling, crawling beetle-like creatures are of no interest to us Sky Gods.
He also totalled a lot of cars.
Imagine all that ruined boot space.
RIP imo.
Are you really, genuinely such a complete knob Rich?
He is a spotter, h. But worse, he is the kind of spotter who claims that he is going to get a licence one day.
These people should be subject to a restraining order.
I am going to refrain from mentioning that I posted a link to Karen Danczuk's twitter feed and you then disappeared for 20 minutes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote