Hung Parliament - lost opportunity for reform?
Thread Starter
Pilots need healthy egos to fly. They need confidence in their ability to master any situation, not breakdown and cry.
The common factor with pilots, surgeons, barristers and actors is that once they start an operation/flight/court performance they must go on to the end and finish it. This requires a certain level of confidence in ones own abilities - also called ego. Members of these groups cannot be tentative about the actions they take, they cannot suddenly say "hold everything! I need to study this situation! Excuse me while I take myself off and do some research". You have to perform with what you know and the skills you have available at the time. There is no one else who can do it for you as you realize a microsecond after you. lift off on your joyous first solo. It is also a solitary profession compared to say accounting.
As another Pprune poster wrote years ago somewhere, pilots are not comfortable with ambiguity, nor long winded decision making processes, they want an answer right now and if they disagree with the answer then they say so.
They don't beat around the bush because doing so with an aircraft will kill you. Thus they are not the logical folk to build an Association which must of necessity deal with Government ambiguity, long winded decision making, people perhaps playing fast and loose with the truth as part of political processes and all the other institutional touchy feely stuff.
This is not a criticism of pilots merely an observation that as a group we don't do the cooperation thing too well (perhaps it's just a male thing? ladies seem to work together very well
)
This is not to say that pilots are loud mouthed egomaniacs, merely that a healthy ego is necessary for safe operation of an aircraft. A certain book about an A380 incident illustrates what I mean.
Looklefts comments demonstrate where excessive ego leads - to destructive name calling.
The common factor with pilots, surgeons, barristers and actors is that once they start an operation/flight/court performance they must go on to the end and finish it. This requires a certain level of confidence in ones own abilities - also called ego. Members of these groups cannot be tentative about the actions they take, they cannot suddenly say "hold everything! I need to study this situation! Excuse me while I take myself off and do some research". You have to perform with what you know and the skills you have available at the time. There is no one else who can do it for you as you realize a microsecond after you. lift off on your joyous first solo. It is also a solitary profession compared to say accounting.
As another Pprune poster wrote years ago somewhere, pilots are not comfortable with ambiguity, nor long winded decision making processes, they want an answer right now and if they disagree with the answer then they say so.
They don't beat around the bush because doing so with an aircraft will kill you. Thus they are not the logical folk to build an Association which must of necessity deal with Government ambiguity, long winded decision making, people perhaps playing fast and loose with the truth as part of political processes and all the other institutional touchy feely stuff.
This is not a criticism of pilots merely an observation that as a group we don't do the cooperation thing too well (perhaps it's just a male thing? ladies seem to work together very well
)This is not to say that pilots are loud mouthed egomaniacs, merely that a healthy ego is necessary for safe operation of an aircraft. A certain book about an A380 incident illustrates what I mean.
Looklefts comments demonstrate where excessive ego leads - to destructive name calling.
Sunfish I didn't realise that as part of your amazing skill set that you were also a pseudo psychologist! There is a big difference in confidence in one's ability to ego driving your decision making.
As for the name calling, you have a very limited attention span otherwise how could you have already forgotten this:
As for the name calling, you have a very limited attention span otherwise how could you have already forgotten this:
lookleft = pollyanna
Well I'm stuffed - those very successful female pilots who can also work together, how do they deal with emergencies when their massive pilot ego doesn't come on line? I'm sure you can elaborate, Sunfish.
The pilot with the big ego is the one to avoid flying with, not to put up as typical of the profession! Although I'm sounding a bit flippant here, this bit is dead set truth. Ego is the root of press-on-it is and the 'don't tell me about the rules, they're for average pilots, not me' attitude which has killed a lot of our forebears and peers and will continue to do so.
Barristers and surgeons, though - what about plumbers? There's no room for the faint hearted in that line when they get half way through unblocking the dunny - they need the drive to carry on through adversity, and once committed to a course of action better not stop!
The pilot with the big ego is the one to avoid flying with, not to put up as typical of the profession! Although I'm sounding a bit flippant here, this bit is dead set truth. Ego is the root of press-on-it is and the 'don't tell me about the rules, they're for average pilots, not me' attitude which has killed a lot of our forebears and peers and will continue to do so.
Barristers and surgeons, though - what about plumbers? There's no room for the faint hearted in that line when they get half way through unblocking the dunny - they need the drive to carry on through adversity, and once committed to a course of action better not stop!
Thread Starter
Aaaah! But plumbers work by very simple rules! Sh*t flows downhill, don't chew your fingernails and Thursday is payday. Doctors bury their mistakes and barristers oopsies go to jail. Pilots on the other hand have their mistakes splattered over the front page.
I agree about egomaniacs however my reading of Pprune suggests they may be commoner to the pilot community then, say, among accountants and auditors.
An example drawn from a current thread elsewhere on this page:
You can find similar storms in a teacup littering Pprune without even looking very hard.
Lookleft is a perfect example. He simply sprays at anything he doesn't like the look of without a constructive comment.
I agree about egomaniacs however my reading of Pprune suggests they may be commoner to the pilot community then, say, among accountants and auditors.
An example drawn from a current thread elsewhere on this page:
There has been a change of management at BRS a Greedy Self-elected Dictatorial Board of two ******* and ****** and anyone that dares to have a different opinion to theirs is targeted.
Some Aero Club members that are also Airport owners have exercised their right to free speech that was not in line with ******* and ******* views as a result not only have the Aero Club members that are also Airport owners been targeted so has the Aero club.
Some Aero Club members that are also Airport owners have exercised their right to free speech that was not in line with ******* and ******* views as a result not only have the Aero Club members that are also Airport owners been targeted so has the Aero club.
Lookleft is a perfect example. He simply sprays at anything he doesn't like the look of without a constructive comment.
AOTW I defer to your powers of observation and your correct assessment of Sunfish:
Exhibit A:
I've been accused of being like Pollyanna by Sunfish too, Lookleft, whose operating method is basically to state his own case as if it's unassailable fact and then use put-downs in practically all further 'discussion'.
Exhibit A:
Lookleft is a perfect example. He simply sprays at anything he doesn't like the look of without a constructive comment.
Thread Starter
Q: How do you know if someone at a party is a pilot?
A: he'll tell you!
Old joke, says it all really..........l
I love it when the injured innocents here say pilots don't have big egos. Ask members of the general community, not your colleagues.
But back on track, lookleft and perhaps AOTW demonstrate the lack of any constructive attitude to the question of GA and a complete refusal to think outside the square when it comes to gaining recognition of GA's plight.
it may have escaped your attention that it has been reported that Melbournes population is going to double by 2050. What hope for YMMB, YPCK and YMEN without an effective GA lobby???????
A: he'll tell you!
Old joke, says it all really..........l
I love it when the injured innocents here say pilots don't have big egos. Ask members of the general community, not your colleagues.
But back on track, lookleft and perhaps AOTW demonstrate the lack of any constructive attitude to the question of GA and a complete refusal to think outside the square when it comes to gaining recognition of GA's plight.
it may have escaped your attention that it has been reported that Melbournes population is going to double by 2050. What hope for YMMB, YPCK and YMEN without an effective GA lobby???????
Its a joke usually told by pilots Sunfish so don't go congratulating(or is that soemthing else ending in ..ating?) yourself on your wit.
This is classic
By your own admission you considered your hair brained scheme to be dishonest and it was always based on a "negative" campaign. Where is the constructive attitude to the question of GA?
Once again your own words condemn you as a fraud because you consider GA industry groups to be nothing more than warring factions full of egotistic pilots. What you proposed consists of some nebulus group starting a whispering campaign about incumbent MPs supposedly orchestrated by King Sunfish to advance the cause of GA? Just remember this is a forum for Professional Pilots Sunfish, although there is a Wannabe section that you might like to check out. Of course you can always start your own BB titled "Dishonest Consultants".
This is classic
demonstrate the lack of any constructive attitude to the question of GA and a complete refusal to think outside the square when it comes to gaining recognition of GA's plight.
What hope for YMMB, YPCK and YMEN without an effective GA lobby???????
via rutan around #52:
Flying Binghi & Lookleft,
Your political views make you sound insane.
Flying Binghi & Lookleft,
Your political views make you sound insane.
.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Binghi,
I would probably have been more accurate to make the reference to your scientific views re climate change science. I hope I'm not wrong in assuming you trust scientists in other fields such as medicine , engineering , chemistry , metallurgy etc etc. Over time all these sciences continually refine their procedures and expand their knowledge. If you go to a doctor , fly a plane, take medication or cross a bridge you believe the science is essentially correct even though it has evolved over the years. Yet when climate scientists refine their methods to give an ever more accurate picture of what is happening to our climate you choose to reject everything they do. I find this non acceptance of science in one field but embracing it in others very strange indeed.
What part of my political views. Please explain..
Thread Starter
Once again, Lookleft demonstrates the negative, egotistical, pilot mindset that has destroyed any hope of building a reform organization as demonstrated by his continuous Ad Hominem attacks on me.
He either doesn't understand or doesn't like negative political campaigning so he goes hammer and tongs at someone who suggests it, thus providing a perfect example of the divisive and unconstructive behavior that has destroyed. the hopes of many for CASA reform over at least fifteen years.
For the record Looky, negative campaigning is a recognized political technique that has been around for decades. It is highly effective since people remember negative information better than positives according to some researchers. It is a dangerous tool if used badly because it can backfire.
Australian negative campaigns that were devastatingly effective were "36 faceless men" - used by Menzies to destroy Calwells campaign in 1963.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faceless_men
Then of course there was Labors "whinging Wendy" in the 1987 campaign.
Then of course there is "Pauline Pantsdown" who may make a return this year and who can forget the Bob Ellis campaign against Bronwyn Bishop?
We have had at least 15 years of arguing sweet reason with CASA to no effect. There has been review after review highlighting CASA failure, the latest being the unimplemented Forsyth review which famously found that no one trusts CASA.
Surely we are entitled to conclude that CASA is not going to willingly reform itself?
If CASA will not willingly reform, then our politicians in government are the next legal entity that can implement CASA reform.
To date politicians have demonstrated no stomach for CASA reform.
It is thus open to us, since politicians number one concern is to be re elected, to legally threaten their career prospects.
As I said, fifteen years of carrot, time for the negative campaign stick - starting with highlighting how politicians talk about waste, yet let CASA blow half a billion in taxpayers money.
He either doesn't understand or doesn't like negative political campaigning so he goes hammer and tongs at someone who suggests it, thus providing a perfect example of the divisive and unconstructive behavior that has destroyed. the hopes of many for CASA reform over at least fifteen years.
For the record Looky, negative campaigning is a recognized political technique that has been around for decades. It is highly effective since people remember negative information better than positives according to some researchers. It is a dangerous tool if used badly because it can backfire.
Australian negative campaigns that were devastatingly effective were "36 faceless men" - used by Menzies to destroy Calwells campaign in 1963.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faceless_men
Then of course there was Labors "whinging Wendy" in the 1987 campaign.
Then of course there is "Pauline Pantsdown" who may make a return this year and who can forget the Bob Ellis campaign against Bronwyn Bishop?
We have had at least 15 years of arguing sweet reason with CASA to no effect. There has been review after review highlighting CASA failure, the latest being the unimplemented Forsyth review which famously found that no one trusts CASA.
Surely we are entitled to conclude that CASA is not going to willingly reform itself?
If CASA will not willingly reform, then our politicians in government are the next legal entity that can implement CASA reform.
To date politicians have demonstrated no stomach for CASA reform.
It is thus open to us, since politicians number one concern is to be re elected, to legally threaten their career prospects.
As I said, fifteen years of carrot, time for the negative campaign stick - starting with highlighting how politicians talk about waste, yet let CASA blow half a billion in taxpayers money.
I'm sorry Sunfish, I thought that you wanted to be taken seriously with your campaign for a "negative" campaign to get the population to rise up against the evil CASA. Now I can see you were just having a laugh,
because no one who uses a political campaign from the time of Calwell and Menzies can expect to be taken seriously in anything they say. First it was your faith in the young folk of PM&C who were going to fix things but who were in fact hiding under the table from their Chief of Staff. Now its using the Reds under the Beds slogan of Menzies. You do know that most readers of this would not have a clue who Arthur Calwell is.
Who is the "us" in the above statement? It can't be you because to date you actually haven't demonstrated a single action that would put your fantasy into practice.
Then your hypocrisy rises to the fore when you state that I continue to attack you, yet your initial statement is:
Is hardly an example of bon homme is it Sunfish. You claim to be a pilot so the egotisitical pilot mindset must exist in your befuddled brain.
Personally I put more faith in the industry groups in achieving reform than your political masterstroke that goes back 53 years! But once again because you once tried to run an industry group and failed....... you think that all of them are never going to work.
Give up while you can Sunfish because the more you type the more stupid you look, but I know that your ego will not let anyone have the last word. BTW the Libs won this election without a hung Parliament, despite Labor using the negative campaign technique you are so fond of.
because no one who uses a political campaign from the time of Calwell and Menzies can expect to be taken seriously in anything they say. First it was your faith in the young folk of PM&C who were going to fix things but who were in fact hiding under the table from their Chief of Staff. Now its using the Reds under the Beds slogan of Menzies. You do know that most readers of this would not have a clue who Arthur Calwell is.
It is thus open to us, since politicians number one concern is to be re elected, to legally threaten their career prospects.
Then your hypocrisy rises to the fore when you state that I continue to attack you, yet your initial statement is:
Once again, Lookleft demonstrates the negative, egotistical, pilot mindset that has destroyed any hope of building a reform organization as demonstrated by his continuous Ad Hominem attacks on me.
Personally I put more faith in the industry groups in achieving reform than your political masterstroke that goes back 53 years! But once again because you once tried to run an industry group and failed....... you think that all of them are never going to work.
Give up while you can Sunfish because the more you type the more stupid you look, but I know that your ego will not let anyone have the last word. BTW the Libs won this election without a hung Parliament, despite Labor using the negative campaign technique you are so fond of.
Thread Starter
lookleft, "The industry groups" that exist have failed and continue to fail. They have had 15 years to gain traction and they have been utterly unsuccessful. They all seem to implode due to the aforesaid pilot ego problem or lately, they get bought off by CASA with the prospect of an authorization from CASA to administer the very rules that destroy their membership in return for a stable cash flow extorted from the same members.
Answer me this; after 15 years, aren't we entitled to conclude that the "sweet reason" approach as implemented by the associations is an abject failure?
If the answer is "yes" then it is time to pressure CASA's masters - our elected representatives no less, for change.
You still deliberately fail to understand the concept of negative campaigning - it's not about pilots voting out incumbents, it's convincing the wider electorate to do it for us. It's called "leverage".
Oh! And P.S. look at the antics of some of the pr!cks you are defending: https://jade.io/article/422184
Answer me this; after 15 years, aren't we entitled to conclude that the "sweet reason" approach as implemented by the associations is an abject failure?
If the answer is "yes" then it is time to pressure CASA's masters - our elected representatives no less, for change.
You still deliberately fail to understand the concept of negative campaigning - it's not about pilots voting out incumbents, it's convincing the wider electorate to do it for us. It's called "leverage".
Oh! And P.S. look at the antics of some of the pr!cks you are defending: https://jade.io/article/422184
Give up while you can Sunfish because the more you type the more stupid you look, but I know that your ego will not let anyone have the last word. BTW the Libs won this election without a hung Parliament, despite Labor using the negative campaign technique you are so fond of.
Answer me this; after 15 years, aren't we entitled to conclude that the "sweet reason" approach as implemented by the associations is an abject failure?
) doesn't mean others can't. Of course you could just be one of those people that thinks if you fail once then don't bother ever trying again.
You still deliberately fail to understand the concept of negative campaigning - it's not about pilots voting out incumbents, it's convincing the wider electorate to do it for us. It's called "leverage".
state his own case as if it's unassailable fact and then use put-downs in practically all further 'discussion'.
demonstrate where excessive ego leads - to destructive name calling.
via rutan around:
I would probably have been more accurate to make the reference to your scientific views re climate change science. I hope I'm not wrong in assuming you trust scientists in other fields such as medicine , engineering , chemistry , metallurgy etc etc. Over time all these sciences continually refine their procedures and expand their knowledge. If you go to a doctor , fly a plane, take medication or cross a bridge you believe the science is essentially correct even though it has evolved over the years. Yet when climate scientists refine their methods to give an ever more accurate picture of what is happening to our climate you choose to reject everything they do. I find this non acceptance of science in one field but embracing it in others very strange indeed.
I would probably have been more accurate to make the reference to your scientific views re climate change science. I hope I'm not wrong in assuming you trust scientists in other fields such as medicine , engineering , chemistry , metallurgy etc etc. Over time all these sciences continually refine their procedures and expand their knowledge. If you go to a doctor , fly a plane, take medication or cross a bridge you believe the science is essentially correct even though it has evolved over the years. Yet when climate scientists refine their methods to give an ever more accurate picture of what is happening to our climate you choose to reject everything they do. I find this non acceptance of science in one field but embracing it in others very strange indeed.
85% clinical medical research is false, or not useful, not worth the money ? government funded waste « JoNova
And from one of our agenda driven (i.e., NOT research driven) university's comes this directive:
"...Taking a plane from Sydney to Bali, for example, has almost the same carbon footprint as a typical year’s worth of driving..."
Five ways to reduce your eco-footprint this Christmas - IMPACT @ Griffith Sciences
Ultimately the corruption of the global warming hysteria is out to destroy aviation... except for the aircraft required for conveying the wealthy like Dick Smith
and a few 'select' politicians..
rutan around, as just a dumb old barely literate hill farmer I've been amazed, incredibly amazed actually, just how easy it is to demolish the arguments of our so-called scientists. If you search my old posts here you'll find where I covered my run-ins with Blair Trewin over at the weather zone forum. I've de-bunked him several times and he is supposedly one of Oz's chief climate researchers. blair trewin - - Search - Bureau of Meteorology
The last forum 'discussion' I had with Trewin he basically comments that having many of Australia's temperature stations located at airports makes no difference to the temperature record. Me as a pilot, and having spent many a night seeing the heat signature of airports in a FLIR camera, has the practical experience to de-bunk the Trewin nonsense. The Weather Zone forum seeing the looming Trewin fiasco banned me before I could totally debunk their forum poster boy..
.
