"Kerryn Offord" wrote in message
...


" wrote:

Kerryn Offord wrote:



" wrote:

Eric Chevalier wrote:

It's one of the most articulate discussions about risk that I've
come
across, and has broad applicability to many situations in life, way
beyond flight test!

Eric

Yes it's pretty good...however you might try asking her about her
views on Pilot Error. You may have noticed that she studiously
ignores the subject even though I give her a little jab about it
occasionally...amazingly she thinks that there's no such
thing...something to the effect that any mistake that one makes
was an error in aircraft design which misled him into making that
error...WooHoo...
--

-Gord.

Saying the cause was "Pilot error" is a bit like blaming the goalie for
letting in a goal.... (thinking mainly soccer here)... what about the
other 10 men who are supposed to be out their, especially the 2-4 other
defenders....

But isn't that the point?, those other defenders can stop most of
the 'possible goals' and that leaves the Goalie to seal off the
remainder. Now, if he makes no error then he 'will' seal off that
last one, but if, on the other hand, he makes an error then isn't
it fair to call it 'Goalie Error? (or the soccer equivalent).

But when the defenders leave the goalie totally exposed against two+
attackers... that's not goalie error, even diving the wrong way to
defend a penalty isn't goalie error...

It all depends on perspective, for a "hiuman factors" engineer, the designe
could always have been improved. On the other hand, I agree with Gord, than
no SR 71 engineer would ever write that.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE