Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ssc-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!tjj
From: tjj@ssc-vax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.rec.skydive
Subject: Re: lodestar crash repost
Message-ID: <152@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 24-May-84 01:29:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.152
Posted: Thu May 24 01:29:14 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 19-May-84 01:08:47 EDT
References: <150@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
Lines: 19

Not wishing to be excessively critical, I still must protest that it is not
the FAA's responsibility to supervise the skydiving operations of Lockheed
Lodestars, or any other aircraft!!  If it isn't the pilot in command's
responsibility to manage the aircraft under all anticipated flight conditions
then it is no one's responsibility!  I am a CFI-AI with both single and multi-
engine experience, some of both in hauling skydivers.  I am the first to be
cautious about blaming another pilot when I was not there in his/her shoes.
But I certainly do not believe that ANY FAA Inspector would have done things
differently unless they had actually been there.  I applaud the job that the
NTSB does, but in this case and a few others, I must vehemently disagree.  It
ain't the FAA that's flying the damn airplane, it is the PIC!!!

Lest we forget,
Ted Jardine
-- 
TJ (with Amazing Grace) The Piper
Boeing Computer Services
Artificial Intelligence Center
...uw-beaver!ssc-vax!tjj