Discussion
Anyone seen this before?
Off Wikipedia:-
After the crash, an investigative team from the UK Department for Transport Air Accidents Investigation Branch attended the scene in co-operation with Strathcyde Police. The wreckage of the helicopter was removed to Farnborough for further forensic investigation. Pilots operate under strict regulations, and are expected in the case of helicopters under CAA rules to undertake a competency test every year, and renew their licenses every five years - to not do so is illegal. It later emerged that McRae had not undertaken a competency check as required in March 2006, and that effectively his license had expired in February 2005. A CAA spokesman commented "The investigators must determine why he (McRae) hasn’t kept up to date with his documentation. There is no suggestion that Mr McRae was not a competent pilot.”[38]
Off Wikipedia:-
After the crash, an investigative team from the UK Department for Transport Air Accidents Investigation Branch attended the scene in co-operation with Strathcyde Police. The wreckage of the helicopter was removed to Farnborough for further forensic investigation. Pilots operate under strict regulations, and are expected in the case of helicopters under CAA rules to undertake a competency test every year, and renew their licenses every five years - to not do so is illegal. It later emerged that McRae had not undertaken a competency check as required in March 2006, and that effectively his license had expired in February 2005. A CAA spokesman commented "The investigators must determine why he (McRae) hasn’t kept up to date with his documentation. There is no suggestion that Mr McRae was not a competent pilot.”[38]
Anything on wiki that doesn't have a reliable reference should be taken with a pinch of salt. The reference for that part of the article goes to the following: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article3...
And being the Sun, I don't think it can really be called a 'reliable' reference
And being the Sun, I don't think it can really be called a 'reliable' reference
Beefmeister said:
Wikipedia MUST be taken with a barrel-load of salt.
It can be edited by anyone, anytime, anywhere, therefore i tend not to believe a lot of the stuff on there.
Think how many trolls PH attracts, than map that to a website the size of Wikipedia....
It seems another forum has confirmed this was true. I was a BIG fan, but had never seen the story before.It can be edited by anyone, anytime, anywhere, therefore i tend not to believe a lot of the stuff on there.
Think how many trolls PH attracts, than map that to a website the size of Wikipedia....
norman156 said:
I thought the reason for the crash was some sort of fault with the helicopter? Rendering the fact that he didn't have a licence irrelivant
Would you say that if someone had been driving a car and killed a few people and had no license?No, you'd be saying well if he hasn't got a license, he probably didnt bother maintaining his car?
If he had no license, then that IMO is very bad. Regardless of who he is and what he was flying/driving.
norman156 said:
I thought the reason for the crash was some sort of fault with the helicopter? Rendering the fact that he didn't have a licence irrelivant
Thats like saying a person has crashed a car and died and even though he had a provisional licence it was not his fault.I loved McRae but that's a silly statement...
Mat Hammond said:
norman156 said:
I thought the reason for the crash was some sort of fault with the helicopter? Rendering the fact that he didn't have a licence irrelivant
Thats like saying a person has crashed a car and died and even though he had a provisional licence it was not his fault.I loved McRae but that's a silly statement...
Mat Hammond said:
norman156 said:
I thought the reason for the crash was some sort of fault with the helicopter? Rendering the fact that he didn't have a licence irrelivant
Thats like saying a person has crashed a car and died and even though he had a provisional licence it was not his fault.I loved McRae but that's a silly statement...
The same with the person driving with a provisional licence. If a mechanical failure through no fault of his own would have caused the car to crash no matter what he would have done then its not his fault the car crashed is it?
If the investigation found that if he would have had the check he would have been able to safely land the helicopter then fair enough, but it doesn't
Curry Burns said:
Hitch78 said:
This is a useless thread - the man had a mastery over machinery that most could not even comprehend, the fact that a piece of paper in a drawer in his desk had not been updated is neither here not there.
Excactly, please just let this thread go or Mods can we lock it.i thought this came out at the time so is and never has been 'an issue'.
briSk said:
Curry Burns said:
Hitch78 said:
This is a useless thread - the man had a mastery over machinery that most could not even comprehend, the fact that a piece of paper in a drawer in his desk had not been updated is neither here not there.
Excactly, please just let this thread go or Mods can we lock it.i thought this came out at the time so is and never has been 'an issue'.
Hitch78 said:
This is a useless thread - the man had a mastery over machinery that most could not even comprehend, the fact that a piece of paper in a drawer in his desk had not been updated is neither here nor there.
Racing drivers have a level of technical mastery such that they never have at fault accidents ?andrewrob said:
If the investigation found that if he would have had the check he would have been able to safely land the helicopter then fair enough, but it doesn't
The investigation that has yet to be published...Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff