Pilot qualifications

[PA28161]

I realise that this post may cause all sorts of negative/positive reactions but here goes anyway:

Would it not be a good idea, for the administrators of this forum, to authenticate and verify posters flying qualifications; i.e. those who claim to be qualified pilots.

After the Tracey Curtis-Taylor debacle I would guess that just about anyone could state in their public profile that they have a PPL/CPL/ATPL/NR/IR etc without actually having any such pilot qualifications and without having to submit any evidence whatsoever.

For instance I am a member of AOPA and when completing my membership application was required to submit my EASA/CAA licence number. The administrators (of AOPA) could then verify this with the CAA. I know that in the USA the FAA has a really good pilot online database, but we have no such checking system in the UK other than contacting the CAA directly. Many might say it's an invasion of privacy but if you're telling the truth what have you got to hide?

I'm not saying that those that are knowledgeable about all things connected with flying (but not qualified pilots) shouldn't make constructive posts and comments. It just seems to me that there is a lot of sometimes very strong and focused comment on this forum without the reader actually knowing if the post author has actually ever flown an aeroplane as a qualified pilot.

Just my ramblings, I am ready to be shot down in flames

[BEagle]

AOPA only uses the licence number if there is a need to assist a member's query with the CAA - if we have the licence number, it makes resolution of such queries much easier.

I don't see any need for such a requirement on a public internet bulletin board.

It's reasonably easy to out a Walt, in any case.

[Baikonour]

As you say, for that to have any value, Pprune would need to put in place a checking system on what people declare. I doubt that the CAA/FAA would be interested in supporting that in the way you hint and who will pay for that, then?

And why stop at pilot qualifications? I'd like to know people's age as well. And their ethnicity and country of birth so I can give those who do not have English as a first language the benefit of the doubt and add a degree of interpreting w.r.t. cultural background.
And gender, of course, not to mention sexual leaning.

All of which Pprune would need to check?

I know, reductio ad absurdum, but why should Pprune offer any more guarantees regarding qualification than you would get in real life if you hear people talk together in the pub?

Oh, and quite a few CPL/ME/IR/ATPL talk as much carp as some of the students. Argument by authority is rife here (and elsewhere, for that matter)

You get to know posters. Sometimes you get it wrong. Just like real life - where there are no certainties either...

B.

[thing]

I think it adds a bit of mystery not knowing. I've met a few of the guys on here at fly ins so can vouch for about a dozen or so but the rest are just sentences on my laptop screen. Kind of Miss Marplish I think. Quite entertaining.

Ghengis and BEagle are who they say they are out of the more informed posters; the rest, well you'll just have to guess!

[overstress]

PA, that idea has been floated quite a few times I believe. When the 'noise' from the uneducated becomes too great I avoid PPRuNe for a while. Always find myself back here though

[9 lives]

Reading on PPRuNe is kinda like life, but without you parents holding your hand while you do it. Like any person you could meet, your respect will ultimately be earned by their consistent credibility. When you come to know then as credible, by your measure, you will trust who they are, and what they say.

Every poster here has the opportunity to grow their credibility with the group, by posting well and honestly. Every reader must learn to understand what they are reading. I admit to following with some interest the informative posts of a now long gone poster here, to read some time later that they had proudly just flown their first solo. But, they never had claimed experience, it was my assumption. I learned to be more selective.

In the mean time, can you imagine the workload of confirming each poster's experience inside the PPRuNe system?

[Martin_123]

two thoughts - 1) how do I know that I can trust PPRune with my personal details? Are they ISO certified and audited for data security?
2) thinking of how many licencing authorities there are (it's not just CAA/FAA you know?), good luck verifying anything with them!

it's a no from me. Also we have to keep in mind that there might be quite a few experienced engineers, educators, law makers etc out there who's opinion and experience might be far more valuable than some kid with a shiny new licence .. no need to look for stripes on a forum

[gasax]

What on earth is the point? Are you suggesting that pilots opinions are more valid? That pilots cannot get completely the wrong end of the stick and talk complete bullS**t. Or that 'unverified' people's opinions are somehow less valuable? Personally I think a lot of poster need to have a compulsory IQ test and then there is the spelling and punctuation....... Two strikes and you should be out!

[The_Pink_Panther]

Anonymity works the other way too. I've flown with people who'd have more acronyms to verify then I could ever remember. I know a few fast jet jocks turned tin tube flyers who'd rather NOT have to declare the full extent of their knowledge, and would just list a PPL.

There's also several retired flyboys who've forgotten more than some of us will ever know, their input should be equally welcome even though they now don't have the paper to prove it.

Ultimately it comes down to that fact that this is a public forum, and as such you've got to take each post at face value.

TPP

[Genghis the Engineer]

When I first joined PPrune, around 1999 or thereabouts, I did so using my real name - at the time I was quite closely associated with microlight aeroplanes, and a PPL(M) as it was then was my only licence. Oh yes, and by the way, I had a degree in aeronautical engineering, and had spent 5 years of my life as an engineer supervising the flight testing of military aircraft.

My experience then was that the "heavy metal guys" looked at my PPL(M), no further, and it was made quite clear that I had nothing useful for them.

So, I killed off that identity, invented Genghis, and let people judge me by what I say, and the level of knowledge I can bring to the conversation. It happens that since then, I've ended up with a CPL and a PhD in aerospace engineering, and eventually ended up back in the "heavy metal" flying world again - but you only have my word for that. On the whole, I'm happy to have come in with no reputation, and built credibility (or not) on the basis of my credibility on PPrune.

We can all put a one-line summary of our background and qualifications - and nowadays I do, as do many, but far from all, others. Charlatans have used PPrune - we all know the stories, and at least two people have been to prison for behaviours that at-least in part used PPrune. But equally we have the ability to judge people by what they say and do *here*, or meet people in real life if there are reasons to, and form opinions (or check qualifications!) there as well.

Personally, I'm happy with things the way they are right now.

G

[PA28161]

gasax, I'm not suggesting any such thing.

My background is in biosciences and genetics and I meet a lot of so called very learned people as part of my job, and from time to time just like pilots qualified or otherwise, teachers, engineers, descamisados de PPRUNE, et al, they do indeed speak a load of B****cks.

[Underbolt]

What on earth is the point? Are you suggesting that pilots opinions are more valid? That pilots cannot get completely the wrong end of the stick and talk complete bullS**t.

I'm reminded of the "aircraft on conveyor belt" question, and the number of people how prefaced their (wrong) answer with "I'm an experienced pilot".

[S-Works]

and eventually ended up back in the "heavy metal" flying world again

That comment may well be a good example of why this thread started.... Tell us what heavy metal you are flying? Perhaps better to have to have been a bit more honest with your position in the heavy metal flying world?

[wiggy]

I ranted about this recently but yes, fundamentally I agree with a lot the previous objections about the problems with demanding verification ...

overstress

When the 'noise' from the uneducated becomes too great I avoid PPRuNe for a while. Always find myself back here though

Know what you mean...it grates but sometimes you just have to accept that despite your best efforts sometimes a topic is a lost cause and the only answer is just leave the forum or topic alone for a while.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by bose-x

That comment may well be a good example of why this thread started.... Tell us what heavy metal you are flying? Perhaps better to have to have been a bit more honest with your position in the heavy metal flying world?

Feckin' big research aeroplane, qualified as a mission scientist although rarely fly as such, running the project to decide what to replace it with when it wears out, ran a campaign in India this summer of 1 big aeroplane, 30 odd scientists, 2 flight crews, and all the associated gubbins. Once spent some quality time as mission scientist in a smaller research aeroplane inside an ash cloud, amongst other notorieties. Continuous refresher training alongside a bunch of other science and flight crew.

Not claiming to fly the big stuff as a pilot, spend a heck of a lot of time working with the pilots to get the maximum out of the aeroplane, fit new equipment, design experiments, and so-on and so-forth. Also got to talk about stuff to ICAO recently in their general assembly hall in Montreal - which scared the heck out of me, and trying to run a project - working with various companies to understand the impact that climate change will have on airline operations. Working up a project to see if we can use a certain large airship to study chemistry and physical processes in the planetary boundary layer.


It seems to be what you end up doing if you have a CPL and a PhD. CPL knowledge used daily alongside PhD research knowledge, CPL qualification used 50-100 hours a year in smaller stuff and seldom as part of my day job, although also just about to fly a programme on mishandled stalls as one of the project test pilots. I can think of four other people with similar qualification pairings in the UK - one is head of flight support for Loganair, one is an air ambulance captain, two fly university owned research aircraft in between their own research projects at Cranfield (one of whom just made full professor, beating me to it, the sod).

Feel free to judge.

G

[S-Works]

See that was easier wasn't it?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Perfectly.

G

[flybymike]

Anyway, Bose has had his own fair share of accusations, regarding alleged and claimed qualifications and experience over the years.

[S-Works]

Indeed. I believe I am currently writing this from the European space station.

[Flyingmac]

Get off the loo and write it. I need to go.