On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:05:23 +0000, Bob Moore wrote:

Greg Copeland wrote
"Collision alert! Collision alert! Collision alert!"

Sure sound's like something that you wrote-up for Flying's
"I learned About Flying From That" column. A little too dramatic
don't you think?

[snip]
Like it or not...that's what happened. I'm sorry you have this desire to
rewrite history. Yes, I attempted to write it with a dramatic style as I
thought it would be fun. My intention was certainly not to cause the
drama to stick in your throat. If you back up, stop over analyzing, stop
being anal, and accept the facts offered as facts, you have the whole
story.

The long of the short, the facts provided are accurate. The verbage
provided is accurate. Maybe not to the letter, but certainly not
significantly changed. For example, "on your six" may of been "at
your six"..."following"...may have been "followed." You get the idea.
And yes, "collision alert" is what he said. The substance is there and
accurate. These minor changes to do not change the content or details one
iota.

If you want to dismiss the story because your ego requires it...by all
means, please do.

I must admit, I am very, very surprised at the reaction this very
true story received. The entire time I was writing it, I was seriously
wondering what the general thinking was on action being taken against the
other pilot (assuming he wasn't supposed to be there; which is my
belief). What I get is the vast majority racing to rewrite history...some
openly in denial. Some looking to over analyze to explain away the
situation. Only a few comments were actually constructive.


Greg