Most unusual method of instilling knowledge
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Diego CA USA
Age: 71
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't it a WWII Boeing, (maybe the 17), that a senior test pilot buried himself on, prompting the wide intoduction of proper checklist usage?
Centaurus sent me a good PM on use in the RAAF, or rather non-use.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish
Why is that you are so utterly incapable of reading a post before responding to it?
First off, I never suggested that any of the people I know in the forces did any such thing. One of them is a US Marine and he was telling me over a beer this evening that his own training, carried out two years ago, consisted of essentially one long scream from his DIs that went on for six weeks. It is absolutely standard in the US armed forces and it is in the UK and NZ too. The only mitigation is that if you appear to know what you are doing and pay attention, you tend to get left alone more. As far as battlefield effectiveness goes, three of his DIs were decorated Gulf and Afghanistan vets with an average of four tours each. What is your combat experience exactly?
Secondly, you clearly have a marked propensity to play the man and not the ball. This could actually be an interesting discussion if you and your mate Anthill would actually address the points that I raise, as I have yours, and leave out the personal stuff. That, by the way, is why I am 99% sure the pair of you are full of it - you won't address the argument and instead go for the personal attack. Immature and extremely unprofessional.
Why is that you are so utterly incapable of reading a post before responding to it?
and if your relatives resort to brutal and aggressive training methods that explains a lot about their lack of battlefield effectiveness
Secondly, you clearly have a marked propensity to play the man and not the ball. This could actually be an interesting discussion if you and your mate Anthill would actually address the points that I raise, as I have yours, and leave out the personal stuff. That, by the way, is why I am 99% sure the pair of you are full of it - you won't address the argument and instead go for the personal attack. Immature and extremely unprofessional.
Remoak have you ever instructed anyone?
As for traininng recruits, I am aware of the US Marine efforts and their reasoning.
In Australia we do it differently and in my view produce a better product. Neither I nor my staff ever screamed at recruits let alone laid a finger on them,
When one member of a platoon failed to arrive on parade wearing his issue windproof jacket as ordered on a freezing Puckapunyal morning, I simply commented on this to my Sergeant in the hearing of recruits. My sergeant simply then ordered everyone else to take off their jackets. Message understood. It's amazing how fast collective responsibility will instill a desire to help your fellow sufferer, and one doesnt have to even raise your voice to do it.
In first appointment and officer training we went to some length to weed out the screamers, bullies and panic merchants. We gave them "leadership " exercises where they were tasked with doing something with a squad or platoon - without knowing that the platoon had been briefed to foul up and misinterpret every command and totally frustrate the candidate to see what would happen.
We sent them on long marches with the promise of a truck with food and a ride back at the end of it. The truck never arrives and we watch what happens.
They sat in ambushes all night with leeches crawling over them waiting for an "enemy" who was never going to appear.
We did, and still do, all sorts of things to instill the message of the need for obedience, shared responsibility for safety and your mates. We tested the limits of their intergrity, self control, endurance and intelligence and we didn't need to do it by screaming, threatening and bullying. We didn't want any of our students to become screamers and bullies either, partly for their own preservation.
In my own case I narrowly avoided killing someone after conducting a range practice because I stupidly allowed a defective weapon to be taken off the range without checking it. Well it didn't fire - until it did. And I will carry the memory of the CO's disproving look to my grave.
You see Remoak, most people are their own worst critics, and they don't need some idiot rapping their knuckles or shouting at them in the cockpit to understand.
As for traininng recruits, I am aware of the US Marine efforts and their reasoning.
In Australia we do it differently and in my view produce a better product. Neither I nor my staff ever screamed at recruits let alone laid a finger on them,
When one member of a platoon failed to arrive on parade wearing his issue windproof jacket as ordered on a freezing Puckapunyal morning, I simply commented on this to my Sergeant in the hearing of recruits. My sergeant simply then ordered everyone else to take off their jackets. Message understood. It's amazing how fast collective responsibility will instill a desire to help your fellow sufferer, and one doesnt have to even raise your voice to do it.
In first appointment and officer training we went to some length to weed out the screamers, bullies and panic merchants. We gave them "leadership " exercises where they were tasked with doing something with a squad or platoon - without knowing that the platoon had been briefed to foul up and misinterpret every command and totally frustrate the candidate to see what would happen.
We sent them on long marches with the promise of a truck with food and a ride back at the end of it. The truck never arrives and we watch what happens.
They sat in ambushes all night with leeches crawling over them waiting for an "enemy" who was never going to appear.
We did, and still do, all sorts of things to instill the message of the need for obedience, shared responsibility for safety and your mates. We tested the limits of their intergrity, self control, endurance and intelligence and we didn't need to do it by screaming, threatening and bullying. We didn't want any of our students to become screamers and bullies either, partly for their own preservation.
In my own case I narrowly avoided killing someone after conducting a range practice because I stupidly allowed a defective weapon to be taken off the range without checking it. Well it didn't fire - until it did. And I will carry the memory of the CO's disproving look to my grave.
You see Remoak, most people are their own worst critics, and they don't need some idiot rapping their knuckles or shouting at them in the cockpit to understand.
Last edited by Sunfish; 5th Jan 2013 at 20:29.
That said Sunfish, plenty of dead-ground counselling still occurs in the regular bns... regardless of rank. This often how senior screamers are corrected by their subordinates.
In the Army the vast majority of incidents end there. The RAAF, however, is largely rear-echelon based and most incidents do not go unpunished.
I don't condone any sort any sort of violence in the cockpit unless it's necessary to prevent the crew from becoming a smoking hole - certainly not for low risk errors in procedure. It's pointless and counter-productive in training.
I have heard stories of an instructor at Camden you uses a rolled up newspaper on ab initio students. While I found him generally brusk (but all bluster really) he never did try the newspaper trick on me. Wouldn't want to either, as he'd lose more than my business.
In the Army the vast majority of incidents end there. The RAAF, however, is largely rear-echelon based and most incidents do not go unpunished.
I don't condone any sort any sort of violence in the cockpit unless it's necessary to prevent the crew from becoming a smoking hole - certainly not for low risk errors in procedure. It's pointless and counter-productive in training.
I have heard stories of an instructor at Camden you uses a rolled up newspaper on ab initio students. While I found him generally brusk (but all bluster really) he never did try the newspaper trick on me. Wouldn't want to either, as he'd lose more than my business.
Last edited by Trojan1981; 5th Jan 2013 at 20:56.
Yup. trojan, dead ground counselling occurs and plenty of officers have been told by their Sergeants to apply for a transfer before they become a casualty. The CO has almost always been briefed by the RSM in these cases and will approve it.
The point I was trying to make to Remoak is that the screaming yelling Hoo hah is unnecessary and often counter productive if you want to produce thinking students with high lelvels of initiative and creativity - something the U.S. Marines are not known for producing (they have other virtues). Even some US Army Officers are fed up with the U.S. marine malarkey.
The point I was trying to make to Remoak is that the screaming yelling Hoo hah is unnecessary and often counter productive if you want to produce thinking students with high lelvels of initiative and creativity - something the U.S. Marines are not known for producing (they have other virtues). Even some US Army Officers are fed up with the U.S. marine malarkey.
As for the "joke" about hitting dogs and women on page one - grow up (whoever you are).
A woman a dog & a walnut tree! the more you beat them, the better they be!
]I have redde, I know not where, these verses. A woman, an asse, and a walnut tree, Bring the more fruit the more beaten they bee. (1581)
When one member of a platoon failed to arrive on parade wearing his issue windproof jacket as ordered on a freezing Puckapunyal morning, I simply commented on this to my Sergeant in the hearing of recruits. My sergeant simply then ordered everyone else to take off their jackets. Message understood.
Option 1: Tell guy he is an idiot, and to go get his jacket. Everyone is then properly dressed, guy knows he made a mistake.
Option 2: Tell guy he is an idiot, punish him with pushups or whatever, leave him without jacket. Guy hates you, and perhaps suffers physical sickness (that's why he needs a jacket after all!)
Option 3: Tell everyone on a freezing day to take off their jackets. Everyone hates you. MUCH higher chance of physical sickness (as you now have everyone without jackets). Original guy is ostracised, and perhaps personally attacked later. Group morale is shattered, officer is hated for being an idiot and several go sick. Bastardisation at its best.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish
Airline check and training for 15 years in a large (90+ hulls) airline. Have you ever instructed in the airline environment?
And if you had read what I have posted before replying you would know that I agree with you. The extreme stuff never works. The measured approach does.
Remoak have you ever instructed anyone?
The point I was trying to make to Remoak is that the screaming yelling Hoo hah is unnecessary
Last edited by remoak; 5th Jan 2013 at 23:19.
Remoak:
I wouldn't even want to be a student in an airline environment if there were screamers and prodders around.
Checkers:
You poor soul, you have entirely missed the point.
The purpose of the exercise I described is not "bastardisation" by a sadist, nor the instilling of "mindless obedience" as it perhaps is with the methods used by the U.S. Marines and least of all the attainment of any sort of sartorial parade ground splendour.
It is simply to get people to realise that their very lives will one day depend on the action, or inaction, of their fellow soldiers and we first of all must teach them to care for what happens to each other to the smallest detail before it is possible to teach them anything else.
We build situations where if one fails, then everybody fails and wears the consequences of group failure. Modern man is very attached to their individualism and independence of thought, deed and word. The approach taken at least in the ADF when I was a minor part of it, was to do the minimum necessary to instill the required group ethos for survival - "mateship", "Team spirit", call it what you will, without destroying initiative and the capacity for original thought and action.
It takes about Two weeks of the hell we created for them before even the slowest, criminal, insolent Bogan suddenly realises that all difficulties vanish overnight if they help and look out for each other. In other words, the penny drops. When our man forgets his jacket, someone reminds him. When he helps another clean his rifle, someone cleans his gear for him.
After that basic lesson is learned, it is possible to instruct in the safe handling, usage and application of weapons and high explosive without too much fear that some idiot is going to blow you and everyone else to kingdom come because they weren't listening or couldn't be bothered following instructions.
Of course there are exceptions, some of us termed them "warrior poets" or "plastic Rambos" who have a romantic idea of what they shoulld be allowed to do. They get chucked out as soon as they are detected. We had one end up naked, with a loaded rifle, crying his eyes out one night on a barracks roof before the unit doctor talked him down.
And I say again, all this can be done without screaming and bullying.
Sorry for being verbose. I havent described this to anyone ever.
P.S. Yes, they do hate you at the time, but only until the penny drops about what you are trying to teach them.
Airline check and training for 15 years in a large (90+ hulls) airline. Have you ever instructed in the airline environment?
Checkers:
Bloody stupid military!
Option 1: Tell guy he is an idiot, and to go get his jacket. Everyone is then properly dressed, guy knows he made a mistake.
Option 2: Tell guy he is an idiot, punish him with pushups or whatever, leave him without jacket. Guy hates you, and perhaps suffers physical sickness (that's why he needs a jacket after all!)
Option 3: Tell everyone on a freezing day to take off their jackets. Everyone hates you. MUCH higher chance of physical sickness (as you now have everyone without jackets). Original guy is ostracised, and perhaps personally attacked later. Group morale is shattered, officer is hated for being an idiot and several go sick. Bastardisation at its best.
Option 1: Tell guy he is an idiot, and to go get his jacket. Everyone is then properly dressed, guy knows he made a mistake.
Option 2: Tell guy he is an idiot, punish him with pushups or whatever, leave him without jacket. Guy hates you, and perhaps suffers physical sickness (that's why he needs a jacket after all!)
Option 3: Tell everyone on a freezing day to take off their jackets. Everyone hates you. MUCH higher chance of physical sickness (as you now have everyone without jackets). Original guy is ostracised, and perhaps personally attacked later. Group morale is shattered, officer is hated for being an idiot and several go sick. Bastardisation at its best.
The purpose of the exercise I described is not "bastardisation" by a sadist, nor the instilling of "mindless obedience" as it perhaps is with the methods used by the U.S. Marines and least of all the attainment of any sort of sartorial parade ground splendour.
It is simply to get people to realise that their very lives will one day depend on the action, or inaction, of their fellow soldiers and we first of all must teach them to care for what happens to each other to the smallest detail before it is possible to teach them anything else.
We build situations where if one fails, then everybody fails and wears the consequences of group failure. Modern man is very attached to their individualism and independence of thought, deed and word. The approach taken at least in the ADF when I was a minor part of it, was to do the minimum necessary to instill the required group ethos for survival - "mateship", "Team spirit", call it what you will, without destroying initiative and the capacity for original thought and action.
It takes about Two weeks of the hell we created for them before even the slowest, criminal, insolent Bogan suddenly realises that all difficulties vanish overnight if they help and look out for each other. In other words, the penny drops. When our man forgets his jacket, someone reminds him. When he helps another clean his rifle, someone cleans his gear for him.
After that basic lesson is learned, it is possible to instruct in the safe handling, usage and application of weapons and high explosive without too much fear that some idiot is going to blow you and everyone else to kingdom come because they weren't listening or couldn't be bothered following instructions.
Of course there are exceptions, some of us termed them "warrior poets" or "plastic Rambos" who have a romantic idea of what they shoulld be allowed to do. They get chucked out as soon as they are detected. We had one end up naked, with a loaded rifle, crying his eyes out one night on a barracks roof before the unit doctor talked him down.
And I say again, all this can be done without screaming and bullying.
Sorry for being verbose. I havent described this to anyone ever.
P.S. Yes, they do hate you at the time, but only until the penny drops about what you are trying to teach them.
Last edited by Sunfish; 6th Jan 2013 at 17:24.
The problem is when group punishment carries on to higher level work, and responsible adults aren't allowed to go have a quiet beer because drinking is banned because some soldier somewhere got too pissed.
Yep maybe first few weeks of rookies that's correct, but I'm a massive fan of individual responsibility and not group punishing a bunch of professional adults for one idiots action.
Yep maybe first few weeks of rookies that's correct, but I'm a massive fan of individual responsibility and not group punishing a bunch of professional adults for one idiots action.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so say the f'cking REMFs
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish
Me neither.
Now that I understand your experience level, I can see why you say the things you do. To summarise:
Airline training experience - nil
Airline experience of any sort - nil
Military combat experience - nil
Military experience of any sort - minimal (sounds like the Aussie version of Territorials).
Pilot training experience - possible but I doubt it on a PPL.
So if it's all the same to you, I'll stick with the proven methodologies of successful airlines, and the most successful military of our time. A military several orders of magnitude more capable and experienced than the ADF...
Nice chatting...
I wouldn't even want to be a student in an airline environment if there were screamers and prodders around.
Now that I understand your experience level, I can see why you say the things you do. To summarise:
Airline training experience - nil
Airline experience of any sort - nil
Military combat experience - nil
Military experience of any sort - minimal (sounds like the Aussie version of Territorials).
Pilot training experience - possible but I doubt it on a PPL.
So if it's all the same to you, I'll stick with the proven methodologies of successful airlines, and the most successful military of our time. A military several orders of magnitude more capable and experienced than the ADF...
Nice chatting...
So if it's all the same to you, I'll stick with the proven methodologies of successful airlines, and the most successful military of our time. A military several orders of magnitude more capable and experienced than the ADF..
I won't comment on the airlines' methodology as I am not, and hopefully will never be, an airline pilot. They are hardly the tip of the spear when it comes to training development as they are cost driven, reactive and work in a risk-averse, over-regulated environment. Peoples lives (particularly on the ground) rarely depend on the arrival of an airliner. Different game, different rules.
Last edited by Trojan1981; 7th Jan 2013 at 19:24.
Thank you for the vicious Ad Hominem attack Remoak, I'm sure the people you have instructed would be quite familiar with it's style.
I say again; there is no need for shouting, bullying (both physical and social), prodding and other forms of the nastiness you demonstrate in any training organisation. If I see any of it, I always move to correct it.
I say again; there is no need for shouting, bullying (both physical and social), prodding and other forms of the nastiness you demonstrate in any training organisation. If I see any of it, I always move to correct it.
Last edited by Sunfish; 7th Jan 2013 at 20:31.
So, summing up. We are all agreed that there is no place in flying training for shouting, screaming and physical abuse. However some of us believe that certain recalcitrants may need to be taken down a peg by using a bit of military-style psychology and peer pressure. In extremis, some measure of humiliation may be in order.
Others defend the softly-softly mustn't damage the poor little darlings approach. Their kids are probably the screaming, tantrum-tossing brats in the supermarket that never get proper disclpline and give the rest of us the sh!ts.
Others defend the softly-softly mustn't damage the poor little darlings approach. Their kids are probably the screaming, tantrum-tossing brats in the supermarket that never get proper disclpline and give the rest of us the sh!ts.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 8th Jan 2013 at 01:09.
Mach, I agree with you, but what I say is that it is possible to apply peer group pressure and humiliate and take recalsitrants down a peg without raising your voice much above a whisper. I agree you don't treat people like poor little fragile egos as well.
The art form is to inculcate lessons with accuracy and efficiency, and it is a delight to see it practiced properly.
The art form is to inculcate lessons with accuracy and efficiency, and it is a delight to see it practiced properly.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My only experience in military instuction was in 1981 at Pukkapunyl as an army reservist. our platoon Stg. informed us us on day 1 that bastadisation was no longer allowed and he couldn't punch us when we %^&ed up, but he sure as #$% could give us plenty of picket duty 
.
The requirements of civil aviation and military training are very different. The military trainee is molded to kill people on command and the training is designed for this. The crew of a civilian aircraft have a different mission altogether, which is the safe transportaion of pax and cargo by air. There is no logical reason that the military paradigm of trainin should extend into the civilian world.
Consider the philosophies of 20 years ago to those used now: Although most of my previous instructors were level headed individuals who instructed by way of mentoring, there were those who were yellers, screamers and hand-slappers. Of the later group, I just thought that they were bullies and prats. The gentlemen who encouraged rather then screamed provided far more input to my profession development.
Not so long ago, if a trainee failed to check out, they got some additional training and 1 more attempt. If they failed here, they washed out and were probably fired. At my present company, slow performers are given the benefit of 'trouble shooter' instructors and additional training. They also sign a training agreement by which the company agrees to provide the additional training required (which is tailored to the students needs) and the student must reach a certain skill level withing the agreeed time. The process is probably similar to the 'old days' (I wouldn't know exactly because I wasn't subject to it), but is formalised as a contract to comply with industrial law and fairness for all parties.
Regardless of whether this is 'politically correct' or not, consider the following: A trainee undergoes a upgrade (sim or line) and is allocated a screamer who trains by belittlement, aggression and physical contact (slapping). The trainees confidence is slowly eroded and fails to check out. They fail to perform in the next check and are subsequently fired. this trainee has every reason to sue for unfair dismissal: they have been subject to workplace harrassment, assualted, belittled, etc in a hostile workplace environment. No wonder they didn't complete the training to the required standard! A six figuire settlement and re-employment orders would follow!
I have not much interest in what methods the US military employs in their training as it has not much relevence in our world. US Marines are trained to kill en-mass when ordered to do so. We have a diffent mission and ethic (one would hope!). They instructional methods that my company uses stem from adult education philosophies and doctrines developed by experts in the field, such as former airline training captain and current academic researcher Dr Tim Mavin from Griffith University. Their opinions and approach hold far more relevance than those from the marine corps.
(In the interests of Political Correctness, we give recognision to the Djjarnkk people, their tribal leaders and ancestors as the traditional owners of this thread
).
.The requirements of civil aviation and military training are very different. The military trainee is molded to kill people on command and the training is designed for this. The crew of a civilian aircraft have a different mission altogether, which is the safe transportaion of pax and cargo by air. There is no logical reason that the military paradigm of trainin should extend into the civilian world.
Consider the philosophies of 20 years ago to those used now: Although most of my previous instructors were level headed individuals who instructed by way of mentoring, there were those who were yellers, screamers and hand-slappers. Of the later group, I just thought that they were bullies and prats. The gentlemen who encouraged rather then screamed provided far more input to my profession development.
Not so long ago, if a trainee failed to check out, they got some additional training and 1 more attempt. If they failed here, they washed out and were probably fired. At my present company, slow performers are given the benefit of 'trouble shooter' instructors and additional training. They also sign a training agreement by which the company agrees to provide the additional training required (which is tailored to the students needs) and the student must reach a certain skill level withing the agreeed time. The process is probably similar to the 'old days' (I wouldn't know exactly because I wasn't subject to it), but is formalised as a contract to comply with industrial law and fairness for all parties.
Regardless of whether this is 'politically correct' or not, consider the following: A trainee undergoes a upgrade (sim or line) and is allocated a screamer who trains by belittlement, aggression and physical contact (slapping). The trainees confidence is slowly eroded and fails to check out. They fail to perform in the next check and are subsequently fired. this trainee has every reason to sue for unfair dismissal: they have been subject to workplace harrassment, assualted, belittled, etc in a hostile workplace environment. No wonder they didn't complete the training to the required standard! A six figuire settlement and re-employment orders would follow!
I have not much interest in what methods the US military employs in their training as it has not much relevence in our world. US Marines are trained to kill en-mass when ordered to do so. We have a diffent mission and ethic (one would hope!). They instructional methods that my company uses stem from adult education philosophies and doctrines developed by experts in the field, such as former airline training captain and current academic researcher Dr Tim Mavin from Griffith University. Their opinions and approach hold far more relevance than those from the marine corps.
(In the interests of Political Correctness, we give recognision to the Djjarnkk people, their tribal leaders and ancestors as the traditional owners of this thread
).
When I was learning to fly 50 years ago, most flying school instructors were ex-military.
One of these gave me a lesson that I will never forget. I had come back from an early solo session and in my euphoria had forgotten to switch off the magnetoes. We did not use checklists in bugsmashers back then. As luck would have it, the CFI (who was the full RAAF Monty right down to his handlebar moustache) was next to take over the aeroplane.
He stormed back in to the office and very publicly tore me a new rectum. He did not shout, but made sure that everyone in the room could hear him. Including the office chick that I was so desperate to impress.
Words to the effect that if I EVER, EVER left the switches on again he would personally go to the ends of the earth to terminate my flying ambitions by not only banning me from his school, but by passing the word around that I was a dangerous moron who should not be taught to fly for my sake and for protection of society as a whole. To a sprog 17 year-old, that was SO humiliating. My initial thought was that I would take my business elsewhere, where they had younger instructors who were not ex-military. I am glad that I came to my senses and stayed where I was, because this same guy gave me some of the best instruction that I have ever received; delivered firmly, sometimes with gentle sarcasm, but with wonderful humour.
And - I have NEVER fogotten the ignition switches EVER in any aeroplane since. Even when I fly turbines, I still check that the manual ignition is off at shutdown.
One of these gave me a lesson that I will never forget. I had come back from an early solo session and in my euphoria had forgotten to switch off the magnetoes. We did not use checklists in bugsmashers back then. As luck would have it, the CFI (who was the full RAAF Monty right down to his handlebar moustache) was next to take over the aeroplane.
He stormed back in to the office and very publicly tore me a new rectum. He did not shout, but made sure that everyone in the room could hear him. Including the office chick that I was so desperate to impress.
Words to the effect that if I EVER, EVER left the switches on again he would personally go to the ends of the earth to terminate my flying ambitions by not only banning me from his school, but by passing the word around that I was a dangerous moron who should not be taught to fly for my sake and for protection of society as a whole. To a sprog 17 year-old, that was SO humiliating. My initial thought was that I would take my business elsewhere, where they had younger instructors who were not ex-military. I am glad that I came to my senses and stayed where I was, because this same guy gave me some of the best instruction that I have ever received; delivered firmly, sometimes with gentle sarcasm, but with wonderful humour.
And - I have NEVER fogotten the ignition switches EVER in any aeroplane since. Even when I fly turbines, I still check that the manual ignition is off at shutdown.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 8th Jan 2013 at 01:12.