Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianL99
The article didn't say the 3rd crew-member wasn't Rated. The Chief of Staff for Army Aviation said he had "100's of hours of flight time".
The Chief of Staff of Army Aviation apparently disagrees with your contention that the Instructor was the PIC. He specifically said that the "Evaluated Pilot" was PIC (according to the press reports).
Also, there was no directive to wear NVG's. According to Retired CWO Jonathan Koziol who's been attached to the Unified Command Post to coordinate the investigation, the Army doesn't know if they were in use for the flight, but they were available in the aircraft.
https://6abc.com/post/army-black-haw...ence/15849913/
Accuracy matters and we all know the press accurately reports the facts. |
Wow, I get the feeling you just scanned what I wrote so that you can disagree. The third crewmember WAS identified as the crew chief (non-rated crewmember), as would be normal.
"In a briefing with reporters on Thursday, Jonathan Koziol, chief of staff for Army aviation, said that the pilot commanding the flight was female with more than 500 hours of flight time. The male instructor pilot had over 1,000 hours of flight time, and the
crew chief also had hundreds of hours of flight time."
That report of that briefing did say the female pilot was the PC. I'm curious if he said A PC or THE PC. As I carefully explained, one can be qualified as a PC but act as a PI on any particular flight. In any case, I was careful to say that IF the IP was INSTRUCTING then he was the PC. I stand by that comment. I can direct you to the paragraph in
AR 95-1 that directs this.
I can't imagine why a crew would have NVGs onboard and authorized and not use them but I suppose that is possible. I do not know if they were using them - nor do you.
One more thought. Kozoil's statements seem to me like he is polishing the turd. Spoken like a true desk jockey. I disagree with several of his statements but given his position he will be believed. Such is life.
From your post "Accuracy matters and we all know the press accurately reports the facts." Is that intended as sarcasm?