The Press & GA...

[Supersport]

Was just perusing the BBC News website and read a new article about 'Flying Officer Wales' getting 'fast tracked' through his course at RAF Cranwell.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7339475.stm

A quote is contained in this report from former RAF Squadron Leader Chris Carder when he was asked if HRH is doing some kind of 'equivalent' to the PPL.



"He's done more than PPL training," says Mr Carder. "On a PPL course, the basics are very basic, by their nature. "By the end of a PPL course, you can't fly at night or in bad weather. You can take-off, land, fly from A-to-B and are able to deal with a possible engine failure en-route."


Now forgive me if I'm over reacting but especially with the high publicity the recent air accidents are recieving, I feel that ill thought out comments aren't doing us 'Basic' PPLs any favours. To me statements like that make us look like under trained hazards to the non-flying public. Just got on my nerves that's all, seems like bad press all the time at the moment where GA is mentioned in the media, I'm getting a little fed up of it to be honest. I definately would not consider my training as 'Basic!'

/rant

[pistongone]

Mr Carder said "On a PPL course, the basics are very basic, by their nature. "By the end of a PPL course, you can't fly at night or in bad weather. So can we deduce from this statement that the Prince is now night and IMC rated? In 13 weeks? I completely agree with with you SS, we do a lot more than the very basic stuff of which Mr Carder spoke.:=

['Chuffer' Dandridge]

I know Chris Carder and he is a bl00dy nice bloke..... But maybe he still has some Red Arrows left in him. It will wear off after a while and he'll get back to normal.. :E

But in my experience, I think most Military trained pilots look down their noses at civvie pilots. Until they want an airline job of course......

But saying that, certain elements of the PPL & microlight world don't do themselves any favours (TRA & CAS busts, silly accidents etc etc) Granted, a miltary trained pilot must be very good to get there in the first place, but they don't know everything and in a professional capacity, I've seen some shocking examples of arrogance and poor airmanship from the boys in blue, both light & dark....

There was a recent post on the miltary aircrew forum where some well meaning guy attempted to chastise military pilots for CAS busts up north somewhere. Bad move putting it on the miltary thread:=

Still, there's good and bad in both camps, but I hear what you're saying SuperSport:D

[Shunter]

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the fact that he was allowed to fly with the RAF at all is rather amazing, since he has CVD (colour vision deficiency) which is an automatic disqualifying condition for anyone else. I suppose they conveniently forgot that small issue...

[youngskywalker]

What I find amazing is that the services claim that only a tiny percentage of the population has what it takes to earn RAF wings, now either every male member of the Royal family is born with that 'rare gift' or that in actual fact most people with average intel' could probably manage it given the opportunity and a patient instructor, or in other words, give enough monkeys enough type writers and eventually they will produce a Shakespeare? :O

I'm just jealous of course

[pulse1]

or that in actual fact most people with average intel' could probably manage it given the opportunity and a patient instructor

Over the last few years I have watched my son go through the military training process, wondering at the same time whether I could have made it myself. I suspect that, given enough time, I probably could but the one thing that military training does not normally give you is time. If you don't get it after one lesson or so, you're chopped. There probably is a small percentage of people who could learn at the pace required by the military. In fact, the number of students on my son's course who made it to the end was quite small, three I believe.

It's just a pity that they have to spread it over such a long time.

[youngskywalker]

Indeed, but do you think that the prince Philip, Andrew, charles and now William would really have been chopped?! :E

[IO540]

Without wishing to be cynical (me cynical???) I don't see a problem with any members of the Royal Family being allowed to fly in the RAF or the Navy.

Nowadays, none of them is likely to see front line action, for reasons of press hounding and the resulting placing of their fellow soldiers in additional danger.

I am not against the royal family but IMHO it does these people a lot of good to learn some discipline.

As regards colour vision, it has been proven (http://www.aopa.com.au/infocentre/topicdocuments/colourvision.pdf)(to anybody willing to listen objectively) that CV has barely any relevance to flying. Like much aviation stuff, it's a hangover from WW1 when pilots were real men with hairy chests and anybody remotely considering following in their esteemed footsteps had to be as good. Things have gone downhill ever since open cockpits went out of fashion :yuk:

[airborne_artist]

Has no-one seen the polo link? The world's best polo players are the Argentinians - and they were not so bad in the cockpit in 1982, either. Charles, William and Harry are all keen polo players.

Worth noting that Andrew has never played polo, despite his late ex-father-in-law being a very good player. Andrew was actually quite a good pilot, though he did have some trouble getting through the exams at Dartmouth, as I recall.

[funfly]

Correct me if I am wrong but the 'wings' that miladdo has got allow him to 'fly solo' - doesn't make him a fully fledged RAF pilot.

Of course RAF fliers (proper ones) are good, they are chosen for aptitude, they are young and they have a billion pound training rescourse. We PPL's are generally more mature and fund our flying ourselves using time and facilities as and when available.

It's just that they are so Bl:mad:dy arogant.

[airborne_artist]

Doubtless it's changed, and perhaps been been cut, but I did three hours night flying and just under ten hours IF on RN EFT in 1979. No ratings, agreed.

[whitehorse]

......and me, I did 2.30 dual and 0.15 solo night and 8.55 instrument (not an IR of course) on EFT in the Chipmunk T10, but that was in the early 70´s.
In any case, an organisation formed on 1st April has got to be suspect.
Just going down to the bunker to avoid incomming:E

[Professor Plum]

The EFT course now no longer includes night flying, and only 5 and a bit hours IF. However, Will went on to fly the Tucano, and the BFJT course involves night flying, and you get an IR too. Not sure how much of it Will did though.

[LH2]

I feel that ill thought out comments aren't doing us 'Basic' PPLs any favours. To me statements like that make us look like under trained hazards to the non-flying public

Well, there is some room for dissent. I for one agree that "On a PPL course, the basics are very basic" (not that that's any different on a CPL course either), and I also quite agree with you on the "under trained hazards" bit (perhaps to ourselves more than the public at large, but anyway).

The most serious hazard though, is not being aware of one's limitations.

The right amount and quality of experience will make you less dangerous in due course, but after those 45 hours we're just about good enough that we can reuse the plane after most landings.

That's my impression anyway.