Its not the possibility of pilot error that is being questioned. That can happen. It is your other claims that have raised tempers –
1. The IAF’s training program is inadequate.
2. The pilots in question did not have adequate experience.
3. They couldn’t handle the transition to a four engined aircraft with a glass cockpit.
1. Given its RIAF heritage (professional roots) and the scale of foreign exposure its undergone over the last decade, there aren’t a lot of doubters with regard to the quality of the IAF’s training regimen.
2. The current pilots have all been trained at USAF establishments. Aside from their previous experience, one assumes that the depth and scope of the training imparted was adequate.
3. By all accounts, aircraft with glass cockpits are easier and safer to fly.
Both pilots were Wing Commanders (eq to Lt Col) with thousands of hours under their belt. Its absurd to suggest that their flying X trainer for Y hours two decades ago contributed to this accident.
This is the tragedy of this situation. No one is prepared to question the training or the leadership. No one doubts the IAF’s profressional roots, but every organisation has sometimes systimatic failures, in training, procedure and leadership. There is a possibility this was the case here.
Let me give you two examples of foreign air forces that have “professional roots”.If you dont know the stories behind the below use Google.
1) The USAF nuclear scandal at its Minutemen Nuclear missile bases. Drug taking, exam cheating, leadership cover ups
2) RAF Puma base scandal that revealed negligence in training, leadership and administration after several crashes
The difference between these two “professional air forces” and the the IAF fan boys on here, is that in the two cases above action is being taken to remedy the situation. So human failures like this do happen. It MAY have occured here is what I am saying, but please feel free to bury your head in the sand.
Sign In
