Hey how convenient it is for any manufacturer to blame the pilot for a crash. After all that is what used to be done for a whole lot of the IAFs crashes.
And in Aero India 2007 we get:
ALH crashes "Oh it was pilot error"
IJT crashes "Oh it was pilot error"
Something's got to be fishy here. Even if something is not fishy - no "buyer" in his right senses would accept the pilot error explanation so easily. If you buy an aircraft and it crashes - you may not live to defend yourself and say why it was not your fault.
Of course - with such reports having appeared since the moment the crash was seen in public - pressure will have to rise on HAL to accept or deny them. Unfortunately for Baldev and fortunately for HAL - trial by media means that unless the "forgot to lock canopy" story is denied - it will be taken as the truth.
I would have thought that technology from 1950 - ie a light that stays on if the door is not closed should have been there in the 21st century IJT. How come the pilot is being blamed?
Yawn.... A 340 crashes in full view of public and cameras during its "unfurling flight" and still airlines bought it in droves.. And of course airplanes had engines right from the day they first flew and basic laws of physics meant that airplanes however sophsiticated they are fly only within a certain envelope.. Dayumm.. couldnt airbus have lights that stay on or have a Kate like voice croon "danger " "danger" ? Sure.. they did but still a very experienced test pilot crashed the plane in full view.
ANd in Bangalore when one of the first A320s to enter service in the world crashed while it still smelt of fresh paint, the evil Airbus did a "foreign conspiracy" theory and blamed the poor Indian Airlines pilot.. what to do saar! .. Right since probably Wright bros, pilots had to make sure that the descent rate was such that you could make it to the run way or you crash short of it.. Didnt the TFTA IT/VITY computer controlled FBW A320 have anything at all to have Kate croon "Danger Danger" ,"Pull Up" "Pull Up".. still that poor guy crashed.. Of course Airbus' fault onlee and no one should buy A320.. but.. but.. A320 smashed all records in sales and every one is lining up to buy more.. An eevill conspiracy onlee..
Airus is to blame of course.. Ask the dead pilots of the A320 and A340 that crashed. They never made any error saar.. How can they defend themselves.. I tell you them damned Airbus manufacturers.. It is the planes onlee..
And of course, cars have a seat belt sign on the dashboard that stays on red until you put seatbelts on.. I am willing to bet Rs 100, that the nitwit who wrote this , never ever looks at that and drives around without his seat belt in the city he lives in , in India.. Sure, it is the car manufacturer's fault if he gets killed in a car accident because he wasnt wearing the seat belt..So in the 21st century why are you blaming poor car drivers who get killed because they dont wear seatbelts.. It is a conspiracy really. Everything is fishy onlee.. And people line up in the millions to buy cars!!..
And now Sirjee.. There is a technology from the 1950s called a light bulb that stays on in the aircraft if you dont lock the canopy and probably makes a peee.....peee.. noise..But like the car driver with seat belt, the plane driver ignores it and crashes the plane.. Now it is 21st century and so the airplane manufacturer is to blame saar.. It is a conspiracy theory onlee.. and they are blaming the poor pilot.