Jack Roush Crashes Plane in WI

[Tommy]

Originally Posted by snakebittexan

If we limited the post on this thread to those "that do" we would far fewer responses wouldn't we?

I will admit that I was curt with a non-pilot earlier in this thread, but it's not that I think this discussion should be limited to experienced pilots. I enjoy answering questions about flying for inexperienced people who are curious about it. I don't mind non-pilots offering opinions when those opinions regard general topics not directly based on the experience one gets only by being a pilot. For example, anyone should be free to speculate on why Roush used the words he did to describe the incident after the fact. But I do get a little testy when a non-pilot expresses a strong but incorrect opinion about how a pilot is supposed to behave in a particular flying situation. ... Analogies are useful tools when a more knowledgable person needs to explain a complex concept to a less knowledgable person. (E.g., flying in the titanium protected cockpit of an A-10 in combat is a little like sitting in a trash can while someone throws rocks at it.) But analogies aren't as useful when less knowledgable people use them to infer that their knowledge of a simple concept makes their opinions on more complex topics valid. (E.g., I have sat in a trash can while someone threw rocks at it, so my opinion about how to fly the A-10 is as valid as anyone else's.)