On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 13:44:23 -0400, Jeff wrote in
Message-Id: corrected for
completeness to overcome Jeff's creative snippage:

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:43:23 -0400, Jeff wrote in
Message-Id: :

you pompous twit

When one airman publicly maligns another, it reveals her lack of
reverence for the brotherhood and camaraderie that binds the majority
of airmen. I take no issue with your disagreement and contrary argument,
but an airman publicly resorting to name calling at his fellow is
disappointing indeed. And a personal attack during a rational
discussion reveals a debater who advertises his intellectual bankruptcy
and exhausted resource of _rational_ arguments. But then, you were
espousing your emotional (not rational) bent, weren't you. I suppose
it would be optimistic to expect a rational response from one whose
autonomic nervous system so dominates his airmanship and social discourse.

I see you are incapable of apology, let alone rational discourse on
your emotionally motivated name calling. Perhaps I expect too much
from a fellow airman who flies for thrills. Oh well ...

With regard to your charge of 'pompousness', I plead an ernest effort
to communicate my thoughts succinctly and clearly without arrogance.

It was both pompous and arrogant of you to imply that you speak for
all certified pilots. Thankfully, you don't.

Because you post from an anonymised internet account, and fail to
provide your full name, let alone even your IP, I must resort to
asking if you are indeed even certificated by the FAA. If so, perhaps
you'll be confident enough to reveal the number of years you've
possessed your airmans certificate, or the number of flight hours
you've accumulated. I just want to clarify for whom YOU speak.

In an attempt to return the discussion to its stated subject, I
respectfully disagree with your view; aerobatics are precision
maneuvers (ideally). The visceral responses of a professional acro
pilot are so subordinate to her intent concentration as to be
irrelevant. Over time, Darwinism is effective in weeding the thrill
seekers from our ranks.

The OP's implicit, stereotypic presumption of visceral motivation for
pilots engaging in flight is in fact largely inaccurate, IMNSHO.

You are only fooling yourself when you attempt to ascribe your own
clinical personality to other pilots.

I have not done that. If you disagree, please provide the Message-ID
number and the text to which you refer. You are mistaken, my friend.

It is you who implied you flew for the thrill of it, not me. Clearly,
the OP is not a certificated airman, but a misguided researcher.

Your views about the motivations of professional aerobatic pilots directly
contradict their own words in interview after interview.

Do you have any supporting evidence for that allegation. If you did,
you would have posted, I'm sure.

You characteize pilots as "professionals" but seem to forget that the
majority of pilots in the USA are not professional pilots.

While it is true that the majority of US airmen do not earn income
from flying, my experience has been, that the overwhelming majority of
those with which I have had contact attempt to conduct themselves in a
professional manner exercising the responsibilities of Pilot In
Command. If they do not, they soon find themselves the subject of an
FAA Administrative Action, or the first to arrive at the scene of an
accident. Are you attempting to imply that US airmen are all thrill
seekers?

Perhaps you need to get out more. For some enlightenemnt on the subject
of pilot motivation, ask Chuck Yeagar [sic] why he still flies.

From your statements above, I can only infer, that you not only
'get out' frequently, but apparently have the ear of General Yager
(despite the fact that you misspelled his name); I do not have that
pleasure. Perhaps you will consider sharing what he told you
regarding his motivation for a life long career as a professional
aerospace test pilot and fellow airman.

Here's what his web site says:

http://www.engineerscouncil.org/Yeag...945-1947p3.htm
"In June 1947, Colonel Boyd made one of the most important
decisions of his career when he chose one of his most junior test
pilots to make the attempt to become the first person to exceed
the speed of sound in the rocket-powered Bell X-1. He chose Yeager
because he considered him the best “instinctive” pilot he had ever
seen and he had demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to remain
calm and focused in stressful situations. The X-1 program
certainly promised to be stressful; many experts believed the
so-called “sound barrier” was impenetrable.

In my opinion, thrill seekers are seldom calm and cool, yet that is
what is said he

http://www.engineerscouncil.org/Yeag...947-1954p2.htm
Flying constantly at the edge of the envelope . . . and then
beyond, at a time when accidents were far more common than they
are today, Yeager repeatedly demonstrated an uncanny ability to
coolly think his way through potentially catastrophic situations,
take appropriate action, and bring his ship back.

Here's what his OTHER friend said about him:
http://www.engineerscouncil.org/Yeag...s/anderson.htm
As a fighter pilot, Chuck had the rare ability to concentrate
totally on the task at hand. In combat, he could block out
fatigue, fear, or any other distraction.

http://www.engineerscouncil.org/Yeag...oices/boyd.htm
We had several other outstanding pilots to chose from but none of
them could quite match his skill in a cockpit or his coolness
under pressure.”

http://www.engineerscouncil.org/Yeag...bridgeman2.htm
He has made his point and he couldn’t have picked a worse time,
but his cool, brilliant piece of horseplay eases the tension and I
laugh.

http://www.engineerscouncil.org/Yeag...ices/frost.htm
Charlie Yeager is completely nerveless . . . He’s the coolest guy
I’ve even seen, and it’s been my business to see a lot of pilots
preparing for flights of doubtful outcome.



--

Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts.
-- Larry Dighera,