.. .. .. another pointless thread

[Fuji Abound]

There have been a few threads recently which fall into this category.

Now I don’t particularly have a problem with that. Some are entertaining, some hostile and some purely banal - maybe the thread on letting Granny have “a go on the controls”, is a good example embodying all three, but we enjoy each thread for what it is.

These threads often revolve around what we can and cant do as pilots. Understanding and interpreting the law is important and often interesting. However, fundamental to being a pilot is the responsibility we inherit with the title. The law may well define the minimum I can operate to with my IR but I would be particularly stupid to do so without taking account of my own currency and IMHO old fashioned common sense. In other words it is my responsibility to set my own minima taking into account all the factors personal to me.

So what is my point.

Don’t legislate against Granny having a go on the controls - let me judge whether I am competent and able to deal with whatever problem Granny causes.

Don’t legislate against me trying a right seat landing - because as sure as night follows day I will want to try it!

Far, far better point out during training some of the pitfalls and the boundaries of the envelope in which we all operate and our responsibility to extend those boundaries with caution. That awareness and responsibility should include spinning is dangerous without proper training, right seat handling will seem odd at first, granny might just select the fuel to cut off because I bet we will want to try each and every one of these and a few more during our flying career.

In short please don’t try to legislate away the responsibility we each assume every time we fly - for it is one of the reasons I fly.

- and at this seasonal time of year there we all go but for the grace of God.

[Speedbird252]

In short please don’t try to legislate away the responsibility we each assume every time we fly

By doing what? Asking for advice on this forum from fellow Pilots about things that may concern us / may benefit us from other peoples experiences?

:confused:

[Fuji Abound]

Speedbird - of course you are correct, this forum is brilliant at giving advice - but you have sort of missed the point or I didnt make it very well.

It is my impression that some threads start with a very sensible question followed by some very sensible advice but degenerate to the point at which an observer might conclude - ah well we had better legislate against a pilot doing that so we end up with a totally sterile enviroment bereft of any personal responsibility.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Speedbird :

What Fuji was trying to point out is there has to be some common sense used when flying, letting granny hold the controls to show her how easy it is to guide an airplane falls under the common sense part of being a pilot.

To be a slave to every moronic rule that the regulator can think up will eventually result in them making a rule to try and prevent us from using common sense, and thereby taking away granny's go at the controls.

One of the biggest problems with aviation is it is already over regulated.

Flying when you look at it in an objective manner is no different than operating any other piece of mobile machinery.

Chuck E.

[strafer]

I can see your point Fuji, but the title doesn't sum it up. Any pointless/boring thread will quickly drop onto the 2nd page to be quickly forgotton. It's hard to say at the start which subjects aren't worthy of possible discussion (although trying to make sure they're aviation related would be nice). Some of the best threads this year have started out with unpromising titles.

What worries me more, is the impression I get that they are a lot of guests & even some members who seem reluctant, or even afraid, to express their point of view for fear of being shot down in flames. A couple of threads this year started by PPL students asking questions soon degenerated into an esoteric 'discussion' between test pilots, engineers and the like which left me, and I'm sure a few others, completely baffled. On one, I noticed that the originator had actually gone to ask the same question on the Flyer website because she was getting no change on this one.

As I write this, there's 144 members loggod on and over 200 guests. Have they got nothing to say or can pprune be too brutal???

[FlyingForFun]

I agree, Fuji. But, in defense of the "pointless" threads:

For many issues surrounding our flying, there are two things to consider: Is it legal? And is it safe? Only if both of those are satisfied can we go ahead and do it.

The "is it safe" question is very often interesting. There are different opinions from people with different backgrounds, and each of us will read those opinions, apply our own predjudices and experiences to them, and come up with our own, individual but valid, conclusions.

The "is it legal" question is nowhere near as interesting (to most of us at least!), but still needs to be answered. I think all of us here agree with the sentiments which you and Chuck express, that we hope that the law will leave as much as possible to our own discretion. But that doesn't absolve us from the need to ask the questions and find the answers. And, unfortunately, the answers are not always as obvious as they should be in the ideal world, so it may take a lengthy discussion (and sometimes some individual interpretations of what's written) before we get an answer. Let's just hope that the answer, for many things, continues to be "it's up to you"!

FFF
-------------

[Whirlybird]

I think the title of this thread is definitely appropriate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Any thread that people are interested in gets more posts; if it's not it drops to the next page. Some of us think aviation is over-regulated; some don't. Some threads digress, sometimes usefully, sometimes not. Sometimes you get a good answer, other times you get flamed. If you go over the limits, the mods do something about it. If not, read the posts if you like 'em, don't if you don't, but one thing we really don't need is any more self-styled mods.

This is PPRuNe, and almost anything goes. Long may that continue. And the one thing we don't need is any new posters wondering if they dare post, or if their thread isn't relevant or acceptable.

[Mike Cross]

The danger with rules is that we may become focussed on whether something is legal rather than whether it is sensible.

That said, the discussions here show there are a lot of misconceptions as to what is legal.

Mike

[S-Works]

Strafer,

I think PPrune can be too brutal a lot of the time. The majority of threads are dominated by the same people who have made a huge number of posts and believe that there own opinion or even bastardisation of the ANO to fit there arguments is the correct answer. When people dare to question them is when the threads start to get nasty and or ridiculous and then ulitmately get pulled.

Examples are of the hours thread, if you have flown more hours than someone else you must be lying.......

It's the reason I like to make the "odd" contentious comment to stir things up!!!!

:D

[bookworm]

In short please don’t try to legislate away the responsibility we each assume every time we fly - for it is one of the reasons I fly.

I think there's a more fundamental issue regarding safety here. It's not just about having freedom.

Rules take away options from pilots who have to make choices at many points before and during a flight. A rule may look sensible in isolation, but it just may force a pilot into a course of action that, with hindsight, everyone would agree would be more hazardous than the (illegal) alternative.

Examples include:

the 90 day-rule that says that I can't have a pilot who's experienced and qualified on type sitting in the right seat unless I have three t/os and ldgs in the last 90 days, but I can go off and fly solo.

the FM immunity provisions that require me to fly a non-precision approach in an aircraft with a functional but non-FM-immune ILS receiver because of a risk that hasn't been quantified.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't have rules, but that they should be chosen carefully with a very thorough analysis of the consequences.

[Miserlou]

Fuji.
Were you one of the previous owners of arthur?
If you know what I'm talking about then I think I know you.
Regards,
Miserlou.

[Fuji Abound]

Miserlou - sorry not me, at least not in this life!

I suspect we might all be interested in the story though.

I am indeed pleased with some of the very experienced PPruNers that have contributed to this topic and I have enjoyed reading your views. Thank you.

[Pilotage]

Unless I'm missing something, most of such threads are basically asking the question..

"Is there a rule about this that I have to obey, or am I genuinely allowed to exercise my experience and common sense - in which case, what is everybody else's experience and common sense".

Which to me is an eminently sensible question to be asking.


It's particularly sensible to ask these questions on Pprune, because if you ask the CAA direct, you'll rarely get a particularly pragmatic answer.

P

[niknak]

For every rule theres usually a good reason for it being there.

The majority of pilots are not fully subscribed members of the "It will never happen to me Club", but more than a few of that society choose to make statements on this forum as though their word is sacrosant and nobody else should dare to have an opinion, and that, as an aviation professional, really pisses me off.

Rules are generally made in the light of experience and common sense, and nothing prevents a pilot departing from those rules should they genuinely believe that safety is going to be compromised.
In addition to this, the regulators, (the CAA), are answerable to everyone in avaition for the rules they implement, and far from the ill concieved attitude that Pilotage and a few others care to colour SRG with, they are always willing and available to discuss any matter with anyone whos is affected, be they PPL or ATPL.

[Fujiflyer]

Bookworm, exactly.

Part of the satisfaction of flying is successfully taking on the responsibility of piloting an aircraft, in addition the trust which others place with us, in respect of the same.

We have (and need) a basic framework of rules in order to prevent the "standards" sliding into disarray but the last thing we want is to have a huge set of rules which try to take over from the routine common sense decisions we make. Excessive regulation tends to produce bazaar, unintended side effects (Bookworm made this point nicely wrt: the 90 day rule) and discourages "free" thinking and personal responsibility.

I have observed that those who tend to advocate making up rules for every situation tend also to be very poor at quick thinking in demanding situations - not the sort of people you'd want flying 'planes in the first case. :=

Rich