Badges and Insignia
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Badges and Insignia
The new law about wearing medals and insignia is obviously intended to prevent imposters, of whom there a a few, from wearing medals and military uniform in public to which they are not entitled. However, will it have an impact on GA flyers who wear ex Miilitary flying suits? Some pilots wear suits covered in badges and one sees quite a lot of people at Rallies and Air Shows wearing name badges and insignia on ex RAF flying suits which are probably designed to look like RAF wings. Clearly many are trying to deceive! Where should the line be drawn on this?
From ear to ear? Seriously though. Many wings are of similar design. Wings are wings. There are Military wings, Airline wings and poser wings etc. I personally only care about the wings on my aircraft and car. Life's too short. I don't think we need Badge Police.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people in our society work hard to earn a qualification, and I believe that they have the right to claim that qualification (and identity). Society, who makes available that qualification, has the responsibility to honour those who have earned the qualification, and respect the use of the identity.
There is no point in having standards for doctors, engineers, lawyers, ship's captains, military personnel, police, firefighters and pilots, among many qualifications, if society is not going to respect the identity of a person so qualified. If you have earned the right to identify yourself as qualified as whatever, identify yourself if you wish. Society, respect that, and defend it.
I've been a pilot for 40 years. I nearly never wear anything which identifies me as a pilot - not important to society. I've been a firefighter for 25 years. I nearly always am wearing something which identifies me as a firefighter - it works well when I arrive to a call to service, people know who I am. I am offended when a person wears something which identifies them as a firefighter (or police, military, etc.), when doing so could cause the public to think they are someone they are not.
Society expects to be defended/protected/assisted by people who have earned a qualification to do so. Society expect the people providing these identified services to meet society's standard for qualification. The least society can do in return is to defend their right to their identity!
There is no point in having standards for doctors, engineers, lawyers, ship's captains, military personnel, police, firefighters and pilots, among many qualifications, if society is not going to respect the identity of a person so qualified. If you have earned the right to identify yourself as qualified as whatever, identify yourself if you wish. Society, respect that, and defend it.
I've been a pilot for 40 years. I nearly never wear anything which identifies me as a pilot - not important to society. I've been a firefighter for 25 years. I nearly always am wearing something which identifies me as a firefighter - it works well when I arrive to a call to service, people know who I am. I am offended when a person wears something which identifies them as a firefighter (or police, military, etc.), when doing so could cause the public to think they are someone they are not.
Society expects to be defended/protected/assisted by people who have earned a qualification to do so. Society expect the people providing these identified services to meet society's standard for qualification. The least society can do in return is to defend their right to their identity!
Some people in our society work hard to earn a qualification, and I believe that they have the right to claim that qualification (and identity). Society, who makes available that qualification, has the responsibility to honour those who have earned the qualification, and respect the use of the identity.
There is no point in having standards for doctors, engineers, lawyers, ship's captains, military personnel, police, firefighters and pilots, among many qualifications, if society is not going to respect the identity of a person so qualified. If you have earned the right to identify yourself as qualified as whatever, identify yourself if you wish. Society, respect that, and defend it.
I've been a pilot for 40 years. I nearly never wear anything which identifies me as a pilot - not important to society. I've been a firefighter for 25 years. I nearly always am wearing something which identifies me as a firefighter - it works well when I arrive to a call to service, people know who I am. I am offended when a person wears something which identifies them as a firefighter (or police, military, etc.), when doing so could cause the public to think they are someone they are not.
Society expects to be defended/protected/assisted by people who have earned a qualification to do so. Society expect the people providing these identified services to meet society's standard for qualification. The least society can do in return is to defend their right to their identity!
There is no point in having standards for doctors, engineers, lawyers, ship's captains, military personnel, police, firefighters and pilots, among many qualifications, if society is not going to respect the identity of a person so qualified. If you have earned the right to identify yourself as qualified as whatever, identify yourself if you wish. Society, respect that, and defend it.
I've been a pilot for 40 years. I nearly never wear anything which identifies me as a pilot - not important to society. I've been a firefighter for 25 years. I nearly always am wearing something which identifies me as a firefighter - it works well when I arrive to a call to service, people know who I am. I am offended when a person wears something which identifies them as a firefighter (or police, military, etc.), when doing so could cause the public to think they are someone they are not.
Society expects to be defended/protected/assisted by people who have earned a qualification to do so. Society expect the people providing these identified services to meet society's standard for qualification. The least society can do in return is to defend their right to their identity!
All of which sounds great until you actually look at the detail. I'm a chartered engineer - a REAL engineer. I worked hard for many years to achieve an accredited honours degree, and accredited masters degree and evidence of demonstrating the five groups of competencies. But everyone from the spanner-basher whose training went no further than "clockwise means tight" to the biuffoon who fixes our photocopiers also call themselves engineers. Machinists who turn and mill metal (which I also do in my own workshoip, as a hobby) call themselves engineers. In the colonies even TRAIN DRIVERS call themselves engineers. Never mind those medical practitioners who've never done any academic research in their lives but still claim the title "Doctor".
What's sauce for the goose is goose for the gravy and all that jazz. If you wanty the rest of society to respect and defend your aerial bus driver qualifications then start calling people out who falsely use other peoples' titles. Then perhaps we'll be with you.
Fair?
PDR
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For "Engineer" I entirely agree, that is a person who has received the required training to be accredited as an Engineer. I am not an engineer, and I vigorously defend the right of engineers to be identified as such, and everyone else not. Hobbiests, train operators, office equipment repair people, and people who work in kitchens are not engineers (in that role anyway), and should be denied being referred to as such by society. 'Same for "Doctor", you are, or you are not, an accredited certificate says if you are.
It's more than just "training" to become an Engineer, but never mind. The title "Doctor" should be reserved for those who have been awarded Ph.Ds - medical practitioners should only be entitled to use the post-nominal "MD".
PDR
PDR
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder who qualifications, Edison, Einstein, D Vinci et al had in order to be called engineers. Sorry but I don't agree that you need to have a degree and a masters and the five circles of mother nature in order to be an engineer. The dictionary defines and engineer as:
NOUN
1 a person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.
• a person qualified in a branch of engineering, especially as a professional.
2 a person who controls an engine, especially on an aircraft or ship.
• a train driver.
3 a skilful contriver or originator of something.
So the little guy in his workshop skilfully contriving or originating is just as much as an engineer with a fancy degree. Its those little guys, the home engineers that are the foundation of some of the greatest devices mankind has........
NOUN
1 a person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.
• a person qualified in a branch of engineering, especially as a professional.
2 a person who controls an engine, especially on an aircraft or ship.
• a train driver.
3 a skilful contriver or originator of something.
So the little guy in his workshop skilfully contriving or originating is just as much as an engineer with a fancy degree. Its those little guys, the home engineers that are the foundation of some of the greatest devices mankind has........
Badges and medals have as much and as little value as titles and degrees. Yes one must have achieved something to earn them. No they say nothing about a given person's ability to solve a given problem.
As for the word "engineer", yes its meaning has considerably changed over recent years. That'll teach you Brits for letting the US'ans meddle with your language.
As for the word "engineer", yes its meaning has considerably changed over recent years. That'll teach you Brits for letting the US'ans meddle with your language.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a real doctor and an engineer I realised many years ago that I'd sure hit on a losing combination! But Flyingmac is right: life is too short. Nevertheless, I still have a chuckle when I see a 100 hour recreational pilot emerge from the latest plastic fantastic wearing a pressed flying suit with a glory of insignia. You'd like to think it's a phase but some of them look disturbingly middle aged. But to each his own.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the film What's up Doc?
Barbara Streisand's character: "You're a doctor???"
Kenneth Mars' pompous character (hautily): "I am a Doctor of Music"
BS character: "Can you fix a broken hi-fi?"
Barbara Streisand's character: "You're a doctor???"
Kenneth Mars' pompous character (hautily): "I am a Doctor of Music"
BS character: "Can you fix a broken hi-fi?"
A friend of mine once was pursuing a PhD in jazz music, on the grounds that he was pretty certain that it would let him prescribe at least certain classes of drugs.
More seriously - I think that people should be able to put anything they like on a flying suit, so long as it's true. Wings do matter in certain quarters, but there are also generic PPL wings you can buy. But if you have RAF wings or an F16 badge on there - it would seem reasonable to me that you earned that right. Should we criminalise people who didn't? Frankly not unless they are using the lie to gain some advantage. But public scorn is entirely legitimate.
I've largely given up on most attempts to protect the word "Engineer ", but it does need a qualifier to be meaningful. Chartered, Licenced, Incorporate, ing Technician, Aeronautical - all serve to make it meaningful. That said, yes - seeing the term used to describe somebody who has done a 3 week course on photocopier repair is galling when you spent 7 years becoming Chartered.
G
More seriously - I think that people should be able to put anything they like on a flying suit, so long as it's true. Wings do matter in certain quarters, but there are also generic PPL wings you can buy. But if you have RAF wings or an F16 badge on there - it would seem reasonable to me that you earned that right. Should we criminalise people who didn't? Frankly not unless they are using the lie to gain some advantage. But public scorn is entirely legitimate.
I've largely given up on most attempts to protect the word "Engineer ", but it does need a qualifier to be meaningful. Chartered, Licenced, Incorporate, ing Technician, Aeronautical - all serve to make it meaningful. That said, yes - seeing the term used to describe somebody who has done a 3 week course on photocopier repair is galling when you spent 7 years becoming Chartered.
G
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm a chartered engineer - a REAL engineer. I worked hard for many years to achieve an accredited honours degree, and accredited masters degree and evidence of demonstrating the five groups of competencies. But everyone from the spanner-basher whose training went no further than "clockwise means tight" to the biuffoon who fixes our photocopiers also call themselves engineers. Machinists who turn and mill metal (which I also do in my own workshoip, as a hobby) call themselves engineers. In the colonies even TRAIN DRIVERS call themselves engineers. Never mind those medical practitioners who've never done any academic research in their lives but still claim the title "Doctor".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fear my original post has rather lost its way in the comments abut engineers and doctors! It seems no one is really bothered if people in flying suits pretend to be what they are not!
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fear my original post has rather lost its way in the comments abut engineers and doctors!
To connect the dots (well, the ones in my mind, anyway) the insignia is just the public presentation of what the wearer has achieved in a publicly recognized discipline. To dishonour the insignia is to dishonour those who have earned it. Be the insignia pilot wings, an iron ring, or a caduceus, it is the [legitimate] wearer's privilege to be seen displaying it. Our society shows our respect for a person who has achieved recognition in a discipline by respecting the insignia associated with that discipline.
Pilot wings, perhaps more than other insignias, come in many variations. If a pilot wears generic wings, I'm confident no one has issue with that - they're a pilot. However, if the specific wings can be identified as the insignia of a distinct pilot discipline, we owe it to those pilots to show them our respect by rejecting the misappropriation of their earned insignia.
