Aviation Fatalities: "he died doing something he loved..."

[Brad]

I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
but do you really want to die doing something you love?

I see this often. Perhaps it's a way for grieving families to come to
term with their loss. But really, of all the ways to die, doing
something I loved would be the last way I'd want go go. old age,
disease and cancer are bad, but dying from a blunt force trauma, third
degree burns, etc. is certainly no picnic.

I've seen posts alluding to a preference to meet their maker via
aircraft. I for one certainly would not want to have my death
associated with a loss of additional life or property, a black mark on
aviation, legal battles regarding liability, and questions regarding my
piloting abilities.

So for those of you who'd prefer to start your ascension to the gates
of heaven with a bit a head start, why break an airplane in the
process?

[sculley]

"So for those of you who'd prefer to start your ascension to the gates
of heaven with a bit a head start, why break an airplane in the
process?"

Hell, I wouldn't want anyone playing with my toy, especially after all
the time and money put into it! Seriously though, after all the hours
and time he's put into aviation, you can't help but think that he'd
somehow come to peace with the fact that he would soon die, and that
there was a chance it would happen while in the air. It probably is a
way of dealing with grief; however, its comforting to know that a loved
one was doing something he/ she loved in the moments up to their death.

[muff528]

A couple of years ago a TV "News Magazine" show featured a skydiver who
survived a double malfunction (I think it was a main/reserve entanglement).
He had time to contemplate his quandry before impact and he did mention
that being faced with the prospect of "dying while doing something he loved"
was not all that it was cracked up to be.
,Tony P.


"Brad" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
> fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
> but do you really want to die doing something you love?
>
> I see this often. Perhaps it's a way for grieving families to come to
> term with their loss. But really, of all the ways to die, doing
> something I loved would be the last way I'd want go go. old age,
> disease and cancer are bad, but dying from a blunt force trauma, third
> degree burns, etc. is certainly no picnic.
>
> I've seen posts alluding to a preference to meet their maker via
> aircraft. I for one certainly would not want to have my death
> associated with a loss of additional life or property, a black mark on
> aviation, legal battles regarding liability, and questions regarding my
> piloting abilities.
>
> So for those of you who'd prefer to start your ascension to the gates
> of heaven with a bit a head start, why break an airplane in the
> process?
>

[Dudley Henriques]

I've been a professional pilot all my life operating in the most dangerous
area of aviation; experimental, prototype, and demonstration flying. I've
seen enough death to fill volumes. I've attended funerals of friend and foe
alike, and I know something about this issue.
The sentiments you hear and see spoken and written after the death of a
pilot such as the ones you are referring to here are sentiments usually
expressed by those outside the inner circle of the pilot gone south.
Those of us who live in these professions seldom feel our mortality. The
thought of dying is something most of us just don't get into all that much.
When one of us cashes it in, we feel remorse just like anyone else, but if
the absolute truth be known and expressed, what many of us are really
thinking about are what caused it to happen, and what we can do to avoid it
happening to us.
It's a very practical world in the venues we live and die in, and there
isn't much room or time for expressions like, "he died doing what he
believed in", and "at least he died doing what he loved".
These are sentiments that help those who make them feel better, for whatever
reasons they have for making them. This doesn't mean that these sentiments
are phony. Some are, but for the most part, they are expressed by sincere
people. They just don't know that much about how many of us in the flight
test and demonstration communities feel about these things.
Let me tell you something about our world.
If I had a catastrophic structural failure in my airplane while doing a
demonstration and ended up at the bottom of a ten foot hole in front of
twenty thousand people, my last conscious thought before impact would be the
same involuntary "Oh ****" that everybody else makes in that last second of
life. (Trust me, most of my friends are test pilots and race car drivers,
and we all feel the same way about these things.)
Then after I was gone, the fans would all go home and express the kind of
sentiment you're talking about, but my peers would express their sadness in
another way. They usually just shut up and keep the touchy feely stuff to
themselves. Instead, each would immediately start analyzing what went wrong
or what I might have done wrong and adjust to protect themselves from the
same fate.
It might not be as "warm" as most would like, but that's the way it is in
our community. It's also the best way. If I went in, I'd damn sure want my
death to mean something, and helping the next pilot down the line avoid what
happened to me would be sentiment enough.
My good friend Dick Schram is a good example. Dick died doing his world
famous comedy act in a borrowed J3 at Reading many years ago. His son was
with the Blue Angels as their PA officer and was narrating his
demonstration. I was standing next to him on the podium.
The stick came out in Dick's hand on the back side of a loop and he went
straight in. The Cub had been used for a photo shoot the day before and the
stick cotter pin hadn't been replaced in the back seat mount. Dick
apparently missed it in his preflight.
Dick Schram lives on in the many flight safety lectures I and others in our
community who lecture on the importance of preflight inspections have made
since he died.
I'm here to tell you that Dick Schram would have wanted to be remembered in
this manner and not as someone who "died doing what he loved to do".
I've just given you a look into my world. I hope it helps you understand
these things a bit better.
Dudley Henriques


"Brad" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
> fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
> but do you really want to die doing something you love?
>
> I see this often. Perhaps it's a way for grieving families to come to
> term with their loss. But really, of all the ways to die, doing
> something I loved would be the last way I'd want go go. old age,
> disease and cancer are bad, but dying from a blunt force trauma, third
> degree burns, etc. is certainly no picnic.
>
> I've seen posts alluding to a preference to meet their maker via
> aircraft. I for one certainly would not want to have my death
> associated with a loss of additional life or property, a black mark on
> aviation, legal battles regarding liability, and questions regarding my
> piloting abilities.
>
> So for those of you who'd prefer to start your ascension to the gates
> of heaven with a bit a head start, why break an airplane in the
> process?
>

[RST Engineering]

I second Dudley's theory that Scott was not alive at the moment of impact.
My best guess is that the aircraft was on autopilot when Scott died, the
autopilot has no knowledge of where thunderstorms are without human
guidance, and the aircraft simply flew itself into a cell where it was
literally torn apart. My best guess is that Scott never felt a thing and
that the aircraft would have impacted the earth somewhere else when it ran
out of fuel.

And yes, Dudley, it is quite a simple medical procedure to tell whether a
person was dead prior to the aircraft impact with the earth. Mostly it is
an examination of the lungs to see what materials were in the air when the
person stops breathing. Dust from the dirt of impact? Water from the rain?
Soot from the burning fuel? Clean from 11000 foot air?

Jim


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
ink.net...

[Gene Seibel]

The point isn't so much "dying while doing something you love", but if
you do, it indicates that you lived your life doing something you
loved. That's a good thing. Like you, I don't want to leave a black
mark on aviation.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Bob Moore]

RST Engineering wrote

> I second Dudley's theory that Scott was not alive at the moment of
> impact. My best guess is that the aircraft was on autopilot when Scott
> died, the autopilot has no knowledge of where thunderstorms are
> without human guidance, and the aircraft simply flew itself into a
> cell where it was literally torn apart.

Yeah...but... the FAA accident report states that ATC had just cleared
him to deviate around weather.

Bob Moore

[Dudley Henriques]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
.. .
>I second Dudley's theory that Scott was not alive at the moment of impact.
Actually, I don't really have a "theory" per se. I do however, have an
interest in viewing the post mortem report; call it a "hunch" more than a
"theory". It's far too early for anyone, least of all me, to be forming
theories on the cause of this accident.
I'm a firm believer in letting investigations run their course. There are
all too many times when the obvious ends up not being the cause of a crash
at all, but rather something that reveals itself during the post accident
investigation.
I just have a "feeling" about Crossfield based on the way he thought about
and acted about aviation safety issues all through his life. I could be
totally off base, but seeing that post mortem report has at least piqued my
interest if nothing else.
Dudley Henriques

[Bob Noel]

In article . com>,
"Brad" > wrote:

> I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
> fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
> but do you really want to die doing something you love?

it might just beat giving up the thing you love in order to live.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Jay Honeck]

> The sentiments you hear and see spoken and written after the death of a
> pilot such as the ones you are referring to here are sentiments usually
> expressed by those outside the inner circle of the pilot gone south.

I've got a slightly different "take" on this matter.

I am a firm believer in "dying while doing something we love" as being
the preferred way to meet our demise. I believe this sentiment is
expressed NOT by those who are ignorant of the pain of "blunt force
trauma," but rather it is held by those of us who have witnessed
friends and loved ones die of old age, infirmity, or one of the
"wasting" illnesses (I.E.: cancer; tuberculosis; emphesema, Lou
Gehrig's Disease, etc.)

I, for one, spent the last 15 minutes of my mother's life holding her
hand, watching her gasp for breath after agonizing breath. (And this
only after many days of ever-increasing, unrelenting discomfort
beforehand.) I also knew a man who died a long, cruel death, trapped
inside a body that no longer functioned. And finally, my father died a
long, slow death from cancer. This once proud man ended his days
incontinent, and as unhappy as any living being can be.

I can guarantee you, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they all
would MUCH rather have died while doing something they loved.

Bottom line: A plane crash may suck, but we all end up facing that
wall, someday -- and there are far worse ways to go. Godspeed, Scott
Crossfield.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dudley Henriques]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> The sentiments you hear and see spoken and written after the death of a
>> pilot such as the ones you are referring to here are sentiments usually
>> expressed by those outside the inner circle of the pilot gone south.
>
> I've got a slightly different "take" on this matter.
>
> I am a firm believer in "dying while doing something we love" as being
> the preferred way to meet our demise. I believe this sentiment is
> expressed NOT by those who are ignorant of the pain of "blunt force
> trauma," but rather it is held by those of us who have witnessed
> friends and loved ones die of old age, infirmity, or one of the
> "wasting" illnesses (I.E.: cancer; tuberculosis; emphesema, Lou
> Gehrig's Disease, etc.)
>
> I, for one, spent the last 15 minutes of my mother's life holding her
> hand, watching her gasp for breath after agonizing breath. (And this
> only after many days of ever-increasing, unrelenting discomfort
> beforehand.) I also knew a man who died a long, cruel death, trapped
> inside a body that no longer functioned. And finally, my father died a
> long, slow death from cancer. This once proud man ended his days
> incontinent, and as unhappy as any living being can be.
>
> I can guarantee you, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they all
> would MUCH rather have died while doing something they loved.

Of this I have no doubt.
To feel these things when connected to the death of a loved one dying of old
age or a health issue is absolutely normal, and in fact expected.
Your scenarios however exist outside the flight test community, and as such
I see no connection between what you have said and the context of my
remarks.
I can only speak about my community from my experience within that
community. I make no effort to speak outside that reference and for anyone
else.
Dudley Henriques

[Morgans]

"B A R R Y" > wrote

> I see it as the fact that the deceased was *living* as he or she
> wished!
>
> He or she wasn't sitting on the couch in front of the TV, waiting for
> the reaper.

Right.

I hurt myself, sometimes often. I hit my finger, or cut myself, or pull a
muscle, or whatever.

It happens because I am always doing something - building something, fixing
something.

If you do those things, there is a chance that you will get hurt, more so
than sitting at a desk, or on the couch.

Same goes with flying. If you do enough of it, the chances that you will
die doing it, go up. So do it, and bad results be damned, I say.

Note, I don't need a statistics lesson/discussion. I am talking about the
accumulated risk over a lifetime.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter Duniho]

"Brad" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
> fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
> but do you really want to die doing something you love?

I think the sentiment means different things to different people. However,
I'm in agreement in Gene and Barry. It's not so much that you want the
thing you love to kill you, but that the (an) alternative is to die having
not done the thing you love. When I hear the sentiment, I don't interpret
it so much as "well at least he was right in the middle of doing something
he loved when he was killed" as I interpret it as "yes, the thing he loved
killed him, but at least he took the risk and did what he loved".

Relative risks aside, I do lots of things on daily basis that could get me
killed, and in just as traumatic or potentially painful a way as an airplane
accident could. Believe me, if I've got to die that way, I'd rather do it
in my airplane than trying to get to some meeting while driving down the
highway.

Pete

[Tony]

Then there's this. If you do fly into something at 150 kts, you won't
have much time to worry, fear, or feel pain. I was in a thunderstorm in
WY a long time ago in a Mooney. Big downdraft, no visibility at all.
The time from first instant I'd have seen a mountain in the windscreen
until I was pate on rocks would have been fractional seconds, not even
enough time so say "Oh ****."

In terms of ways to go, that would not have been too bad, except for
the "pilot error" ephitet.

[Blanche Cohen]

personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep,
and NOT in any airplane or any other vehicle.

[Jay Honeck]

> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep,
> and NOT in any airplane or any other vehicle.

....And your passengers are grateful!

<Ducking!>

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[LWG]

Perhaps a better way to express our feelings is that "at least he was able
to do what he loved until his last minute with us."

I've thought about the "dying doing something he loved" phrase, too. I
agree with some of the underlying principles, but also see that it is a way
to sugarcoat a tragedy.

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article . com>,
> "Brad" > wrote:
>
>> I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
>> fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
>> but do you really want to die doing something you love?
>
> it might just beat giving up the thing you love in order to live.
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> Looking for a sig the
> lawyers will hate
>

[Matt Barrow]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article . com>,
> "Brad" > wrote:
>
>> I saw a similar sentiment posted in relation to Scott Crossfield's
>> fatel accident. I'm not sure I really get it...we're all going to die,
>> but do you really want to die doing something you love?
>
> it might just beat giving up the thing you love in order to live.
>

And you'll still die.

[Montblack]

("Blanche Cohen" wrote)
> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep, and NOT
> in any airplane or any other vehicle.


Agreed ...except change sleep to bed. :-)


Nelson Montblockefeller

[Brad]

Fine insight Dudley. To me its a little different in the test pilot
world than GA. For the most part, the things that kill us are things
we can control. In the test pilot world, theres a large area of
unknowns that can kill a pilot. Skill allows the pilot to address the
unknowns, but luck certainly helps as well. In the flying that most of
us on the NG do, the most likely cause of the accident is us. Quite
frankly, I don't want my legacy to be that I was foolish enough to fly
with empty tanks, into a level 5, etc. For the most part, the things
that kill us are lessons that were learned years ago. Do we really
another stall/spin accident to tell us that stall training is
important? Are death contributes little to the knowledge base of
aviation safety.

I enjoy flying, but if I'm going to die doing something I really enjoy,
I'd rather it be in bed with a supermodel.

[Roy Smith]

"Brad" > wrote:
> Quite frankly, I don't want my legacy to be that I was foolish enough to
> fly with empty tanks, into a level 5, etc.

The way I like to think about it is this. Whenever contemplating doing
something that you're not sure about, ask yourself how the NTSB report will
read.

[RST Engineering]

I personally plan on going at 98, shot by a jealous husband.

Jim



"Blanche Cohen" > wrote in message
...
> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep,
> and NOT in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>

[Private]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Blanche Cohen" wrote)
>> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep, and NOT
>> in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>
>
> Agreed ...except change sleep to bed. :-)
>
>
> Nelson Montblockefeller


I want to die in bed when I'm ninety,

Shot by a jealous husband.

[Private]

Sorry Jim, it seems we are in agreement, but I should have read all the
thread before responding.

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
.. .
>I personally plan on going at 98, shot by a jealous husband.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> "Blanche Cohen" > wrote in message
> ...
>> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep,
>> and NOT in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>>
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Private" > wrote in message
news:dZX2g.64472$7a.53873@pd7tw1no...
> Sorry Jim, it seems we are in agreement, but I should have read all the
> thread before responding.

That's okay...it's not like either of you came up with it first. :p

[Flyingmonk]

Montblack wrote:
> ("Blanche Cohen" wrote)
> > personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep, and NOT
> > in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>
>
> Agreed ...except change sleep to bed. :-)
>
>
> Nelson Montblockefeller

I was thinking die in bed also, but not while 'sleeping' :-)) While
doing the other thing people do in bed with a beautiful partner LOL.
Sorta selfish ain't it? Not thinking at all how the partner would feel
if the other one died on them while doing the nasty. :-))

The Monk ~ Dying while doing one of the things I love...

[Skylune]

Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his death
by small plane wasn't surprising.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Blanche Cohen" > wrote in message
...
>
> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep,
> and NOT in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>

That's how I'd like to go. Quietly, in my sleep, just like my dad did. Not
screaming like his passengers.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...

> Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his
> death
> by small plane wasn't surprising.

Yeager has never liked the civilian test pilots very much and has said so on
many occasions. The competition between the two factions when operating out
at Edwards during the heyday out there was "tense" to say the least.
Yeager overdoes it sometimes. Personally, I wish he'd learn to keep his trap
shut and just finish the good ride life has given him.

He has a propensity for shooting from the hip when questioned by reporters
and can quite often stick his perferbial foot in his mouth.
To this day, Yeager still doesn't know how to handle the press. He is the
ultimate mixture of extreme talent, tremendous ability, and intellectual
stupidity.
Yeager's "independent views" on subjects one and all have been a source of
trouble for him for years, and will no doubt plague him for the remainder of
his life.
It's a wise man who knows when enough is enough and when the hell to just
shut up and enjoy the trip.
Dudley Henriques

[Matt Barrow]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> He has a propensity for shooting from the hip when questioned by reporters
> and can quite often stick his perferbial foot in his mouth.
> To this day, Yeager still doesn't know how to handle the press. He is the
> ultimate mixture of extreme talent, tremendous ability, and intellectual
> stupidity.

I wouldn't call it stuoidity, but the fact he comes from a place where plain
talk and a lack of unmitigated bull**** is commonplace.

Understandable considering beginnigs and his "ride" to the top, wouldn't
you say?
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Skylune]

It's a wise man who knows when enough is enough and when the hell to just
shut up and enjoy the trip.
Dudley Henriques

<<

Good advice that I personally should take to heart. That Boyer clown is
just so infuriating that I have a hard time not spouting off (here and
through other means).

[Dudley Henriques]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> He has a propensity for shooting from the hip when questioned by
>> reporters and can quite often stick his perferbial foot in his mouth.
>> To this day, Yeager still doesn't know how to handle the press. He is the
>> ultimate mixture of extreme talent, tremendous ability, and intellectual
>> stupidity.
>
> I wouldn't call it stuoidity, but the fact he comes from a place where
> plain talk and a lack of unmitigated bull**** is commonplace.
>
> Understandable considering beginnigs and his "ride" to the top, wouldn't
> you say?

Actually no, at least not in my opinion anyway.
Even when considering Yeager's back country beginnings, anyone who has been
exposed to him through his career (and I know a bunch :-) will tell you in
a nano second that his intelligence goes way beyond whatever boundaries this
factor might define in his life equation.
Perhaps intellillectual stupidity is the wrong phrase to use to describe
Yeager. Closer would be his inability to keep his mouth shut after his point
has been made. He has always had an unbridled propensity to take it out
there "one bridge too far".
This latest statement about Crossfield is a perfect example.
Facing a CNN reporter, Yeager was asked for a comment on Crossfield's death.
His gut reaction and his initial response was correct. He simply stated that
he was "sad this had occurred".
But then something else kicked in. I won't presume to actually know what
that was, but knowing about and his relationship with the civilian test
pilots of his era, and especially his feelings about Crossfield; Armstrong
and a few others, his next remark came as no surprise.
Saying it was "not surprising" and commenting on Crossfield's alleged
propensity to take unnecessary risk was not only out of place, but it took
Yeager right into that area he should know by now causes him trouble.
His follow-up remarks suggesting that Crossfield took unnecessary risks when
a civilian test pilot and got himself into trouble with weather, and
attributing the cause of the crash to Crossfield himself were simply
inappropriate, and based on Yeager's relationship with the civilian test
pilot community, downright mean and intentionally made.
It's the fact that these remarks were unnecessary that mark them as a major
intellectual flaw for Yeager, and mark what he said as being stupid.
There's a time and a place to shoot from the hip, and knowing where those
places are for a hip shooter like Yeager should be 101. He's simply never
learned when to shoot and when not to shoot.
The problem with Yeager is that he came out of the back woods with nothing
but sheer coordination and good eyesight. Then he got the break of his life
when the section trailer in the four ship flight of German aircraft he was
shooting at broke into instead of away from his section leader, colliding
with him and giving Yeager 5 for the day. Stars and Stripes picked it up as
a major story and Yeager was an instant "hero". Not to say he didn't deserve
it, but nonetheless, it was a fluke that launched him. Any fighter pilot
flying in that era will tell you that it was the magic number 5 that
launched Yeager.
If that German pilot had broken the other way and Yeager's score for the one
mission had been 4 instead of 5, chances are S&S would never have picked up
the story and what followed in Yeager's life would possibly have been quite
different then the way it went from that point on.
Yeager has always been lucky. He's also very talented and probably one of
the premier "sticks" of all time.
He was extremely lucky in the Bell X1 program. Everybody in the flight test
community knows it was George Welch and not Yeager who went mach 1 first.
Yeager got the gravy because it came down that way for reasons beyond the
scope of my remarks here.
The trouble with Yeager is his mouth. It's gotten him into trouble with the
AF, and now in civilian life afterward.
He would be just fine if he'd let things be and simply enjoy the good
fortune. Guys like Yeager make a huge mistake when they start "talking" to
an audience that already accepts them as heroes. The more they talk, the
deeper into the way the audience thinks they penetrate. They never seem to
realize that silence and/or extremely well thought out comment is the way to
keep the status quo.
Tom Cruise is going through this right now. Yeager would be wise to observe
what has happened to Cruise and the way the public views him.
I have no doubt Yeager will go on "speaking his mind". Actually, I have it
on fairly good authority that he really doesn't give a damn what people
think about him, and that's the saddest part of all, because all he ever had
to do was to share the limelight with those who shared the risks with him.
Crossfield was one of those with whom he chose not to share, and that, in my
humble opinion is the ultimate stupidity.
You might get the impression from all this that I don't like Yeager. That's
not true. I actually feel sorry for him. He was much better than he has
chosen to project of himself.
Dudley Henriques

[Kingfish]

>>>Good advice that I personally should take to heart. <<<

Many of us on this NG wish you would do just that. Or find a hobby not
involving computers.

>>>That Boyer clown is just so infuriating that I have a hard time not spouting off (here and
through other means).<<<

A little restraint goes a long way, my friend...

[Kingfish]

Dudley H wrote:

>>>Yeager would be wise to observe what has happened to Cruise and the way the public views him. I have no doubt Yeager will go on "speaking his mind".<<<

I don't recall Crossfield making any public comment on Yeager's going
off the runway in a T-6 a few years back. Chuck should return the honor
and stifle any negative comments IMHO.

[Dan Luke]

"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
in message k.net...
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>>>
>>> He has a propensity for shooting from the hip when questioned by
>>> reporters and can quite often stick his perferbial foot in his mouth.
>>> To this day, Yeager still doesn't know how to handle the press. He is the
>>> ultimate mixture of extreme talent, tremendous ability, and intellectual
>>> stupidity.
>>
>> I wouldn't call it stuoidity, but the fact he comes from a place where
>> plain talk and a lack of unmitigated bull**** is commonplace.
>>
>> Understandable considering beginnigs and his "ride" to the top, wouldn't
>> you say?
>
> Actually no, at least not in my opinion anyway.
> Even when considering Yeager's back country beginnings, anyone who has been
> exposed to him through his career (and I know a bunch :-) will tell you in
> a nano second that his intelligence goes way beyond whatever boundaries
> this factor might define in his life equation.
> Perhaps intellillectual stupidity is the wrong phrase to use to describe
> Yeager.

Let us not put too fine a point on this.

"Horse's ass" is the good old-fashioned term that I think best describes
Yeager. His remarks upon the death of a great aviator are more evidence of
his resemblance to an equine posterior--as if any more was needed after his
autobiography.

As was noted in AvWeb today, when Mr. Right Stuff ran a T-6 off the runway a
couple of years back, Scott Crossfield maintained a discreet silence, a sign
of a gentlemanly character missing in Yeager.

[snip]

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[Dudley Henriques]

"Kingfish" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Dudley H wrote:
>
>>>>Yeager would be wise to observe what has happened to Cruise and the way
>>>>the public views him. I have no doubt Yeager will go on "speaking his
>>>>mind".<<<
>
> I don't recall Crossfield making any public comment on Yeager's going
> off the runway in a T-6 a few years back. Chuck should return the honor
> and stifle any negative comments IMHO.

You are correct, although the two scenarios might not be quite comparable.
Crossfield, being out of the public limelight for many years, and never
having had the exposure Yeager has had, wouldn't have been an attractant for
the press after Yeager's little "incident" with the T6.
It would have been unnatural for the press to interview someone like
Crossfield after the T6 incident, as no harm was done and only egos were
involved. I wouldn't have put it past the National Inquirer however :-)
It was however, natural for Yeager to be asked to comment on the death of a
test pilot of Crossfield's caliber; someone whom he knew personally.

Just as an aside, and I can't speak for Crossfield of course, I would have
been very surprised had Crossfield had been asked to comment after Yeager's
incident, if he would have said anything more than that the T6 can be quite
a handful on rollout in a crosswind for the best of pilots and that Yeager
wasn't the first, nor would he be the last pilot to get bitten in this
manner.
This is the kind of comment you give to the press at moments like these.
It's called "Class"!
Dudley Henriques

[Blanche Cohen]

Montblack > wrote:
>("Blanche Cohen" wrote)
>> personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep, and NOT
>> in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>
>
>Agreed ...except change sleep to bed. :-)

well, my standard response is something closer to an R rating. I wrote
this way to attempt to maintain some semblance of propriety in what
is often a family-oriented newsgroup....

[Montblack]

("Dudley Henriques" wrote)
[snip]
> Perhaps intellillectual stupidity is the wrong phrase to use to describe
> Yeager. Closer would be his inability to keep his mouth shut after his
> point has been made. He has always had an unbridled propensity to take it
> out there "one bridge too far".

> This latest statement about Crossfield is a perfect example.

> Facing a CNN reporter, Yeager was asked for a comment on Crossfield's
> death. His gut reaction and his initial response was correct. He simply
> stated that he was "sad this had occurred".

> But then something else kicked in. I won't presume to actually know what
> that was, but knowing about and his relationship with the civilian test
> pilots of his era, and especially his feelings about Crossfield; Armstrong
> and a few others, his next remark came as no surprise.

>Saying it was "not surprising" and commenting on Crossfield's alleged
>propensity to take unnecessary risk was not only out of place, but it took
>Yeager right into that area he should know by now causes him trouble.

> His follow-up remarks suggesting that Crossfield took unnecessary risks
> when a civilian test pilot and got himself into trouble with weather, and
> attributing the cause of the crash to Crossfield himself were simply
> inappropriate, and based on Yeager's relationship with the civilian test
> pilot community, downright mean and intentionally made.


Not intending to ruffle feathers here, but...

In these days of media savvy interview subjects, I found Yeager's remarks
refreshingly honest.

This is what Chuck Yeager thinks vs. This is the APPROPRIATE thing to say -
is how he handled the question.

Was Yeager right in saying what he did?
I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.

Was it an un-classy thing to say?
I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.

Was it (refreshingly) honest?
Yes.


Montblack

[Dudley Henriques]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Dudley Henriques" wrote)
> [snip]
>> Perhaps intellillectual stupidity is the wrong phrase to use to describe
>> Yeager. Closer would be his inability to keep his mouth shut after his
>> point has been made. He has always had an unbridled propensity to take it
>> out there "one bridge too far".
>
>> This latest statement about Crossfield is a perfect example.
>
>> Facing a CNN reporter, Yeager was asked for a comment on Crossfield's
>> death. His gut reaction and his initial response was correct. He simply
>> stated that he was "sad this had occurred".
>
>> But then something else kicked in. I won't presume to actually know what
>> that was, but knowing about and his relationship with the civilian test
>> pilots of his era, and especially his feelings about Crossfield;
>> Armstrong and a few others, his next remark came as no surprise.
>
>>Saying it was "not surprising" and commenting on Crossfield's alleged
>>propensity to take unnecessary risk was not only out of place, but it took
>>Yeager right into that area he should know by now causes him trouble.
>
>> His follow-up remarks suggesting that Crossfield took unnecessary risks
>> when a civilian test pilot and got himself into trouble with weather, and
>> attributing the cause of the crash to Crossfield himself were simply
>> inappropriate, and based on Yeager's relationship with the civilian test
>> pilot community, downright mean and intentionally made.
>
>
> Not intending to ruffle feathers here, but...
>
> In these days of media savvy interview subjects, I found Yeager's remarks
> refreshingly honest.
>
> This is what Chuck Yeager thinks vs. This is the APPROPRIATE thing to
> say - is how he handled the question.
>
> Was Yeager right in saying what he did?
> I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.
>
> Was it an un-classy thing to say?
> I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.
>
> Was it (refreshingly) honest?
> Yes.
>
>
> Montblack

Doctor to family of person who just died on the operating table;
"Listen up gang. She's dead!"
Refreshing honest? Perhaps.
Tactful? Don't think so.
Necessary? Absolutely not!
There is a time and a place for being honest and direct and a time and a
place for avoiding it.
What makes one intelligent and in possession of what we like to call "class"
is in knowing the difference.
If for no other reason, Yeager should have passed on ANY public comment
suggesting a DIRECT cause for the crash based on nothing more than the fact
that the investigation is on-going.
Dudley Henriques

[Grumman-581]

"Blanche Cohen" > wrote in message
...
> well, my standard response is something closer to an R rating. I wrote
> this way to attempt to maintain some semblance of propriety in what
> is often a family-oriented newsgroup....

USENET, family oriented? And exactly *what* have you been inhaling?

[Margy Natalie]

Roy Smith wrote:
> "Brad" > wrote:
>
>>Quite frankly, I don't want my legacy to be that I was foolish enough to
>>fly with empty tanks, into a level 5, etc.
>
>
> The way I like to think about it is this. Whenever contemplating doing
> something that you're not sure about, ask yourself how the NTSB report will
> read.
That's my rule.

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

RST Engineering wrote:
> I personally plan on going at 98, shot by a jealous husband.
>
> Jim
>
>
Be Careful out there Jim, you do have a wife. She just might shoot your
companion and make you pay for it for the rest of your life!
>
> "Blanche Cohen" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>personally, I fully intend on dying of very old age, in my sleep,
>>and NOT in any airplane or any other vehicle.
>>
>
>
>

[Margy Natalie]

Skylune wrote:
> Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his death
> by small plane wasn't surprising.
>
Yes, and Avflash pointed out that Crossfield didn't say anything when
Yeager ran off the runway a few years back. Maybe Yeager should learn a
few things about manners. Scott died after he asked for a course change
to avoid weather. I would guess that things were worse than he expected
and when he tried to get out of it he ran out of time and options all at
once. May he rest in peace.

Margy

[Dudley Henriques]

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
...
> Skylune wrote:
>> Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his
>> death
>> by small plane wasn't surprising.
> Yes, and Avflash pointed out that Crossfield didn't say anything when
> Yeager ran off the runway a few years back. Maybe Yeager should learn a
> few things about manners. Scott died after he asked for a course change
> to avoid weather. I would guess that things were worse than he expected
> and when he tried to get out of it he ran out of time and options all at
> once. May he rest in peace.
>
> Margy

This is true, and most likely a very good guess. I'm also still interested
in seeing the post mortem report.
Dudley Henriques

[Morgans]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote

> Personally, I wish he'd learn to keep his trap shut and just finish the
> good ride life has given him.

This (latest) incident has only served to reinforce what I think about him.
I would not go across the street to hear him speak, and did not, while he
was speaking at OSH.

Respect has to be earned, every day we are on this spaceship we call Earth.
Yeager had respect at one time, but in my eyes, he has failed to keep it.

Here we have two men, at one time, perhaps two of the finest pilots in the
program.

Fast forward to present time. Crossfield has had many people (in this group
even) saying what a good and genuine person he always seemed to be.

Then there is Yeger. Which one of them would you rather be compared to?

That says it all, IMHO.
--
Jim in NC

[Dudley Henriques]

Yeah, it's a damn shame when someone has it made like Yeager did, then
screws it all up by spoiling the "image". Yeager unfortunately is one of
these people.
Crossfield on the other hand just went out and did the job, took his licks,
and went on to live a very productive, quiet, and useful life.
I sincerely hope the accident investigation brings out further information
that helps clear the air about his judgment on the accident flight. The man
deserves a fair shot until the evidence proves otherwise. Yeager should have
known that and kept his mouth shut. What he said was about the cheapest shot
a dead pilot can get from a fellow pilot.
Dudley

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
>
>> Personally, I wish he'd learn to keep his trap shut and just finish the
>> good ride life has given him.
>
> This (latest) incident has only served to reinforce what I think about
> him. I would not go across the street to hear him speak, and did not,
> while he was speaking at OSH.
>
> Respect has to be earned, every day we are on this spaceship we call
> Earth. Yeager had respect at one time, but in my eyes, he has failed to
> keep it.
>
> Here we have two men, at one time, perhaps two of the finest pilots in the
> program.
>
> Fast forward to present time. Crossfield has had many people (in this
> group even) saying what a good and genuine person he always seemed to be.
>
> Then there is Yeger. Which one of them would you rather be compared to?
>
> That says it all, IMHO.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[Morgans]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote

> If for no other reason, Yeager should have passed on ANY public comment
> suggesting a DIRECT cause for the crash based on nothing more than the
> fact that the investigation is on-going.

Yep, and saying that his remarks were honest, or that they are accurate and
correct, may be out of line, also. Reports say that he was already
diverting around the weather, and he took an unlucky lightning hit.

Any talk of what he should have done, or what happened is pure speculation.
We were not there to see the conditions, or how quickly they closed in on
him. Speculation surely won't bring him back.

At the risk of using another cliché, sometimes, your number is up.
--
Jim in NC

[Grumman-581]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
.. .
> I personally plan on going at 98, shot by a jealous husband.

Hey! That was my line... Well, except there was a clause at the end, "of a
25 year old wife"... <dirty-old-man-grin>

--
N581 -- AA5A -- AXH
http://www.narcosis-republic.us

[Grumman-581]

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Not thinking at all how the partner would feel
> if the other one died on them while doing the nasty. :-))

"Gee baby, you're not quite getting into it that well this morning... You
seem kinda *cold* also..."

--
N581 -- AA5A -- AXH
http://www.narcosis-republic.us

[Dudley Henriques]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
>
>> If for no other reason, Yeager should have passed on ANY public comment
>> suggesting a DIRECT cause for the crash based on nothing more than the
>> fact that the investigation is on-going.
>
> Yep, and saying that his remarks were honest, or that they are accurate
> and correct, may be out of line, also. Reports say that he was already
> diverting around the weather, and he took an unlucky lightning hit.
>
> Any talk of what he should have done, or what happened is pure
> speculation. We were not there to see the conditions, or how quickly they
> closed in on him. Speculation surely won't bring him back.
>
> At the risk of using another cliché, sometimes, your number is up.
> --
> Jim in NC

I received word today about his call for a weather diversion. Puts a bright
spotlight on Yeager's remarks.
I know one thing. Yeager's ability to get a free round from the guys at the
local O Club just went down a few pegs from the feedback I've been getting
in my inbox all day.
Dudley

[Grumman-581]

"Brad" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Quite frankly, I don't want my legacy to be that I was
> foolish enough to fly with empty tanks, into a level 5, etc.

Do you think that you would have better luck with *full* tanks in a level 5?
Once the wings get ripped off, does it really matter whether they had gas in
them or not or even if you have a header tank?

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
> Yep, and saying that his remarks were honest, or that they are accurate
> and correct, may be out of line, also.


I believe Chuck Yeager was being honest when asked the standard 'How do you
feel' question.

This observation on my part is not out of line.

Field of Dreams (1989)
Shoeless Joe Jackson: "Ty Cobb wanted to play, but none of us could stand
the son-of-a-bitch when we were alive, so we told him to stick it!"

http://www.cmgworldwide.com/baseball/cobb/tccare.html
Ty Cobb career stats!


Montblack
I WOULD walk across the street to hear Chuck Yeager speak.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Morgans" wrote)
>> Yep, and saying that his remarks were honest, or that they are accurate
>> and correct, may be out of line, also.
>
>
> I believe Chuck Yeager was being honest when asked the standard 'How do
> you
> feel' question.
>
> This observation on my part is not out of line.

I don't believe anyone has even come close to indicating you were out of
line. Some of us have simply indicated that we thought Yeager was out of
line.
If you don't find fault with Yeager's remarks, that is your call. I for one
respect that.
I just don't hold any respect for Yeager's call on this.
Dudley Henriques

[Matt Barrow]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>>>
>>> He has a propensity for shooting from the hip when questioned by
>>> reporters and can quite often stick his perferbial foot in his mouth.
>>> To this day, Yeager still doesn't know how to handle the press. He is
>>> the ultimate mixture of extreme talent, tremendous ability, and
>>> intellectual stupidity.
>>
>> I wouldn't call it stuoidity, but the fact he comes from a place where
>> plain talk and a lack of unmitigated bull**** is commonplace.
>>
>> Understandable considering beginnigs and his "ride" to the top, wouldn't
>> you say?
>
> Actually no, at least not in my opinion anyway.
> Even when considering Yeager's back country beginnings, anyone who has
> been exposed to him through his career (and I know a bunch :-) will tell
> you in a nano second that his intelligence goes way beyond whatever
> boundaries this factor might define in his life equation.

I was refering to his personality; I'd second your assessment of his
intelligence.

His backcountry beginnings made him rather incapable of sucking up to
people.

> Perhaps intellillectual stupidity is the wrong phrase to use to describe
> Yeager. Closer would be his inability to keep his mouth shut after his
> point has been made. He has always had an unbridled propensity to take it
> out there "one bridge too far".

From what I've read (I'm sure you actually KNOW him) was not that he went to
far and too long, but he's a man of very few words and those can be brutally
frank and honest.

[Matt Barrow]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
>
> In these days of media savvy interview subjects, I found Yeager's remarks
> refreshingly honest.
>
> This is what Chuck Yeager thinks vs. This is the APPROPRIATE thing to
> say - is how he handled the question.
>
> Was Yeager right in saying what he did?
> I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.
>
> Was it an un-classy thing to say?
> I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.
>
> Was it (refreshingly) honest?
> Yes.

And think of the pilots who hear that and recognize that if a pilot of
Crossfield's caliber can kill themselves flying into t-cells, they can too.

[Matt Barrow]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>>
>> Was it an un-classy thing to say?
>> I don't know. Maybe, maybe not.
>>
>> Was it (refreshingly) honest?
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>> Montblack
>
> Doctor to family of person who just died on the operating table;
> "Listen up gang. She's dead!"

Busting context to the point of being silly.

> Refreshing honest? Perhaps.
> Tactful? Don't think so.
> Necessary? Absolutely not!
> There is a time and a place for being honest and direct and a time and a
> place for avoiding it.
> What makes one intelligent and in possession of what we like to call
> "class" is in knowing the difference.
> If for no other reason, Yeager should have passed on ANY public comment
> suggesting a DIRECT cause for the crash based on nothing more than the
> fact that the investigation is on-going.

They asked for a comment/assessment and he gave them an honest answer. If
you want ruffles and feathers, get comments from Bill Clinton.

[Matt Barrow]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
>
>> Personally, I wish he'd learn to keep his trap shut and just finish the
>> good ride life has given him.
>
> This (latest) incident has only served to reinforce what I think about
> him. I would not go across the street to hear him speak, and did not,
> while he was speaking at OSH.
>
> Respect has to be earned, every day we are on this spaceship we call
> Earth. Yeager had respect at one time, but in my eyes, he has failed to
> keep it.
>
> Here we have two men, at one time, perhaps two of the finest pilots in the
> program.
>
> Fast forward to present time. Crossfield has had many people (in this
> group even) saying what a good and genuine person he always seemed to be.
>
> Then there is Yeger. Which one of them would you rather be compared to?
>
> That says it all, IMHO.

Yet Yeager is still alive.

When Crossfield was raking in the dough during the 60's, Yeager was making
$700 a month and flying combat missions in Viet-Nam.

When Crossfield was making upwards of six figures plus speaking fees, Yeager
was making $400 and giving hundreds of talks for free....on his own time.

I suspect that there's a lot of bitterness behind it all.

[Peter R.]

Matt Barrow > wrote:

> They asked for a comment/assessment and he gave them an honest answer. If
> you want ruffles and feathers, get comments from Bill Clinton.

However, Yeager is very experienced with accident cause and speculation.
Seeing that the investigators' footprints around the crash site weren't
even dry yet, he would have been more tactful at least waiting until the
cause was determined by the NTSB, assuming it ever will be.


--
Peter

[Matt Barrow]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow > wrote:
>
>> They asked for a comment/assessment and he gave them an honest answer. If
>> you want ruffles and feathers, get comments from Bill Clinton.
>
> However, Yeager is very experienced with accident cause and speculation.
> Seeing that the investigators' footprints around the crash site weren't
> even dry yet, he would have been more tactful at least waiting until the
> cause was determined by the NTSB, assuming it ever will be.
>

The reporter gave the preliminary analysis of flight into a T-S and Yeager
commented that Crossfield had gotten into that situation before (apparently
more than twice).

[gatt]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
news:Yw63g.8603

>> Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his
>> death by small plane wasn't surprising.
>
> Yeager has never liked the civilian test pilots very much and has said so
> on many occasions.

He ranted about that at length in his biography.

I had a strange experience doing a documentary ("Flying the P-38 Lightning")
with a bunch of WWII fighter vets one time. There was the straw-hat faction
(Hoover fans, bless 'em), and a couple of guys who sort of snubbed the
others. One guy mentioned what squadron he was in-- "YEAGER's
squadron!"--and then suddenly right in front of all of us, two or the old
guys looked at each other and turned their backs on him. One of the guys'
WIFE said "I wouldn't brag about that."

I don't know what Yeager did to **** them off, but there were about half a
dozen of us there including Jeff Ethell. We all just sort of shifted and
looked at each other. I asked one of them, with whom I'd chatted quite a
bit, and he said something to the effect that Yeager was a pompous ass and
anybody that served with him and bragged about it probably was too.

I took a mental snapshot of that moment.
-c

[Matt Barrow]

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> news:Yw63g.8603
>
>>> Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his
>>> death by small plane wasn't surprising.
>>
>> Yeager has never liked the civilian test pilots very much and has said so
>> on many occasions.
>
> He ranted about that at length in his biography.
>
> I had a strange experience doing a documentary ("Flying the P-38
> Lightning") with a bunch of WWII fighter vets one time. There was the
> straw-hat faction (Hoover fans, bless 'em), and a couple of guys who sort
> of snubbed the others. One guy mentioned what squadron he was in--
> "YEAGER's squadron!"--and then suddenly right in front of all of us, two
> or the old guys looked at each other and turned their backs on him. One
> of the guys' WIFE said "I wouldn't brag about that."
>
> I don't know what Yeager did to **** them off, but there were about half a
> dozen of us there including Jeff Ethell. We all just sort of shifted and
> looked at each other. I asked one of them, with whom I'd chatted quite a
> bit, and he said something to the effect that Yeager was a pompous ass and
> anybody that served with him and bragged about it probably was too.
>
> I took a mental snapshot of that moment.

Might have been that Yeager's squadrons won every competition that came
down. That tends to **** off the highly touted fair-haired boys that don't
cut it when the chips are down.

[Matt Barrow]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "gatt" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>> news:Yw63g.8603
>>
>>>> Yeager implied he was a hot dog who would always push it and that his
>>>> death by small plane wasn't surprising.
>>>
>>> Yeager has never liked the civilian test pilots very much and has said
>>> so on many occasions.
>>
>> He ranted about that at length in his biography.
>>
>> I had a strange experience doing a documentary ("Flying the P-38
>> Lightning") with a bunch of WWII fighter vets one time. There was the
>> straw-hat faction (Hoover fans, bless 'em), and a couple of guys who sort
>> of snubbed the others. One guy mentioned what squadron he was in--
>> "YEAGER's squadron!"--and then suddenly right in front of all of us, two
>> or the old guys looked at each other and turned their backs on him. One
>> of the guys' WIFE said "I wouldn't brag about that."
>>
>> I don't know what Yeager did to **** them off, but there were about half
>> a dozen of us there including Jeff Ethell. We all just sort of shifted
>> and looked at each other. I asked one of them, with whom I'd chatted
>> quite a bit, and he said something to the effect that Yeager was a
>> pompous ass and anybody that served with him and bragged about it
>> probably was too.
>>
>> I took a mental snapshot of that moment.
>
> Might have been that Yeager's squadrons won every competition that came
> down. That tends to **** off the highly touted fair-haired boys that don't
> cut it when the chips are down.

For another example, check out how some of the media and the industry is
treatingLynn Tilton, the babe who bailed out MD Helicopters and how she is
kicking ass. Much of the "old boy network" doesn't seem to appreciate it,
especially her remarks about the supply chain in the avaiation industry
being "in shambles" in Rotor & WIng magazine.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[vincent p. norris]

>>> he said something to the effect that Yeager was a pompous ass....

That seems to be a widely-shared opinion.

vince norris