Two's in
14th Oct 2006, 21:47
A couple of threads here show disagreement between "youngsters" doing exciting things, and old farts (like me) calling it dangerous. I think there is an underlying problem behind this in the nanny state antics such as certified tradesmen being solely responsible for putting up Christmas Tree lights, or wearing safety glasses to change light bulbs, the problem being that any such Health and Safety inspired nonsense teaches people to treat all official advice the same dismissive way. So when someone says "you need an electrical tradesman to change the fuse on the Mess toaster" and then the Authorizing Officer says, "not below 250' MSD", the risk is that people will treat both restrictions on their personal freedom with the same contempt.
Recognizing real danger and risk, instead of this litigation inspired nonsense, will become harder and harder, and thus ironically put service people at greater overall risk when they are unable to correctly identify real risk and mitigate it accordingly, because "the H&S representative normally does that kind of thing".
With low flying specifically, youngsters are not only fearless, they are immortal. That is why their flying is supervised and controlled to allow them to explore the envelope without actually becoming a safety statistic every time. Fearless, however, does not equal Reckless, and over time they hopefully acquire the knowledge and experience that will allow them to pass on their wisdom through the supervision of others.
When you are in your early twenties, and screaming around some God-forsaken hellhole in HM's finest aerial weapons platform, delivering instant unpleasantness to the bad guys, it is even more important that you don't lose your life (or a valuable asset) to the impetuousness of youth. That is when the real rewards of arduous training and routine pay off, because your safety should be second nature. By throwing away all the rules and restrictions because nobody is looking, simply puts you that closer to the inevitable tragic outcome.
Individual views on this are actually a simple mathematical function, whereby the number of times you exceed the Auth and descend below MSD are inversely proportional to the number of times you have stood at the graveside of a mate, in your best uniform, and thrown dirt on his coffin lid. It is also a direct function of years of marriage multiplied by the number of kids, it is a subset of how many Boards of Inquiry you have been on, and has a quadratic relationship to how much imagination you have.
Youth is youth, and the Armed Services have a long and glorious history of "youngsters" fighting incredible odds in battle to achieve outstanding results, but there is a time and a place for derring-do, and I suggest it's not every time you strap an aircraft to your backside thinking nobody's watching.
Recognizing real danger and risk, instead of this litigation inspired nonsense, will become harder and harder, and thus ironically put service people at greater overall risk when they are unable to correctly identify real risk and mitigate it accordingly, because "the H&S representative normally does that kind of thing".
With low flying specifically, youngsters are not only fearless, they are immortal. That is why their flying is supervised and controlled to allow them to explore the envelope without actually becoming a safety statistic every time. Fearless, however, does not equal Reckless, and over time they hopefully acquire the knowledge and experience that will allow them to pass on their wisdom through the supervision of others.
When you are in your early twenties, and screaming around some God-forsaken hellhole in HM's finest aerial weapons platform, delivering instant unpleasantness to the bad guys, it is even more important that you don't lose your life (or a valuable asset) to the impetuousness of youth. That is when the real rewards of arduous training and routine pay off, because your safety should be second nature. By throwing away all the rules and restrictions because nobody is looking, simply puts you that closer to the inevitable tragic outcome.
Individual views on this are actually a simple mathematical function, whereby the number of times you exceed the Auth and descend below MSD are inversely proportional to the number of times you have stood at the graveside of a mate, in your best uniform, and thrown dirt on his coffin lid. It is also a direct function of years of marriage multiplied by the number of kids, it is a subset of how many Boards of Inquiry you have been on, and has a quadratic relationship to how much imagination you have.
Youth is youth, and the Armed Services have a long and glorious history of "youngsters" fighting incredible odds in battle to achieve outstanding results, but there is a time and a place for derring-do, and I suggest it's not every time you strap an aircraft to your backside thinking nobody's watching.