"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Dudley Henriques wrote:


In YOUR context, "insufficient" apparently means "not sufficient."
In my
context, insufficient means "could be better".

FYI:


http://m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?bo...a=insufficient

You'll note that "not sufficient" is the definition of "insufficient".

So? Context again...as it has been for the last ten or so posts with
you. You just can't seem to get it can you? The pilots I was checking
out of accelerated training were "not sufficient" to MY standards
Gideon, NOT the flight test standards. The dictionary definition is in
complete agreement both ways. The pilots were also "insufficient" to MY
standards. Dawning on you yet?



[...]

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

BINGO!!! Now was this all that hard to understand?

I'm afraid that it is, given that you've made this statement as a
comparison
between graduates of accelerated and "conventional" programs. Recall
that
your original statement on this thread included:

To put it bluntly, I can't remember a situation where I have
checked out
a new pilot coming out of an accelerated course for Private
Pilots where
the performance level was such that I felt no remedial work
was
required....not ONE case!!!!

If the graduate of an accelerated program is safe as defined by the
PPL
exam, but could be more safe, then what is the difference between the
graduate of an accelerated program and the graduate of a
"conventional"
program?

The difference is exactly as I stated it. I was getting what I
considered insufficient results from all the accelerated grads. I was
getting mixed results from the conventional grads; insufficient on one
side......mixed on the other side........This Gedion, is a difference!



Surely, the graduate of a "conventional" program could/should
also be more safe than he/she is.

Absolutely! That's why the Commercial PTS is basically an "upgraded"
Private PTS in a lot of respects. It requires an even deeper level of
comprehension and performance to a closer tolorance of the same subject
matter by the examinee in many cases.


By this definition of "remedial work",
would you not find a need for "remedial work" with any recently
certificated pilot?

Absolutely! All pilots, including myself, can use some remedial work. I
did it all the time. The issue here however isn't that all pilots need
remedial work. The issue is that I was finding a DIFFERENCE in the level
of remedial work needed between accelerated and traditional training
methods, and THAT is indicative of a data point if nothing else.

For that matter, can not *any* pilot be better than he/she is?

All pilots can be better than they are. Pilots like myself for example,
who lived and worked in a highly dangerous environment with high
performance airplanes were engaged in a daily regimem of self
improvement. Without it, I never would have survived to be here arguing
this ridiculas argument with you :-)

BTW, I apologize for losing my temper with you. I shouldn't have done
that. If you can, please forgive my personal remark in the last thread.
If you wish to engage in this discussion with me, please continue. I'll
try and keep my temper in check and deal with your questions as they are
thrown my way :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt