Open Question to 10540 - what's wrong with WW2 pilot training?!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kent UK
Age: 70
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Open Question to 10540 - what's wrong with WW2 pilot training?!
I was just curious. I notice in some of your replies to posters that you appear to condemn the existing syllabus as outdated and that the navigation syllabus, in particular, should be re-thought, in order to embrace new technology.
I'm curious because I'm on a mission to learn to fly like the WW2 guys did! (Within my own limited means.) I want to finish my PPL on tailwheel, I want to get IMC and Night and do aerobatics, and I want to navigate by map, compass and CRP. Apart from the fact that I love engaging with history when I do these things, it didn't seem to do them any harm!
Kev.
I'm curious because I'm on a mission to learn to fly like the WW2 guys did! (Within my own limited means.) I want to finish my PPL on tailwheel, I want to get IMC and Night and do aerobatics, and I want to navigate by map, compass and CRP. Apart from the fact that I love engaging with history when I do these things, it didn't seem to do them any harm!
Kev.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure, Kev, whether you are serious or whether this is a wind-up.
If you want to learn to fly like they did in WW2, I am sure you can. You go down to Transair and get yourself an "authentic" leather cap and "authentic" goggles (or "authentic" sunglasses), a £500 "authentic" leather jacket, a real WW2-RAF-issued watch (plenty of them for sale, not cheap though as they tend to be collectors items). Then turn up at a school that does taildragger training. I don't know of any from experience because I didn't do that but there are plenty in the USA that specialise in this field.
"it didn't seem to do them any harm"
Apart from the WW2 pilots being a bunch of eager to learn (mostly) teenagers (whereas today's average newcomer is in his 40s/50s), and WW2 pilots having had 1 or 2 orders of magnitude more currency than today's average PPL, and nobody expecting them all to necessarily come back from their unplanned qualifying cross country flight at 20,000ft over France on oxygen and with a few aeros thrown in, and there being no controlled airspace back then, and GA having been grounded through WW2 anyway, and no reports/prosecutions for flying at 200ft following a river, and the fact that a lot of them couldn't find their own airfield anyway, with most bombers being unable to find a foreign city never mind drop a bomb on it (until the pathfinder squadrons came along) etc, etc, I agree with you completely.
Times have moved on. Today, any punter with the IQ to pass the PPL exams, learn to fly, and the budget to do any flying afterwards, cringes at the antiquated methods being taught. Most won't tough the decrepit PPL scene with a bargepole. Only the most hardened anoraks and the most keen to fly remain in the system, and most of them drop out within a year if not immediately they have the PPL. Curiously, when somebody ends up overhead some big concrete place with two big parallel runways, with a lot of 747s waiting to depart, the CAA prosecutor won't have much of a problem with it...
If you want to learn to fly like they did in WW2, I am sure you can. You go down to Transair and get yourself an "authentic" leather cap and "authentic" goggles (or "authentic" sunglasses), a £500 "authentic" leather jacket, a real WW2-RAF-issued watch (plenty of them for sale, not cheap though as they tend to be collectors items). Then turn up at a school that does taildragger training. I don't know of any from experience because I didn't do that but there are plenty in the USA that specialise in this field.
"it didn't seem to do them any harm"
Apart from the WW2 pilots being a bunch of eager to learn (mostly) teenagers (whereas today's average newcomer is in his 40s/50s), and WW2 pilots having had 1 or 2 orders of magnitude more currency than today's average PPL, and nobody expecting them all to necessarily come back from their unplanned qualifying cross country flight at 20,000ft over France on oxygen and with a few aeros thrown in, and there being no controlled airspace back then, and GA having been grounded through WW2 anyway, and no reports/prosecutions for flying at 200ft following a river, and the fact that a lot of them couldn't find their own airfield anyway, with most bombers being unable to find a foreign city never mind drop a bomb on it (until the pathfinder squadrons came along) etc, etc, I agree with you completely.
Times have moved on. Today, any punter with the IQ to pass the PPL exams, learn to fly, and the budget to do any flying afterwards, cringes at the antiquated methods being taught. Most won't tough the decrepit PPL scene with a bargepole. Only the most hardened anoraks and the most keen to fly remain in the system, and most of them drop out within a year if not immediately they have the PPL. Curiously, when somebody ends up overhead some big concrete place with two big parallel runways, with a lot of 747s waiting to depart, the CAA prosecutor won't have much of a problem with it...
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Times have moved on. Today, any punter with the IQ to pass the PPL exams, learn to fly, and the budget to do any flying afterwards, cringes at the antiquated methods being taught. Most won't tough the decrepit PPL scene with a bargepole. Only the most hardened anoraks and the most keen to fly remain in the system, and most of them drop out within a year if not immediately they have the PPL.
It has nothing to do with 'decrepit PPL scene' (or wearing of anoraks, which is the preserve of spotters), and everything to do with having a burning desire to fly.
I applaud kevmusic's desire to fly tailwheel aeroplanes, aeros, and become competent at VFR nav - he will be an excellent stick & rudder pilot as a result, will really understand his aeroplane, and will get a fantasic amount of enjoyment from his flying - so much more than the '£200 cup of coffee' club hire guy who will almost certainly drop out.
None of this will prevent him (indeed it will be the best foundation) from using aids like GPS from day one, and flying high performance aeroplanes in instrument conditions later - if that's what he wants to do.
SSD
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't particularly disagree with you, SSD.
It depends on your terms of reference: do you want to look at this from the individual's perspective, or from the perspective of wanting to secure GA's future in the UK/Europe and perhaps even advance it a bit.
My "effort" here is in the latter department.
Anybody can do the former. Let's face it, plenty of people rebuild old steam engines for example, but I don't think that maintenance of the traditionalist position will keep GA alive.
Most people that do a PPL are doing it as some sort of personal challenge, and they drop out when they are done. This happens in the UK, in the USA, everywhere, and nothing can be done about that. Perhaps 75% ?
It's the attrition rate in the remainder that will determine whether GA will prosper, or whether it will disappear up its own back orifice, with noncommercial airfields closing down because they can't make ends meet through landing fees and fuel sales.
The individual perspective is quite simple. Learn to fly, get yourself access to a plane, find yourself a nice freehold farm strip to keep it (that's probably by far the hardest bit), and you are sorted out for the rest of your life.... well until you fail your medical. You can safely ignore what happens in the rest of the country.
The traditionalist position would have been OK 30+ years ago, but society has changed. Expectations are a lot higher now, and not so many people want to play this game with leather caps and goggles, and any remotely educated newcomer just cringes at things like the slide rule. Sure you can get people to play along but their numbers won't be enough for GA to survive. I don't think most UK pilots realise just how desolate the GA scene is outside the UK...
It depends on your terms of reference: do you want to look at this from the individual's perspective, or from the perspective of wanting to secure GA's future in the UK/Europe and perhaps even advance it a bit.
My "effort" here is in the latter department.
Anybody can do the former. Let's face it, plenty of people rebuild old steam engines for example, but I don't think that maintenance of the traditionalist position will keep GA alive.
Most people that do a PPL are doing it as some sort of personal challenge, and they drop out when they are done. This happens in the UK, in the USA, everywhere, and nothing can be done about that. Perhaps 75% ?
It's the attrition rate in the remainder that will determine whether GA will prosper, or whether it will disappear up its own back orifice, with noncommercial airfields closing down because they can't make ends meet through landing fees and fuel sales.
The individual perspective is quite simple. Learn to fly, get yourself access to a plane, find yourself a nice freehold farm strip to keep it (that's probably by far the hardest bit), and you are sorted out for the rest of your life.... well until you fail your medical. You can safely ignore what happens in the rest of the country.
The traditionalist position would have been OK 30+ years ago, but society has changed. Expectations are a lot higher now, and not so many people want to play this game with leather caps and goggles, and any remotely educated newcomer just cringes at things like the slide rule. Sure you can get people to play along but their numbers won't be enough for GA to survive. I don't think most UK pilots realise just how desolate the GA scene is outside the UK...
Blah Blah Blah
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 49
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
Your response seemed a little harsh. A lot of those pilots in the war probably wanted to fly but didn't really fancy the idea of being blown out of the sky, so I would imagine their nerves were a little edgey.
As for not expecting to come back from the xcountry 20,000ft over France qualifier....don't forget what other nation was probably carrying out the same sort of training in the area plus the amount of German fighter patrols buzzing about. I would imagine a fair few got blown out the sky during training.
As for the Nav skills...compare technology and knowledge from today back to then, and then tell me you could a better job with the same training they had.
Don't get me wrong I am not having a pop at you, I just think you went a bit far with rippng it out of the WW2 pilots.
Your response seemed a little harsh. A lot of those pilots in the war probably wanted to fly but didn't really fancy the idea of being blown out of the sky, so I would imagine their nerves were a little edgey.
As for not expecting to come back from the xcountry 20,000ft over France qualifier....don't forget what other nation was probably carrying out the same sort of training in the area plus the amount of German fighter patrols buzzing about. I would imagine a fair few got blown out the sky during training.
As for the Nav skills...compare technology and knowledge from today back to then, and then tell me you could a better job with the same training they had.
Don't get me wrong I am not having a pop at you, I just think you went a bit far with rippng it out of the WW2 pilots.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might indeed be a wind up, but then you do set yourself up for it IO540 
A lot of what you say makes sense, but you only ever seem to see it from your perspective. You obviously have the money and the inclination to want the best and most modern toys along with all the gadgets, and that's just fine. I expect you drive an equally advanced and flashy car and pour scourn on those who drive old bangers about. The point is that virtually everybody has a completely different way of looking at life. Some fly old stuff and practice old style nav because they want to, some because that's all they can afford, so what? To say that anything other than modern aircraft, the use of gps ect ect will bring about the demise of GA is utter ballderdash! I fly a slow old open cockpit taildragger, and I love it! I'd certainly love to fly somthing sleek and modern, but I can't afford it. Maybe one day I will, but in the meantime I'll just pull my old girl out on a still evening and flutter around for half an hour for the pure joy. True, I'm not putting much back, I pay few fee's so I guess I'll not keep GA alive for long. However, I'm still here and like many others I add my voice to lobbying. I haven't given up like many who could afford to keep going but haven't for one reason or another, so I consider myself an equal to you and any other PPL. I assume that expensive toys aside you love above all to fly? If you suddenly came on hard times would your thoughts change or would you drop it all rather than go "traditional"?
There is nothing wrong with your style of aviating, and there is nothing wrong with mine. Let's just get on with the business of enjoying the skys and forget this "my method of nav is better than yours" or "GRP,GPS,IR yadda yadda yadda, is the future whereas wood and fabric, CRP and VFR are not" rubbish ... and just fly!!!
What a brilliant week! Clear skies and happy flying to all, enjoy it while you can!!!
SS
A lot of what you say makes sense, but you only ever seem to see it from your perspective. You obviously have the money and the inclination to want the best and most modern toys along with all the gadgets, and that's just fine. I expect you drive an equally advanced and flashy car and pour scourn on those who drive old bangers about. The point is that virtually everybody has a completely different way of looking at life. Some fly old stuff and practice old style nav because they want to, some because that's all they can afford, so what? To say that anything other than modern aircraft, the use of gps ect ect will bring about the demise of GA is utter ballderdash! I fly a slow old open cockpit taildragger, and I love it! I'd certainly love to fly somthing sleek and modern, but I can't afford it. Maybe one day I will, but in the meantime I'll just pull my old girl out on a still evening and flutter around for half an hour for the pure joy. True, I'm not putting much back, I pay few fee's so I guess I'll not keep GA alive for long. However, I'm still here and like many others I add my voice to lobbying. I haven't given up like many who could afford to keep going but haven't for one reason or another, so I consider myself an equal to you and any other PPL. I assume that expensive toys aside you love above all to fly? If you suddenly came on hard times would your thoughts change or would you drop it all rather than go "traditional"?
There is nothing wrong with your style of aviating, and there is nothing wrong with mine. Let's just get on with the business of enjoying the skys and forget this "my method of nav is better than yours" or "GRP,GPS,IR yadda yadda yadda, is the future whereas wood and fabric, CRP and VFR are not" rubbish ... and just fly!!!
What a brilliant week! Clear skies and happy flying to all, enjoy it while you can!!!
SS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kent UK
Age: 70
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your reply, 10540, and the rest of you guys. The question was definitely no wind-up!
If you want to learn to fly like they did in WW2, I am sure you can. You go down to Transair and get yourself an "authentic" leather cap and "authentic" goggles (or "authentic" sunglasses), a £500 "authentic" leather jacket, a real WW2-RAF-issued watch (plenty of them for sale, not cheap though as they tend to be collectors items). Then turn up at a school that does taildragger training. I don't know of any from experience because I didn't do that but there are plenty in the USA that specialise in this field.
"it didn't seem to do them any harm"
Apart from the WW2 pilots being a bunch of eager to learn (mostly) teenagers (whereas today's average newcomer is in his 40s/50s), and WW2 pilots having had 1 or 2 orders of magnitude more currency than today's average PPL, and nobody expecting them all to necessarily come back from their unplanned qualifying cross country flight at 20,000ft over France on oxygen and with a few aeros thrown in, and there being no controlled airspace back then, and GA having been grounded through WW2 anyway, and no reports/prosecutions for flying at 200ft following a river, and the fact that a lot of them couldn't find their own airfield anyway, with most bombers being unable to find a foreign city never mind drop a bomb on it (until the pathfinder squadrons came along) etc, etc, I agree with you completely.
But aren't we going a little too far here? I don't really want to tangle it with the dastardly Hun 20'000 ft over France, nor do I want to fly to a foreign city at night in IMC (not yet, anyway!) And I don't need to dress like Village People to drive the thirty minutes to Headcorn for my tailwheel lessons!
Your point about the future of GA is valid, I agree. I am passionate about the healthy future of GA in this country but surely it is not exclusive to the concept of seat-of-the-pants-type flying?
Kev.
If you want to learn to fly like they did in WW2, I am sure you can. You go down to Transair and get yourself an "authentic" leather cap and "authentic" goggles (or "authentic" sunglasses), a £500 "authentic" leather jacket, a real WW2-RAF-issued watch (plenty of them for sale, not cheap though as they tend to be collectors items). Then turn up at a school that does taildragger training. I don't know of any from experience because I didn't do that but there are plenty in the USA that specialise in this field.
"it didn't seem to do them any harm"
Apart from the WW2 pilots being a bunch of eager to learn (mostly) teenagers (whereas today's average newcomer is in his 40s/50s), and WW2 pilots having had 1 or 2 orders of magnitude more currency than today's average PPL, and nobody expecting them all to necessarily come back from their unplanned qualifying cross country flight at 20,000ft over France on oxygen and with a few aeros thrown in, and there being no controlled airspace back then, and GA having been grounded through WW2 anyway, and no reports/prosecutions for flying at 200ft following a river, and the fact that a lot of them couldn't find their own airfield anyway, with most bombers being unable to find a foreign city never mind drop a bomb on it (until the pathfinder squadrons came along) etc, etc, I agree with you completely.
) And I don't need to dress like Village People to drive the thirty minutes to Headcorn for my tailwheel lessons!Your point about the future of GA is valid, I agree. I am passionate about the healthy future of GA in this country but surely it is not exclusive to the concept of seat-of-the-pants-type flying?
Kev.
Last edited by kevmusic; 4th Nov 2006 at 15:10. Reason: typo
Guest
Posts: n/a
Kevmusic,
Doesn't read as a wind-up. There are many pilots who agree with you. LCD displays and lots of buttons have their place, but it is a uniquely satisfying experience feeling confident enough to rely on your discipline and nouse with little to assist you other than a line on the chart, a watch, an altimeter and an ASI. As Michael Wright says (see link below), flying is one of the few ways in which one can directly experience that era as people actually did 50, 60 even 80 years before.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/excessba...20060805.shtml
Doesn't read as a wind-up. There are many pilots who agree with you. LCD displays and lots of buttons have their place, but it is a uniquely satisfying experience feeling confident enough to rely on your discipline and nouse with little to assist you other than a line on the chart, a watch, an altimeter and an ASI. As Michael Wright says (see link below), flying is one of the few ways in which one can directly experience that era as people actually did 50, 60 even 80 years before.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/excessba...20060805.shtml
Grandpa Aerotart
I tend to think that the very fact that 'GA' is dieing while light sport aviation is booming might suggest that most people prefer simpler, cheaper aviating rather than expensive point to point gadget filled transport.
If/when I sell my Bo I will be buying a Steen Skybolt.
If/when I sell my Bo I will be buying a Steen Skybolt.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I have yet to see is what IO540 is proposing as his sylabus!
I presume he wants to teach people without bothering with the basics of how to fly (turning, S & L, climbing and descending etc) and he wants nav teaching with GPS, not bothering with the stuff that will get you out of trouble when the fancy kit breaks down.
I presume he wants to teach people without bothering with the basics of how to fly (turning, S & L, climbing and descending etc) and he wants nav teaching with GPS, not bothering with the stuff that will get you out of trouble when the fancy kit breaks down.
Kev,
There are many ways of enjoying flying and people fly for a variety of reasons. Many people like you enjoy the traditional connection with our history just as many sailors enjoy sailing in classic boats and the fellowship which goes with it. I know from my own experience that musicians have similar variations in their enjoyment of music.
The problem I found with learning to fly by the WWII method, non radio in a Tiger Moth, was that I felt inadequately trained to operate in more controlled environments which my PPL qualified me for. Being very cautious by nature, this limited the scope of my flying for some years until I undertook further training.
Since WWII the PPL syllabus has changed to include more modern techology with the introduction of the 3 hours instrument flying. I know that they did this in Tigers in WWII but all my attempts to fly a Tiger on instruments would have led to a failure. It is only because I had to re-qualify in more modern aeroplanes after a long break that I have had any instrument training at all.
I now fly, like most of us, with a GPS on which I probably rely more than I think I do. (In the sense that I sometimes ask myself if I would be doing this if I did not have a GPS i.e in less than good visibility) I have had no training in its use whatsoever.
In my view, the PPL syllabus should be modernised to include GPS appreciation, whatever aircraft you are flying. The navigation test should include a simulated GPS failure.
Incidentally, when I did my PPL in the 60's I scrounged a wizzwheel which looked old and worn enough to have been used in WWII. I was amazed when my son was recently issued with an identical wizzwheel for his flying training in the Navy. My next door neighbour is now using my old wheel for his PPL - I wonder how many people have learned with it.
There are many ways of enjoying flying and people fly for a variety of reasons. Many people like you enjoy the traditional connection with our history just as many sailors enjoy sailing in classic boats and the fellowship which goes with it. I know from my own experience that musicians have similar variations in their enjoyment of music.
The problem I found with learning to fly by the WWII method, non radio in a Tiger Moth, was that I felt inadequately trained to operate in more controlled environments which my PPL qualified me for. Being very cautious by nature, this limited the scope of my flying for some years until I undertook further training.
Since WWII the PPL syllabus has changed to include more modern techology with the introduction of the 3 hours instrument flying. I know that they did this in Tigers in WWII but all my attempts to fly a Tiger on instruments would have led to a failure. It is only because I had to re-qualify in more modern aeroplanes after a long break that I have had any instrument training at all.
I now fly, like most of us, with a GPS on which I probably rely more than I think I do. (In the sense that I sometimes ask myself if I would be doing this if I did not have a GPS i.e in less than good visibility) I have had no training in its use whatsoever.
In my view, the PPL syllabus should be modernised to include GPS appreciation, whatever aircraft you are flying. The navigation test should include a simulated GPS failure.
Incidentally, when I did my PPL in the 60's I scrounged a wizzwheel which looked old and worn enough to have been used in WWII. I was amazed when my son was recently issued with an identical wizzwheel for his flying training in the Navy. My next door neighbour is now using my old wheel for his PPL - I wonder how many people have learned with it.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the PPL syllabus should be modernised to include GPS appreciation, whatever aircraft you are flying.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know why people here think I want to close down traditional flying, and get everybody to fly IFR space-wagons 
As I wrote earlier, this debate comes down to the individual v. collective position.
Almost everybody here is adopting the individual position. Fine. That's very much the way in UK GA, isn't it As the old joke goes: put 4 pilots on an island; a month later they have set up 5 pilot forums (each with 20 members all using nicknames), 4 user groups, and 1 splinter group.
What I said is that the traditionalist approach is going to drive GA into the ground - because not enough punters are interested in it. If you disagree, fair enough, but to me it seems very self evident. Maybe I mix (and fly) with too many non-GA people, and listen to their views on the matter.
This is not the same thing, BTW, as saying that aerobatic flight is unpopular. It could well be that there would be a lot of activity on the aero front, if suitably promoted as a fun sport. Currently, more or less the only people that get into it are those who did a normal PPL and then felt like having a go at it, and liked it.
As for syllabus changes, I'd kill off the slide rule and bring in an electronic (E6B) method like they widely do in FAA land. The worn out argument about batteries going flat is barmy because nobody short of an ex RAF navigator can use one airborne anyway. I'd teach more instrument flight, because it's unreasonable to expect a PPL to remain VFR every instant, and basic instrument capability will save his life sooner or later. I'd bring in radio nav (VOR/DME/GPS) so that a PPL is capable of flying an entire route with it - this is actually really easy; obviously more so with a GPS but really anybody can track a VOR as well. A DME is so obvious it doesn't really need teaching. I would also do what the FAA does re equipment: the pilot must demonstrate (on the checkride) mastery of everything that is installed; that will ensure that owners of the better equipped planes actually know which knob does what. A somewhat tongue in cheek thing would be to make Navbox standard issue
As I wrote earlier, this debate comes down to the individual v. collective position.
Almost everybody here is adopting the individual position. Fine. That's very much the way in UK GA, isn't it
As the old joke goes: put 4 pilots on an island; a month later they have set up 5 pilot forums (each with 20 members all using nicknames), 4 user groups, and 1 splinter group.What I said is that the traditionalist approach is going to drive GA into the ground - because not enough punters are interested in it. If you disagree, fair enough, but to me it seems very self evident. Maybe I mix (and fly) with too many non-GA people, and listen to their views on the matter.
This is not the same thing, BTW, as saying that aerobatic flight is unpopular. It could well be that there would be a lot of activity on the aero front, if suitably promoted as a fun sport. Currently, more or less the only people that get into it are those who did a normal PPL and then felt like having a go at it, and liked it.
As for syllabus changes, I'd kill off the slide rule and bring in an electronic (E6B) method like they widely do in FAA land. The worn out argument about batteries going flat is barmy because nobody short of an ex RAF navigator can use one airborne anyway. I'd teach more instrument flight, because it's unreasonable to expect a PPL to remain VFR every instant, and basic instrument capability will save his life sooner or later. I'd bring in radio nav (VOR/DME/GPS) so that a PPL is capable of flying an entire route with it - this is actually really easy; obviously more so with a GPS but really anybody can track a VOR as well. A DME is so obvious it doesn't really need teaching. I would also do what the FAA does re equipment: the pilot must demonstrate (on the checkride) mastery of everything that is installed; that will ensure that owners of the better equipped planes actually know which knob does what. A somewhat tongue in cheek thing would be to make Navbox standard issue
Upto The Buffers
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Leeds/Bradford
Age: 48
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to say, as someone who *hasn't* been flying for 20 odd years or more, that I started my PPL training in January this year. I passed my skills test and applied for my license with 45 hours exactly on my logbook and have now pased 75 hours TT.
I'm not going to try and pretend I'm the world's best pilot, but I am confident in my own ability. I've been riding fast bikes for 15 years, pulling them apart, inserting more horsepower, putting them back together again etc etc... so technically I find myself fairly in tune with most things mechanical.
I love being challenged, and as such enjoy the planning, the weather, the winds, the plog, the windshear, and hell.. just the unexpected. I've got total admiration for anyone who puts the technology to one side and really embraces polishing the skill involved in flying at the most rudimentary level.
I've heard a lot about "GA is dead" etc etc.. but it's just not true. I'm putting together a group at the moment of people just like me, all in their early 30's, keen, enthusiastic, new PPL's who think exactly along the same lines. Sharp, heads-screwed-on-the-right-way people who want to stretch themselves, increase their knowledge and experience, and be the best pilots they can.
A pretty bad analogy I'm sure, but I have 2 neighbours... both think they're B-road heros. 1 has a BMW M5 with abs, esp, bbc, itv etc... the other has a Westfield kit-car he built himself. I'm pretty sure that the BMW guy would end up in a mess a lot quicker than the Westfield guy if they swapped cars and he was deprived of his techno safety-net.
My opinion, and it's merely that, is yes... use the GPS and all the other toys, but when push comes to shove, there's nothing more personally fulfilling than throwing the technology out of the window and knowing you're safe in the air with little more than a compass, map and a decent helping of brain power.
I'm not going to try and pretend I'm the world's best pilot, but I am confident in my own ability. I've been riding fast bikes for 15 years, pulling them apart, inserting more horsepower, putting them back together again etc etc... so technically I find myself fairly in tune with most things mechanical.
I love being challenged, and as such enjoy the planning, the weather, the winds, the plog, the windshear, and hell.. just the unexpected. I've got total admiration for anyone who puts the technology to one side and really embraces polishing the skill involved in flying at the most rudimentary level.
I've heard a lot about "GA is dead" etc etc.. but it's just not true. I'm putting together a group at the moment of people just like me, all in their early 30's, keen, enthusiastic, new PPL's who think exactly along the same lines. Sharp, heads-screwed-on-the-right-way people who want to stretch themselves, increase their knowledge and experience, and be the best pilots they can.
A pretty bad analogy I'm sure, but I have 2 neighbours... both think they're B-road heros. 1 has a BMW M5 with abs, esp, bbc, itv etc... the other has a Westfield kit-car he built himself. I'm pretty sure that the BMW guy would end up in a mess a lot quicker than the Westfield guy if they swapped cars and he was deprived of his techno safety-net.
My opinion, and it's merely that, is yes... use the GPS and all the other toys, but when push comes to shove, there's nothing more personally fulfilling than throwing the technology out of the window and knowing you're safe in the air with little more than a compass, map and a decent helping of brain power.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The changes proposed (apart from getting rid of the whizwheel which I think 90%+ agree with) just seem to be adding to the PPL and increasing its cost - hardly the way to make it more popular - What is needed is to get away from the concept that the PPL is the end of the road, fine bring these things in as options during the course at the appropriate stage, but it should also be the case that "advanced" training is promoted more.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Foxmoth. After all, even you IO540 started will a basic PPL. What you've added to it after has been been your choice. You managed ok and went the direction you chose. Leave others to their choice and stop assuming that any way other than yours will bring about the demise of GA. Statements like
I probably mix with far more non GA people than you ... (how many farm workers and the like do you know who fly?), Most I speak to are far more attracted to microlights and biplanes than plastic fantastic, though I admit not all! The point is, I don't assume that they all think the same as me and can accept that the new/old lobbies are pretty evenly split. I also believe they can easily co-exist and even enhance each other.
SS
What I said is that the traditionalist approach is going to drive GA into the ground - because not enough punters are interested in it. If you disagree, fair enough, but to me it seems very self evident. Maybe I mix (and fly) with too many non-GA people, and listen to their views on the matter.
SS
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem I see here is that folks like IO540 see the PPL training as the be all. When in fact it is just a basic licence to teach you how to fly from A to B and not kill yourself.
In the same way, a CPL doesn't in anyway prepare you for a life in the airlines. So we do type ratings and line training, to compensate for it. A CPL is just a basic minimum requirement. It shows you have reached a standard, so that you can continue to learn and get better.
Basic licences are only the start of your training though. If you want to do something more advanced, then get further training. This however is the area the PPL training industry falls down massively, there isn't much around for more advanced training, though there isn't an enormous call for it either since people who fly like IO540 are very much thin on the ground in the PPL world.
I wish there were more like him though!
In the same way, a CPL doesn't in anyway prepare you for a life in the airlines. So we do type ratings and line training, to compensate for it. A CPL is just a basic minimum requirement. It shows you have reached a standard, so that you can continue to learn and get better.
Basic licences are only the start of your training though. If you want to do something more advanced, then get further training. This however is the area the PPL training industry falls down massively, there isn't much around for more advanced training, though there isn't an enormous call for it either since people who fly like IO540 are very much thin on the ground in the PPL world.
I wish there were more like him though!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I ask Person X for his view on something, then I can expect to get his view on it, and I am not going to moan about it. I think half the people here haven't actually read what I have written.
Don't forget who started this thread. It wasn't me; it was somebody I've never heard of. Perhaps somebody put him up to it. It doesn't, to the best of my recollection, join up to anything recently discussed here (although the subject of modern v. traditional has come up before a number of times). I just replied to the "open question", even though it seemed a pretty silly thing to just pick on me.
As for adding specific modules, yes that sounds a good idea and I believe that has been proposed in the past, possibly by AOPA. I would suggest that (even if the CAA went for it) there would be few takers because few GA pilots will bother to spend money on anything unless they get additional privileges. And since this is not ICAO, any such privileges would be limited to the UK only, like the NPPL and the IMCR. I also can't possibly imagine what they could be, since there is a clear demarcation line between the PPL and the IMCR/IR.
Such a system seems to work OK in gliding, but that's a different game in which nobody gets any official privileges anyway (afaik) so it's all about self improvement.
Don't forget who started this thread. It wasn't me; it was somebody I've never heard of. Perhaps somebody put him up to it. It doesn't, to the best of my recollection, join up to anything recently discussed here (although the subject of modern v. traditional has come up before a number of times). I just replied to the "open question", even though it seemed a pretty silly thing to just pick on me.
As for adding specific modules, yes that sounds a good idea and I believe that has been proposed in the past, possibly by AOPA. I would suggest that (even if the CAA went for it) there would be few takers because few GA pilots will bother to spend money on anything unless they get additional privileges. And since this is not ICAO, any such privileges would be limited to the UK only, like the NPPL and the IMCR. I also can't possibly imagine what they could be, since there is a clear demarcation line between the PPL and the IMCR/IR.
Such a system seems to work OK in gliding, but that's a different game in which nobody gets any official privileges anyway (afaik) so it's all about self improvement.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kent UK
Age: 70
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there something I should know?
10540, of course you haven't heard of me. I haven't been mooching around here for very long and I don't have much to say on anything particularly important in this walk of life. But, guess what.......I haven't heard of you either! I know that you have made umpteen million posts and that you have trenchant opinions on one or two things and er....., that's it.
I seem to have been guilty of a near-wind-up here (nearly had me thread deleted because of it!
) and I've no idea why! Who is the great man? On who's precious toes have I trod?
And I "picked on you" for no other reason than a couple of your recent answers on this theme.
I seem to have been guilty of a near-wind-up here (nearly had me thread deleted because of it!
) and I've no idea why! Who is the great man? On who's precious toes have I trod?And I "picked on you" for no other reason than a couple of your recent answers on this theme.
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
My thoughts on this - having read several such threads - are that there is an increasing polarisation in GA.
On the one hand are those who wish to use aviation primarily (not necessarily exclusively) for pleasure, and on the other are those who primarily use it as a means of transport.
Neither group is right or wrong, neither is better or worse than the other.
However, as the polarisation becomes more pronounced, the demand for "General Purpose" aviation is diminished.
The effect of this is likely to be that many general purpose airfields - particularly those with paved runways and / or imperilled by development - will become economically unviable, principally because "sport aviation" - e.g. microlighting, farm-strip flying etc. - really doesn't contribute much towards these airfields. So more people are pushed out of or away from aviation - whether it's because it's now too far to the nearest airfield, or there's no FTC any more, or any maintenance facility etc.
That then means that "transport" GA is forced, more and more, to use the larger "commercial" airfields, thus further increasing the costs and possibly driving more people away from GA.
I'm not trying to argue that farm-strip flyers should subsidise the ILS at such-and-such an airfield - I'm simply saying that unless more people use GA as a means of transport then it will soon become a sad reality that it will no longer be possible to do so - for anyone.
And I think that the only way that that can be done is to have better equipped aircraft and pilots appropriately trained to use the equipment effectively to fly safely from A to B in the UK's (over?)-regulated airspace and weather conditions.
And if the quality of the equipment (and the pilots using it) were to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th Century, then maybe (just maybe) the rules governing the use of the airspace could be similarly updated.
But if the only form of GA available is PFA & farm-strip flying, its voice will be seriously diminished, and its ability to influence the wider aviation scene commensurately reduced.
NPPL anyone?
SD
On the one hand are those who wish to use aviation primarily (not necessarily exclusively) for pleasure, and on the other are those who primarily use it as a means of transport.
Neither group is right or wrong, neither is better or worse than the other.
However, as the polarisation becomes more pronounced, the demand for "General Purpose" aviation is diminished.
The effect of this is likely to be that many general purpose airfields - particularly those with paved runways and / or imperilled by development - will become economically unviable, principally because "sport aviation" - e.g. microlighting, farm-strip flying etc. - really doesn't contribute much towards these airfields. So more people are pushed out of or away from aviation - whether it's because it's now too far to the nearest airfield, or there's no FTC any more, or any maintenance facility etc.
That then means that "transport" GA is forced, more and more, to use the larger "commercial" airfields, thus further increasing the costs and possibly driving more people away from GA.
I'm not trying to argue that farm-strip flyers should subsidise the ILS at such-and-such an airfield - I'm simply saying that unless more people use GA as a means of transport then it will soon become a sad reality that it will no longer be possible to do so - for anyone.
And I think that the only way that that can be done is to have better equipped aircraft and pilots appropriately trained to use the equipment effectively to fly safely from A to B in the UK's (over?)-regulated airspace and weather conditions.
And if the quality of the equipment (and the pilots using it) were to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th Century, then maybe (just maybe) the rules governing the use of the airspace could be similarly updated.
But if the only form of GA available is PFA & farm-strip flying, its voice will be seriously diminished, and its ability to influence the wider aviation scene commensurately reduced.
NPPL anyone?
SD