"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

In reality, at least in the aviation world I knew and know now;
standards can NEVER be too high.


There are two ways to read this.

1: You should always strive to be better.

2: You always should not fly unless you are better.

I have no problem at all with (1). It's my creed. However, (2) seems
to be
proposed here also, by the idea that pilots of [insert program] are
not safe
enough and should not have gotten their private ticket (which is after
all a
license to learn). If they pass the checkride, they are safe enough
to fly (2)
but not safe enough to stop learning (1).

Jose

I see it this way.
You can pass the test with varying degrees of competence as long as all
of those degrees of competence are above the minimum test standard. Any
of these varying degrees can be correctly stated as being safe enough to
fly. Some pilots going through the test process will naturally be better
than others. Are they more safe? Probably.....at least I think so
anyway. It's all a study in relativity. There are no absolutes in this
equation; no single identifiable level of competence. The only common
denominator in the equation is the minimum test standard having been met
at a specific point in time.
For my purposes as a check pilot, I can have two pilots to check out who
have come through the system using varying methods. Although both pilots
are safe enough to check out, and that will be the result of their check
flights with me, if I notice one pilot not as up to speed in
comprehension as the other one, I'll immediately take the steps
necessary to fill in that gap. It's a natural process for any good check
pilot.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt