The assessment of a pilots ability seems to be based on the quality of their radio calls and the number of bars on their epaulets. The fact a pilot can’t land in a crosswind, is petrified of stalls, taxies against the brakes, starts their aircraft 2m from hangar doors with the slipstream filling the hangar with dust and causing the aircraft in the hangar to collide is old fashioned stuff. Their multiple EFBs will protect them!
Roundsounds,
Well said!!
As I have often said, once we "learnt to fly", now you "learn to comply", with all that stick and rudder stuff being old hat, compared to being word perfect on the dozens (is dozens compliant in a metric age) of pages of "radio procedures" beyond anything required by most other countries and/or ICAO.
Tootle pip!!
PS: At least one thing we achieved, years ago, against resistance from CAA/CASA/whichever at the time and large slabs of the local aviation community, particularly one pilot union, was getting rid of "words" that had a completely different meaning in Australia to the rest of the world, ie: Theoretically adopted ICAO as the standard.
For example, we amended the AIP so "left" had the meaning "left" as in left and right, as opposed to left meaning leaving an altitude or flight level.
But it took a real accident and a string of really serious near-hits and the resultant inquiries to do it!!