Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "Dark Records"
channel.
-
4
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
@annabellelee4535
Thank you for your replies.
"Then why did his copilot intervene if it's common practice?"
You may have missed this part of my reply: " If that was the case, Meurs' warning might have meant, "hey, you are revving up prematurely."
In other words, it may have been common practice to rev up on early model 747s, but NOT so soon, before even receiving route clearance. I just suggest this as a possibility.
"He took off without clearance knowing that there was another plane on the runway. He was directly responsible for all those deaths."
I agree he was directly responsible for the crash. But he had no way of knowing if the Pan Am was on or off the runway. If he did in fact know Pan Am was still on the runway, did he have a death wish then? It makes no sense to take off if you know you might be about to kill yourself (and everyone else.) More likely, he lost his situational awareness, a far more common and understandable lapse. By contrast, only a small handful of commercial pilots have used their aircraft to commit suicide.
1
-
1
-
@annabellelee4535
Well, I am going by the established facts. Arrogant though he may have been, it's pure speculation to claim as a solid fact, as you seem to be doing, that this was the primary cause of the crash. The actual evidence for this is skimpy. There are many possibilities here. As he was in a hurry and had a good dose of get-there-itis, and was under considerable stress, this precisely where people can begin to lose situational awareness. Another possibility, suggested also by his comments during the taxi, is that he may have been having hearing difficulties. Or, given the st officer's wording "we are now ready for take off and are awaiting our airways clearance, and the answer which immediately followed "You are cleared," may have caused him to confuse his route clearance with the take off clearance. Note, for example, that after waiting for a few moments, he begins to advance the throttles precisely when he heard those words. Just coincidence?
Accident reports try to go by the established facts and not insert speculation into them. The people who constantly comment in these sections are not adopting the professionalism of accident investigators.
Here's what Pan Am co-pilot Bragg said of Van Zanten, he was "a gentleman who got himself into a hurry." Are your speculations superior to his? He also remarked, "pilots don't cause accidents" intentionally. Which contradicts your claim even an arrogant pilot would try to take off, knowing full well it would likely crash into the Pan Am. Do you not see the inherent absurdity of that?
Thanks
1
-
@annabellelee4535
The evidence for arrogance is mixed. Some claim he was, others called him affable and insisted his colleagues refer to him by his 1st name.
"Nothing changes the fact that he decided to take off without clearance knowing full well there was another plane on the runway. "
Absolutely not. The only absolutes here are that he took off without the proper clearance. Not receiving clearance doesn't mean an airplane is still on the runway. There may be a delay for a few moments as controllers have to keep track of many movements at once, before they issue clearance. Or, as in this case, they were engrossed in a soccer match on the radio, and that may have distracted them. Much more likely is that Captain Van Zanten had for whatever reason formed a mental picture that the plane had already cleared.
I would seriously suggest you go and seek out aviation experts on this crash. I guarantee you the vast majority, if not the totality, will tell you your theory is virtually unthinkable. That's precisely what one of them wrote on another forum. Your theory is totally at odd with common sense. Not even the people who think Van Zanten deliberately violated the rules are saying what you are saying. You are WAY off the deep end. Just go ask commercial pilots.
In another video on a different topic, one of the participants in a debate talked about the "irreducible delusion." What he meant is that if you assume a certain fact as absolute, then it might keep you from ever getting at the real truth. But if you can go back and identify this stumbling block, then you able to pluck it out and discard it. The irreducible delusion here, it seems to me, is that Van Zantan HAD to know there was another plane still on the runway. Once you are able to identify this as a totally unproven assumption, then you can remove it from your thinking and come to a more sensible theory.
Cheers
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ac9110 Yes, general decline in manners and class. That includes the TV shows, the comedy (wouldn't it be nice to have a Dean Martin Show again,) the music, the language, kids swearing normalized by today's parents, and on down the list. A general sense of narcissism (thank you Facebook) and entitlement. But it's also interesting that many basic standards of decency have improved at the same time: the so-called expanding circle of morality, including less tolerance for animal suffering, calling out sexual misconduct, more gains by women, campaign against spanking (OK, that last one is more controversial.) This seems paradoxical to me.
Sorry to get carried away there.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1