Thanks Arthur for you reply. My point is just that training will not prevent such accidents and that these accidents are not the result of improper preparations by the Dutch.
At least one Chinook and the Apache crashes were obvious results of crew errors, which IMHO boils down to a lack of training. Especially the Chinook crash was a clear result of a crew not used to operate in mountainous areas.
I do admit we do not have moutains in Holland but am not sure if training will prevent such mistakes since crashes into mountains are quite common all over the world.
And the Apache crash was the result of the two crewmembers ignoring basic control procedures, which is a woefully stupid error to make and one i wouldn’t expect to be made by a crew which is properly indoctrinated in safely operating their aircraft.
If a crew ignores basic control procedures no training what so every will prevent this ever. Just plain stupid !!!!
So that’s a second one i can wholeheartedly blame on poor training standards on behalf of the Dutch. So nope – no unfounded speculations on my behalf. Perhaps a blunt conclusion, but (especially after talking to some Army guys prior to their deployment to Uruzgan) most definately a conclusion based on information. If you’d know me a bit better (there’s a small 8000 posts you can read, those might give you an idea), you’d know that at the times i do speculate, i let that be well-known. But then again, since you and Yara seem to think that putting this F-16 crash into perspective and putting an identity to the airframe is a “stupid remark” and a “useless comment” i doubt you seriously care anyways.
No comment, just a matter of difference in opinion :p .
The F-16 crash is very unlikely to be a crew-related incident, by the way. Seems like an oxygen malfunction from what i know.
So a technical problem not related to training ??
Sign In
