Radio advice - newbie

In article ,
Kirk Stant wrote:
Hi Mark,

From your response it's obvious we actually think alike in many ways
when it comes to flying - except for the Sports Pilot thing. If 14
year olds can solo gliders and be licenced by 16, having mastered all
the technicalities and "hassles", then it really isn't that hard - it
just takes determination and time (and money, of course - preferably
someone else's!). Making it "easier" by crippling the performance of
the planes and limiting the pilots freedom sounds like a bad and
dangerous deal to me - and everything I have seen in the ultralight
world confirms this - there is so much blatant disrespect for the
limits going on, only the fact that when they kill themselves it is
usually out in the middle of nowhere keeps the Feds from jumping in.


The initial license Sport Pilot - glider is so similar to
the initial Private-glider that it is useless.
I'm really only focussing on transition pilots with respect
to Sport Pilot.

The only part of Sport Pilot that has any use for gliders is the
transition for folks who already have a pilot's license.
So we're talking about folks who already have an FAA license
and have had a checkride, just in a different cat/class.

As far as limiting performance, the 2-33's 25 years with no
fatalities speaks volumes. And recreational pilot already does
exactly the "limiting performance" route. There is significant
precedent...

As far as limiting pilot's freedom on paper, we already do this
very extensively with solo limits, launch endorsements, VFR rules,
etc. Some people follow them, some don't. Darwin watches them
every single minute...

The sad thing is that I love to fly real (meaning certificated) planes
in the same performance range as the ultralights (J-3s and Champs
comes to mind); and I have, but no-one makes any new ones because they
can't compete with ultralights, so we are stuck with 50-year old
designs or expensive antiques or homebuilts - and there goes the
availability and affordability!


I saw a Corben Baby Ace for sale just the other day, $8000...
Van's is the #1 buyer/distributer of airplane engines in the US.
Homebuilt has become the way to go. Come to the
Dark Side, Kirk! rebreather activates

I've heard that few new aircraft are built for two reasons:
1. Liability insurance has increased for the companies
2. The Investment Tax Credit, which allowed
huge depreciation tax credits for "leasebacks", went
away decades ago.

#1 was partially limited a few years ago.

I heard #2 may be changing back soon. Anybody wanna
make $80,000 by putting a DG-1000 on leaseback? ;-P
Yeah, I know, only as an LLC...

I guess I just don't subscribe to the belief that "flying is for
everybody" - heck, there are a lot of people out there who shouldn't
even be driving a car!

I believe exactly the same thing. But I also believe that
far more fatalities are caused by overconfidence, lack of
self-discipline, lack of honest self-evaluation, and desire to
"push the limit" than by lack of regulation. I also don't
think checkrides evaluate hazardous attitudes at all.

RANDOM COMMENT: I actually hate the fact the FAA requires
3 hours of instrument training for power instead of three
hours of cloud separation estimation and visibility estimation.
I'll take good judgement and risk avoidance over mediocre
skill any day.

Over the years, I've picked eight people who, under my breath,
I thought would have accident problems. I stopped flying with
them or training them. In each case I had one-on-one critiques
with them. All eight finished lots of checkrides, in fact
faster and with more determination than others. These are
bright, confident people.

None have died, but six have severely damaged aircraft.
One injured a passenger.

I've also passed along dozens of others, and none of them have
ever injured anyone or severely damaged an aircraft. This
is despite quick training time and very low hours.

I think this had little to do with training, skill, or regulation.
All of these pilots would do almost as well or as poorly
with any instructor or examiner. Some pilots just have
excellent self-assessment. Others, when they get to
be in charge in an airplane, grow HORNS!

I don't think more FAA checkrides is the answer. I don't
think one or two questions as part of a test is the answer.
I think endorsements and a one-on-one train/test
scenario is the answer. I think encouraging
a continued reliance on the lowest, most intimate level of
evaluation and training (the CFI) is better. Heck,
if you wanna be stingy, make the endorsements required
by inspectors/DPE's, just
not as one big ball of wax on a checkride.

Get 'em in the door with the hamburger. They'll hear about
the soyburger, cheese, bacon, hot sauce and
spicy fries. They may even smell them. They may even
taste some from a friend's plate. But I believe THEY
should decide if the item is too expensive or too spicy
or too fattening.

And these customers, with good judgement, are the ones I want.
I want them focussing on each new accomplishment, and want them
to see their flight training as a hamburger with lots
of carefully chosen extras. I don't want them forced with
the choice of:

1. expensive, all of it, and messy,
2. nothing at all.

If you haven't, I'd really encourage reading Dennis Wright's
comments in Soaring Dec 2003 (might be Nov?). This is from
a smart guy who just had a super-burger...


Of course, I guess that whatever happens, Darwin and gravity will sort
it all out in the long run. It usually does.

Darwin is HUGE. Did you notice that there is NO hour requirement
for solo? Did you notice the FAA is adamant about solo time?

I just don't want to be
in the same piece of sky when it happens.


Be careful about wanting fewer gliders in the sky. Fewer
gliders means fewer towplanes, fewer aero clubs, fewer
competitions (and fewer posters to this newsgroup).
Do you really want that? :P

Cheers

Kirk
66
Snobby Elitist Glasshole
and PEZ addict


Mark
35 going on 21
Armchair Quarterback and Troll
Ramen addict (chinese version of PEZ)

"rec.aviation.soaring - BS free since Dec 12, 2003 1:45 PM PST"