Lamplighter55
Second Officer
Flight distance : 538596 ft
Offline
|
AG0N-Gary Posted at 10-2 06:59
Maybe it just hit me wrong at the time. It sounded like the attitude that I've heard from many on this forum over the years and I may have been overly sensitive to it. If so, I'm very sorry. I just know things happened before the crash that I would have aborted on immediately, so I could have rebooted and tested a few minutes before trying again. If there's even a slight glitch in the video in the early parts of a flight, I'll land and reboot. So many times, I've read where someone saw an error or temporarily lost video, only to have it return on its own shortly after. They then continue to fly instead of trying to see if there's a reason for it. Like any computerized device, it's always worth rebooting everything from scratch to see if things straighten out.
Absolutely. no worries. Indeed there are some who put so much 'faith' in a new technology that they somehow think 'there's no way it should fail' and then the question goes that it must be the technology that is at fault - whereas often times its just a lack of full technical mastery - particularly in moments of high stress or distraction for the operator - that it should surely be robust enough to sort itself out and meet 'my expectations' rather than just showing there are limits and special cases where its a combination of the operator and the tech that lead to a particular outcome chain. Anyway, appreciate you getting back and sharing your thoughts. Clear skies! |
|