[vw-dan]

So is learning to drive. Its just a learned skill. Learning to fly does not set you aside and its arrogant to think it does.

Bit of a strange thing to say IMHO. I can drive, ride motorbikes and fly - motorbike training was great fun, except for the half day spent learning manoeuvres for Mod 1. The rest of the road riding was like a Sunday morning ride - just had to ride safe.

Car and Bike theory are a joke that anyone with any desire to pass can do so within a few days if that. No real knowledge required of the mechanics of driving.

Learning to drive was a while back, but I don't remember it being hugely onerous - I certainly didn't think much about it between lessons. I don't remember ever sweating like I did during my first circuits, either!

Flying on the other hand took a huge amount of time and commitment for me- met in particular saw me spending a LOT of time learning and taking additional ground schooling but apart from Aircraft Gen Knowledge and POF (Both of which just happened to be something I was interested in well before PPL) I had to really work at those exams. I've read all the books cover to cover at least once.

I think most people could achieve PPL if they so wanted, but I think the commitment to learning is well in excess of that required for driving. There's not much that I can imagine beating the feeling of passing my skills test, to be frank.

[PeteM]

I appreciate that many people have little experience of examinations and technical study BUT.

If you have a reasonable level of technical understanding and have undertaken tertiary education then the level of 'knowledge' required for a PPL is pretty modest. Yes it might challenge some people but in technical terms it is not that difficult.

Does it make you a better person? Well I suppose so. Does it make you stand out from someone with good technical qualifications? Absolutely not - understand that and live with it

p.s Yes you are smarter than the average van delivery driver (probably!)

[Crash one]

The ability to pass the exams is not the same as the ability to learn the skill set required to hold a PPL. It is a demonstration of commitment of both time and money to education, and of the learned ability to achieve a safe standard of airmanship. Learning to fly is bloody hard work, for all you sky Gods who have long since forgotten.

So is learning to drive. Its just a learned skill. Learning to fly does not set you aside and its arrogant to think it does.

It is arrogant to think it doesn't.
Learning to drive is almost a requirement today, you sit and watch mum and dad do it every day so you grow up with it.
Learning to fly is a voluntary commitment, requiring a different skill set, weather/wind awareness situational savvy and determination etc.
By comparison.
Any half brained Neanderthal can get into a car, run out of fuel, hit a lamp post, skid into a ditch etc and get away with it.
I've just driven home behind one of them!! Watching the standard of performance he would kill hisself in two mins anywhere near an aircraft.
Apologies to Neanderthals they were not that dumb by a long shot.

[The Admin Team]

Gentlemen, can we inject a bit of the Christmas spirit into this thread and speak less about arrogance etc. Thank you.

[Miscellaneous]

It is arrogant to think it doesn't...

...Learning to fly is a voluntary commitment, requiring a different skill set, weather/wind awareness situational savvy and determination etc.

Maybe so, but it doesn't come close to the difficulty and determination required to continue flying.

Between weather, tech issues, medicals, licence confusion, currency, hoops, hoops and more hoops... that's where the differentiation is.

[Crash one]

It is arrogant to think it doesn't...

...Learning to fly is a voluntary commitment, requiring a different skill set, weather/wind awareness situational savvy and determination etc.

Maybe so, but it doesn't come close to the difficulty and determination required to continue flying.

Between weather, tech issues, medicals, licence confusion, currency, hoops, hoops and more hoops... that's where the differentiation is.

Nah, that's where the Neanderthal perseverance kicks in, if they didn't, they went hungry, if we don't, we stay on the ground.

[Miscellaneous]

It's certainly been a challenging couple of years for me and now being out of currency and having to do an LPC at the same time my medical is due would make it easy not to bother.

But then I read about Paul S being 4 years without his aeroplane and now it's tech again.

And of course, I understand you have had your own challenges, now sorted.

At least I'm not alone.

[Crash one]

Gentlemen, can we inject a bit of the Christmas spirit into this thread and speak less about arrogance etc. Thank you.

Agreed.
My apologies.
The Christmas spirit is about to be injected, courtesy of Doctor Lamb.

[Paul_Sengupta]

and now it's tech again

It isn't really, just haven't had a chance to put it through an annual due to personal circumstances.

It wasn't really tech those 4 years either. It started with my having to replace perfectly good seatbelts just because a daft rule says so, and then ended up with an engine overhaul just because it had got to 2000 hours. There was nothing which was actually physically stopping it from flying.

[defcribed]

I don't know how we got to arrogance or anything like that. SteveC and PeteM have it about right

All I meant was that, from the perspective of someone reasonably bright and with a rigorous tertiary education, learning to fly:

(a) isn't difficult
(b) doesn't involve any theoretical stuff that could be considered even vaguely academically challenging

I have a pet theory that if you introduced an academic barrier to entry (i.e. a requirement for a bachelors degree in a 'hard' subject) into ATPL training then:

(a) you wouldn't see the present over-supply of wannabes trying to claw their way into the airlines on the back of their parents' remortgaged house;
(b) pay and conditions for new starters at the airlines would be significantly better;
(c) the airlines themselves might even be paying for training;
(d) the ATPL exams might be overhauled and sorted out because there would be overwhelming feedback from people who knew about real exams and learning.

[ak7274]

"All I meant was that, from the perspective of someone reasonably bright and with a rigorous tertiary education, learning to fly:

(a) isn't difficult
(b) doesn't involve any theoretical stuff that could be considered even vaguely academically challenging"

For some, it isn't as easy as that. I am academically challenged and found some of the theory exams quite difficult.
The practical side of flying, I found extremely easy. Airmanship and Airspace awareness aren't a problem either and if we are saying the less well educated shouldn't be flying, then that is arrogance.
I am a lorry driver, so obviously being just above a Van driver and can look down on him. (I hope that was read light heartedly)


My post isn't intended to be read as any form of rant. More a balancing of views.

[defcribed]

found some of the theory exams quite difficult.

They can be quite difficult to pass (and I understand the ATPL ones are even more so) but this is not because the material is academically challenging, it is because they are just bad exams in many, many ways. Including but not limited to:

- They're designed to be easy to administer and easy to mark rather than to test understanding.

- Much of the material is irrelevant to modern flying (so just rote-learn facts that are of no practical use) and leads to questions based on highly contrived and exceptionally unlikely situations.

- Questions which use double-negatives and 'hidden in plain sight' details which change the whole context to try and trip you up.

- Some questions which are just so laughably simple and easy that you spend 10 minutes looking for the 'trick' aspect of it when in fact there isn't one.

- There are questions which, objectively, have more than one possible correct answer and you essentially have to guess which one the examiner wants.

- Some of the nav stuff involves measurement with poor-quality materials to a degree of accuracy which just isn't possible (and nor does it have a point, because no-one can hand-fly to one degree anyway).

[Flyingfemme]

I don’t think it’s the actual technical content of flying exams/skills that makes a difference, but the decision making does. Flying forces a pilot to examine a situation, assess the options and make a decision on a course of action...........most people these days don’t get to make real decisions and certainly don’t expect to live or die based on those choices. It’s for grownups.

[Miscellaneous]

It’s for grownups.

Oh dear, I can't speak for most here (but have my suspicions), but if that's the case I'm certainly stuffed.

[Paul_Sengupta]

"Dad, when I grow up I want to be a pilot."