"george" wrote in message
ups.com...
No. Pilot experience good 1.5 million lines of code bad..

Based on what? You have an opinion, not proof.

Accident inspectors start off with the 'pilot error' scenario.

That's because so many accidents are caused by pilot error.

Many pilots are aware of incidents in their own countries and at their
own airfields where accident inspectors get it wrong and the civil
aviation body of that country maintain the fiction.

So what? First of all, "many pilots" don't actually have the same
information that the accident inspector is working with. They are "aware"
of something based on their uninformed opinion.

Secondly, that position assumes that every accident attributed to something
OTHER than pilot error was correctly assessed. If inspectors are making
mistakes, they could just as easily make a mistake that would incorrectly
fail to blame pilot error.

Saying the one happens but not the other shows a pretty blatant bias.

Pilots learn from air accident reports.

How do they do that if the reports are, as you appear to claim, incorrect?

If the examining body is seen to have an agenda any good work they do
will always be doubted .

What's that got to do with computer-piloted aircraft?

Pete