What will you say in a post?

[Pilot DAR]

Several recent threads have brought to mind, the question: "What will people say in a post?". I have learned that I'm accountable for what I say, and write (even if I am still somewhat anonymous here). I've done a lot of stupid things in airplanes over the years. Some I would not describe, 'cause I'd feel too stupid, others, 'cause I would not want to think that another inexperienced pilot would go and try it as I did. Thus, I find myself writing here "get instruction, and try it under supervision" for some things I will mention. I just hope the instructors of the world know their limits too!

It is a large measure of luck, and a bit of skill, which have resulted in my never bending a plane ('came close last month thought...). I'm hoping to sustain that through to a graceful retirement now. Aside from test flying some new contraption hanging from a plane, I otherwise fly conservatively. I've done the daring stuff, don't need to repeat it!

But I read things posted here, and occasionally think to myself "gawd! I hope the newer pilot reading this don't go and try that" - either at all, or solo. Sure, a lot of what can be read here, can be safely accomplished, but sometimes the hundreds of hours of skill and practice behind pulling it off, aren't immediately apparent to the casual reader.

In my real world, I do have the opportunity to actually take another pilot for a spin (sometimes literally). But, when I choose to, I can play down the ease with which I fly a maneuver (loop, for example) and allow a bit of skygod to seem apparent. Hopefully, the other pilot will experience, but not emulate right away - out of a renewed fear!

When I write, I have no idea what the reader will do with it. I have no idea what their skill or experience is (knowing that the two are not always directly related). I don't know what they will do with what they read.

Do we more experienced posters have an obligation to temper what we write to downplay or completely mute our experience with certain maneuvers? Do we have a further moral obligation to point out that another post contains a potentially troublesome maneuver or technique, when we notice it, if for no other reason than to keep the new pilots safe a little longer?

[The500man]

I'd like to think pilots of all experience levels know what is and isn't a good idea and what they are actually capable of. I've seen threads about flying on water, the infamous impossible turn, taking off with maximum flap set and also TV shows about landing on frozen lakes or dunking the wheels in the water to slow down to land on a river bank. To be honest I wouldn't personally try any of this with my curent experience level.

I have flown with an instructor that thought it would be fun to fly at -10 feet (altimeter) over the sea, who was also the type to wheelie it down the runway, only banging the tail on the odd occasion, and I haven't emulated any of this either.

I think it is fine to discuss these things on a public forum, and I don't think the more experienced guys should feel responsible for what a nugget or scrub will do with that information. You have to be responsible for yourself in life, and this becomes even more important when you are a pilot as flying affects more than just yourself.

[n5296s]

After my recent experience here, when I set out to recount something I'd done that I thought might be interesting to others, and got savaged by a bunch of humourless nanny-knows-besters trying to prove what incredibly superior pilots they were, it's frankly unlikely that I'd say anything at all.

It would be nice if this forum could just be a pleasant place to chit-chat about interesting stuff to do with flying. The OP's posts are among the ones I enjoy the most. I'd like to contribute the same kind of thing myself too, but it's just too painful. I end up getting annoyed and spending the whole day in a bad mood. What's the point? I gave up contributing to Rotorheads ages ago, after a couple of similar savagings. Sadly there are people who just seem to gain a great deal of pleasure out of being patronising and condescending for the sake of it. (The last one, which I didn't have the strength to respond to, suggested that I should really try to look outside the cockpit while performing tricky low-level manouvers. Well, duh).

As for the moral question (where's Isabel Dalhousie when you need her?)... should you enclose every post about performing ten-turn spins, or climbing at one knot below Vy, with bold, red flashing text saying "Don't ever do this yourself"... I don't really see why. It would be inappropriate, of course, to say, "Hey, why don't you go and do this yourself", but there's no need to go too far.

OK, waiting for the flatlanders to come after me... for some reason the worst offenders often seem to be from a country where flying 10' below sea level is a perfectly safe thing to do.

[The Heff]

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, or sciolists, to elicit certain reactions.

I don't think anything written on PPRuNe should be read as gospel, because the forums don't exist to give advice; they exist for the circulation of rumour and speculation, which works well. If contributors were compelled to use their real names such as on the LAA Forum (which exists to provide advice, &c) then I would imagine the site would dry up, because no-one wants to be held accountable for what they write. I would consider anyone who made a concious decision to fly as described in these forums, based solely on rumour and possible 'black catting' to be an asinine pilot, whether qualified or student.

The anonymity of the forums means every post should be treated with a pinch of salt, unless it can be supported with appropriate references. However, even then the post is simply an intepretation of that reference, and should be considered opinion only. The only place where a pilot's statement can be accepted as gospel is when that statement is being made by an instructor who is being paid to instruct, because the instructor has a duty of care to ensure that the advice and instruction he gives is correct to the best of his ability.

PPRuNe thrives so well, because everyone has an opinion and we all love to express it; irrespective of whether that same opinion has been posted previously on the forums by another contributor, or sometimes even in the same thread itself. I'm guilty of this as much as anyone.

[peterh337]

I think if somebody posts something that is outrageously wrong or dangerous, they soon get corrected :E

[Miken100]

This is a good discussion.... a few thoughts....

It was Prof Mehrabian who pointed out that less than 10% of a message is conveyed by the words/content - especially if there is an emotional content... Forum posts therefore, missing the tone of voice and accompanying body language are very easily misinterpreted, particularly with regard to intent/attitude/mood of the writer - emoticons go some way to help this but are not enough to make up for loss of 2-way face to face dialogue.

In human communication the message received/perceived can often be very different to the message sent.. (Oh you meant "Land After Foxtrot" I once had to explain to a rather upset tower controller after I had nearly decapitated the grass cutter!!)

I would contend that whilst PPRUNE originally set out to be a "Rumours and News" site it has expanded massively and there is much content of an educational nature - reading a few threads on the Tech Log thread demonstrates this.

Anonymity seems to give some people license to write what they like and removes the accountability for their words and in a few cases license to to use an arrogant and/or aggressive style.... although in some cases this is misinterpreted.

I've discovered that to stay on PPRUNE and more importantly to contribute requires a high degree of emotional resilience and emotional intelligence - which is difficult to do when you have been flamed!!

Perhaps a rhetorical question... Is "Private Flying" a purely rumours and news thread or does it have an important role in making us all better/safer pilots?

I'm not anonymous on here and never will be and my contributions are made in the spirit of this - If I'm wrong then that's fine but I don't need shooting down in flames if I am - humour works best :)

[Mark1234]

I will say I'm wrong / I learned something

I *try* not to say anything I may later regret / may be taken down in evidence and used in a court of law, or anything personal, patronising or arrogant.

I don't consider myself particularly experienced overall in the overall sense, but I definitely consider myself differently experienced to most. I used to caveat things a lot more - but got lazy about too much typing, and felt a bit arrogant with "here's why it's ok for me and not for you".

For what it's worth, there are a few posters who (in my opinion) really warrant sitting up and taking notice of. PilotDAR, Big Pistons, Genghis to name a few..

[fernytickles]

If this hadn't started as a Rumours & News forum, would anyone have felt the need to sign up anonymously? The couple of other forums I participate in I sign up as myself, or with my first name. They are both aviation forums, but quite a bit younger than this one.

[Pilot DAR]

What a great post Miken100, I quite agree!

I wonder that a few posters post here, who perhaps don't play as well with others, would appear to post just so they can see their words "in print". In my history of learning to fly (which continues to this day) I owe so much to some many pilots who have bothered to take their time to tell me, or show me something. I am alive today, because of a combination of that wisdom, and my ability to apply it to a safe flight. I figure that I owe that back in some way. So I post - but with care, and caution, for what readers might do with it.

In "the old days" (1970's for me) in addition, to formal flying instruction, flying was also learned by reading books and magazines, and sitting around the club, hoping that your presence would be tolerated amongst a conversation of skygods. There was no mass communication means as we have here now.

But, as Miken100 correctly points out, if you're a party to the live discussion about flying, you have all of the additional non verbal cues about what is being said. Here, it's a struggle. Without a firm basis of understanding, the new pilots here, might be taking literally what is written in failed humour, or sarcasm. ...And can't distinguish the wannabe Walter Mittys posts.

It is my hope that I could meet anyone form PPRuNe face to face (and I have met some) and there would be smiles and handshakes. (Okay, there's one I never want to meet, but he was banned) This is too small an industry to go around angering other who share our passion. We have to encourage new people to participate safely, or our industry shrinks. Similarly, I would be mortified to have a flying school operator come to me and say: "you so and so, my student wrecked a plane, 'cause he tried something you put in a post on PPRuNe".

So, for me, I will not post a description of something which exceeds a limitation, or conflicts with a recommended practice in a Flight Manual, unless it is to mention something I have done in accordance with a Transport Canada accepted flight test plan (like spinning a Cessna Caravan ;)).

That leaves discussions about techniques. It's interesting that what some pilots will willingly explore, causes such such trauma for others. The zero G in the PA-28, and chart floating around the cabin for a few seconds, causes pages of posts of horror, but is well within the limits of the plane.

For myself, I have personally pulled two dead friends from their crashed planes at the local airport, and there was a third training crash there. all after failed low altitude turns. That reality for me serves as the ultimate reminder to not encourage pilots to casually undertake such maneuvers. and makes it a personal red flag for me. Not a complete "don't do", just highlight the very real dangers. I know others here have there own personal experiences with certain techniques too.

For the new pilot, obviously willing to sift through mounds of written material, the reasonable sum of all of this, is pretty wise guidance to safe flying. Yes, PPRuNe seems to fill a new role as a source of training wisdom, and that is a product of the communication age. We who know better owe it to the rest to point them the right way.

[Pace]

I dont think anyone will try anything that they are not comfortable with anymore than they would log into a formula 1 forum and then go out and drive at 200 mph!

I also stress be careful who you think you are talking too under the cover of a false names posters will overstate their knowledge and experience as well as exagerating their experiences.

I used to be involved in flight sim forums. We had a claimed 747 Captain who wrote with authority and a depth of knowledge which was astounding until some of us questioned a couple of major blunders.

Real world he turned out to be a 12 year old kid who was brilliant at googling.
Under cover of a false name posters will also write things they would never say face to face! assasins in the dark springs to mind.

The real ones are usually humble in their postings and polite.

Pace

[dublinpilot]

Do we more experienced posters have an obligation to temper what we write to downplay or completely mute our experience with certain manoeuvres?

It's an interesting question PDAR.

But what is an experienced poster? There is an element of "in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king" here. To the pre solo student, the recently qualified PPL is a sky god. To all students, their instructors are sky gods.

To the recently qualified PPL, someone who knows how to fly to the next country is a sky god.

A 'more experienced poster' is always relative to your own place in the scheme of things. You are clearly more experienced than the vast majority of us here, but clearly if you should downplay your experiences, then others lower down the food chain, should also do the same, as they are 'more experienced posters' to those even further down the food chain ;)

The trouble with that, it that the forum then becomes a place filled with answers consisting of 'don't do that' preaching and finger wagging. No matter how well intended, that tends to send people away without finding the information that they need to make proper informed decisions, and less inclined to ask someone else, and more likely to experiment quietly on their own.

It's not about what is said, but how it is said.

I think it's far better that more experienced pilots be honest about their experiences. If someone asks about doing something that isn't very sensible, then they are more likely to take on board the info they get, if it's presented in a manor such as:

Yes I did that. However I often look back with great regret for how foolish I was. What I hadn't taken into account, because of my lack of experience was 1, 2, 3 and 4.

A few years later, I noticed a fault on an aircraft that I was flying. Had that happened to be on the one I flew that day, I'd have never of know the implications, but it would probably have killed me. If you really want to do this, then what you need to do it safely is get the required instruction on an aircraft that is designed for....

rather than a "Don't be so stupid to do that" sort of answer.

I have to say that you are probably one of the best posters here for relaying your experiences in an open and honest manor, and it makes for powerful replies ;)

A lack of honesty in advice, just leads to a vacuum. People will wonder what's being left out of the replies ;)

For those of us who are around the forums for a bit longer, we know who to watch out for ;)

Whenever you post something, I know that it's based on the vast sort of experience and knowledge, that I'll never achieve. It's always balanced, and never condescending, and always correct. If for some reason I don't agree with your opinion, I'll read it a secon time to see what I missed the first time ;)

If Peter337 posts on some subject that he has researched, then I know that it's been extensively researched, and what he has found can be trusted.

If BEagle or Bose X post on something to do with licensing, I know that unless they qualify their post themselves, then they are invariable correct in what they say.

I know if Genghis posts on something to do with engineering, that he is invariably correct.

I know that if Bookworm posts on something to do with aviation law, regulations or licensing then without fail, he's correct. And if he asks someone about their own position in a debate about the law, then he invariably has seen something or considered something in the wording, that the poster themselves hasn't seen the implications of yet ;)

I know if Backpacker or Fuji Abound posts something, then it's usually well thought out, well considered and honest.

Of course for new ppruners, it's much harder to know who's consistently reliable and who's just loud ;)

dp

[Pilot DAR]

No matter how well intended, that tends to send people away without finding the information that they need to make proper informed decisions, and less inclined to ask someone else, and more likely to experiment quietly on their own.

In many cases, it comes down to "because" and "if". It is unwise to attempt X because Y could happen. If you mitigate by doing Z, it will be adequately safe. If the responder to the question knows what they are talking about (sometimes a difficult thing to determine), and conveys the "Y" and "Z" accurately and completely, there are good chances of success. The challenge is that sometime first hand mentoring is required, as words alone can't do it justice. So we fall back to "ride with an instructor" advice. Let's hope that the instructors have the wisdom, and sense of self preservation to keep their charges safe, while demonstrating PPRuNe inspired techniques. My experiences in the last 25 years have sometimes left me wondering about this. I have seen that often instructors are unusually poor at asking a mere pilot for advice, and even less likely to take it if unsolicited (it must rub the instructor patina the wrong way). There are some things which are just never taught at instructor school apparently. One of the three turnback crashes at my local airport in the last 15 years, was an instructor trying to teach a student to turnback. He should not have attempted it, 'cause it did not work. Both in hospital for months.

I suppose that if the new pilots reading would like more comprehensive explanations, they should feel entitled - that is the point of replies. I have to concede that is was the re-appearance of a "turnback" thread, which inspired this thread. Yes, I have practiced turnbacks, and once did one quasi successfully from crosswind at 350 feet. I did not make it back onto the runway, but onto suitable ground adjoining the runway to enable no damage, and a tow back to the hanger.

Each time I have seen the turnback theme reappear, I have expressed my general dissent. For the most recent (which perhaps has been withdrawn?) I did not want to appear negative to N59 he/she seems a considered poster, so I let it go in general. But, I was still thinking "gosh, I hope new pilots aren't thinking to do this, just 'cause they read it".

There is a lot I have experienced, which I do not post here, I just can't imagine someone else surviving it all - but then how did I?

[Fuji Abound]

As to your last question yes we do.

There is no better way to learn than watch, listen and read - thats how we pass on all knowledge, and it is such a shame to go on repeating the same mistakes!

That said i suspect there is something in the spirit of most pilots that makes them want to see for themselves. All the weather stories ring just that much more true when you have scared yourself hopefully just a little under a lowering cloud base.

So scare people enough so they scare themselves a bit less in consequence because they just had to doubt our words of wisdom a little but take heart that without our words they may have jumped straight in the deep end.

[riverrock83]

I'm a newbie here, and I hope that in my few posts I've made by experience (and lack there off) clear while trying to learn from this community and occasionally contribute when appropriate. I have gained a lot from the wisdom of those around, but I've also learnt quickly to tell when someone isn't talking from their mouth...

I've been using other forums for years - I've grown up with instant messaging, and I've got used to picking up tone from a person's message. I'm intelligent enough to be able to take what is said and not just go out and try it, while still adding the knowledge of those around to my own very limited experience. What I do do, is discuss any questions I have with my instructor. What I have done is use discussions on here to do my own research. I know that in the plane I do most of my flying in, unleaded / mogas isn't allowed, and I have read through the POH with renewed interest, while still taking on board the caveats discussed about performance. Spending too much time lurking on here isn't helping me with doing the exams though!

On the issue that prompted this - am I about to go and try a turn back? My instructor discussed turn backs when teaching EFATOs. He was honest. He said that it was possible with specific practice and large amounts of experience, and helped by taking off from a very long runway, but from our conversations I know that I don't have that practice or experience. With one exception. If I'm taking off from Prestwick on 13 it might be possible to turn back onto 21. We have also practised landing back on the same runway as currently taking off from (possible to take off from 1/2 way down 13 (Mike), get to a couple hundred feet, then land again on 13 depending on wind).

That sort of detail wouldn't make sense to discuss here - but thats why I have an instructor - I'm not learning to fly by reading whats here!

[n5296s]

I certainly never meant to suggest that anyone should be off doing or trying turnbacks. I just wanted to report how it worked out when I tried it.

Actually I'm pretty horrified by the accident statistics about them, which have come to light here. I know it's a tricky and possibly dangerous manouver, but it's kind of amazing that instructors would augur in trying it in a perfectly good airplane. I don't really see why - if you don't like the look of how it's turning out, add power and GO! But evidently it does happen.

Maybe people try to do it too close to the hairy edge of the stall. This is no doubt theoretically better, but more likely to kill you since a stall at 200' AGL requires great delicacy to recover. That's why I did mine with a 20% airspeed margin, and would do so if I ever had to do it for real also.

Anyay, I'll add a belated caveat.

DON'T TRY THE TURNBACK MANOUVER. IT'S QUITE LIKELY TO KILL YOU.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I have been very fortunate to be mentored by several great pilots over the years. I post as a way to give back some of what I hope is some accumulated wisdom to the aviation world that I love. Everything I posted is intended as an fact/idea/procedure/opinion to think about and should only be considered as one data point in the wider search for aviation knowledge

IMO the worse possible outcome is some low time pilot doing something because "Big Pistons Forever said so". However if a reader says, "that's a point I had not considered before" then I think I have contributed to this site.

And although I know it reflects a personal character flaw, I also sometimes get a charge out of deflating some blowhards who pontificate at great lengths on subjects they are imperfectly equiped to comment on :E

[Crash one]

got savaged by a bunch of humourless nanny-knows-besters trying to prove what incredibly superior pilots they were,

That is spot on, & seems to dominate PPrune after the first page of most threads. At least on the Private Flying forum. It includes the spelling police, the grammar police & the absolutely technically thou' perfect police.