View Single Post
  #9  
Old July 19th 04, 07:28 PM
Andrew Gideon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Apparently there is absolutely nothing I can say or do that will get the
few of you who just aren't following this in context away from the
flight test as the focus of this discussion.


Actually, I'm just trying to keep the thread honest with the post to which
you've just replied. You claimed that Shirley had not followed the thread
when you wrote:

May I please, respectfully ask you to read up on this thread a bit more
from the beginning .

because she was discussing issues related to the oral exam. You also wrote:

You are confusing what rote defines in a flight test. Rote can be used
to answer to a question as you indicate, OR it can be the way something
is PERFORMED, which is what we are discussing here on this thread.
What we are discussing here has absolutely nothing at all to do with a
verbal answer to a question.

Which seems a little odd since we are not only discussing the oral test, but
your finding these pilots to have insufficient comprehension. How did you
discover this w/o conversation with the pilots in question?

My findings have little to do with the flight test per se.


But you've been mentioning the flight test (and oral) too! You appear to be
[trying to] shift the thread around in a way I don't grasp.

They were
made on flight checks given to pilots AFTER the flight test had been
passed and are only relevant to that scenario.


Right. I think we all understand this. These were pilots that had passed
the PPL checkride, but whom you [at some point after their checkride] found
lacking in comprehension. You believed "remedial" action required. That's
very clear.

But you've been steadfastly avoiding the issue of why you considered
"remedial" action necessary if the pilots you found lacking were already
sufficiently safe. I can imagine all sorts of perfectly reasonable
answers, but I've yet to see yours.

I will achieve nothing further
by trying to sort all of it out for you again.


You could try answering the question once: why would you feel "remedial"
action necessary if the pilots you found lacking in comprehension were
already sufficiently safe?

I know you've no problem expressing your opinions, but just to make things a
little more clear for you, I'll provide some of the possible answers that I
see:

o They were safe as defined by the PPL exam, but could/should be
more safe.

o They were safe at the time of the PPL checkride, but were no
longer so.

o Comprehension doesn't impact safety, but I [you] believe it necessary
for other reasons.

But I really do want to know *your* answer.

- Andrew