Originally Posted by
bill fly
Hi Jodel,
I think we should distinguish between average folk and average professional pilots in this argument.
Pilots only get (and stay) where they are after stringent selection, training and repeated checking. They are a small part of the community.
That doesn’t mean they have to be especially clever or elite - but just ideal people for their job. Other people are ideally suited to other professions, at which many pilots may fail.
A professional pilot should be well up on your scale - if that scale applies to flying skills/aptitude as applied to the general community. The bad ones get found out with very few exceptions.
A doctor or an architect doesn’t go through this process - has to prove him(her)self to stay in business in other ways...
So an aircraft designer has the right to expect a certain level of skill. I seem to remember in my manual, that Boeing were pretty clear on the skill tests their pilots were expected to pass. That needs to be borne in mind when using terms like “average”.
On the other hand, a professional pilot has the right to expect a level of skill from the manufacturer. This includes honest self criticism such as is required of a professional pilot.
B
Jodel in his graph made clear that represent from "barely pass certification" to "top gun", which if my understanding correctly represent the total number of professional pilots.
He is already distinguishing between average folk (me) and average professional pilots.
There will be always an average, no matter how high you set the bar, some will be above the average and other below the average.
In fact, in my opinion, he has a very good point. Aircraft certification requires that the design is made for average certified professional pilot, which implies that a number (no matter how stringent is the certification process) of professional pilots will not fall in that category, therefore he is suggesting to have system designed (for aircraft certification purpose) for every certified professional pilot (not the average).