Have you ever...

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...

I hear of a guy around my
area who has not had a medical for 15 years.

Which simply shows that a medical (esp. a 3rd class
for hobby flying) is meaningless and should be eliminated.

I heard of a guy flying around who didn't even have a license.
I guess that "simply shows" that a pilot's license
"is meaningless and should be eliminated".

/Sarcasm/OFF

--
Jeff Shirton jshirton at cogeco dot
ca

Keep thy airspeed up, lest the earth come from below
and smite thee. - William Kershner
Challenge me (Theophilus) for a game of chess at Chessworld.net!

"Jeff Shirton" writes:

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...

I hear of a guy around my
area who has not had a medical for 15 years.

Which simply shows that a medical (esp. a 3rd class
for hobby flying) is meaningless and should be eliminated.

I heard of a guy flying around who didn't even have a license.
I guess that "simply shows" that a pilot's license
"is meaningless and should be eliminated".

No, but it shows much of the training for a PP-ASEL is
meaningless...and can be reduced. Hence the Sport license.

Bob,

No, but it shows much of the training for a PP-ASEL is
meaningless.


You might wanna add "most of the time". Which doesn't mean one can omit
it completely - quite the contrary. Hence the serious limitations on
what you can do with a Sport license.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

No, but it shows much of the training for a PP-ASEL is
meaningless.


You might wanna add "most of the time". Which doesn't mean one can omit
it completely - quite the contrary. Hence the serious limitations on
what you can do with a Sport license.

This could be the start of an interesting thread.

What would YOU eliminate from the Private Pilot training curriculum?

Just off the top of my head I can think of half a dozen stupid, pointless
things I was forced to puke back on the written that I've never, ever used
again...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:ZNO6e.8341$Bb3.4369@attbi_s22...
No, but it shows much of the training for a PP-ASEL is
meaningless.


You might wanna add "most of the time". Which doesn't mean one can omit
it completely - quite the contrary. Hence the serious limitations on
what you can do with a Sport license.

This could be the start of an interesting thread.

What would YOU eliminate from the Private Pilot training curriculum?

Just off the top of my head I can think of half a dozen stupid, pointless
things I was forced to puke back on the written that I've never, ever used
again...

Are you talking about flight training, or High School? :~

Just off the top of my head I can think of half a dozen stupid, pointless
things I was forced to puke back on the written that I've never, ever
used
again...

Are you talking about flight training, or High School? :~

Well, flight training, in this thread.

I personally would eliminate all the stupid "look at the picture of the VOR,
and tell me your position from the station" crap. Same with the ADF.
(Hell, I don't even *have* an ADF in my plane.)

And you could eliminate all the "pressure altitude" versus "density
altitude" computational B.S., too. Never used it yet.

And while we're at it, the FAA could simplify the ridiculous VFR versus IFR
ceiling/visibility rules, along with the almost laughable alphabet-soup
airspace designations.

But I guess that's a different topic...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:30a7e.12275$Bb3.8317@attbi_s22...
Just off the top of my head I can think of half a dozen stupid,
pointless
things I was forced to puke back on the written that I've never, ever
used
again...

Are you talking about flight training, or High School? :~

Well, flight training, in this thread.

I personally would eliminate all the stupid "look at the picture of the
VOR, and tell me your position from the station" crap. Same with the
ADF. (Hell, I don't even *have* an ADF in my plane.)

And you could eliminate all the "pressure altitude" versus "density
altitude" computational B.S., too. Never used it yet.

And while we're at it, the FAA could simplify the ridiculous VFR versus
IFR ceiling/visibility rules, along with the almost laughable
alphabet-soup airspace designations.

But I guess that's a different topic...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


and delete the FAA/NTSB accident/incedent reporting rules (just know where
to look them up after you crash). Consolidate the three definitions of
"night" to one (perhaps "when it is dark")

Mike
MU-2

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:30a7e.12275$Bb3.8317@attbi_s22...
[...]
I personally would eliminate all the stupid "look at the picture of the
VOR, and tell me your position from the station" crap. Same with the
ADF. (Hell, I don't even *have* an ADF in my plane.)

And you could eliminate all the "pressure altitude" versus "density
altitude" computational B.S., too. Never used it yet.

And while we're at it, the FAA could simplify the ridiculous VFR versus
IFR ceiling/visibility rules, along with the almost laughable
alphabet-soup airspace designations.

Perhaps you would prefer that all pilot certificates be issued with
restrictions stipulating precisely what it is the pilot was actually taught?
Then, every time you want to add some sort of facet to your flying
repertoire, you would have to go through (at a minimum) specific flight
training and a logbook endorsement?

The required training is a compromise. Once certificated, a pilot is
permitted to engage in a wide variety of flying. Just because YOU don't
personally avail yourself of those privileges, that doesn't mean you don't
have them, nor does it mean it was a waste of time for you to obtain them.
It would be impractical to try to tailor each and every pilot certificate
specifically to the needs of that pilot.

By the way, it's unclear what you mean by "the ridiculous VFR versus IFR
ceiling/visibility rules". There are no minimum ceiling or visibility rules
for IFR flight. That's the whole point of IFR. As far as the
"alphabet-soup airspace designations", frankly it's a heck of a lot more
organized than the old named airspace designations were, and it's gone a
long way to helping international flight become more uniform (in spite of
the many exceptions that still exist, of course).

Pete

Jay Honeck wrote:

And you could eliminate all the "pressure altitude" versus "density
altitude" computational B.S., too. Never used it yet.

If you fly in the mountains in the summer time, knowing the
difference and being able to compute the D.A. can mean the difference
between flying and eating a tree sandwich. Given some of the antics
I've seen from newbie mountain pilots over the years, I was under the
impression that they'd already dropped this from the curriculum.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Jay,

And you could eliminate all the "pressure altitude" versus "density
altitude" computational B.S., too. Never used it yet.


Every year, pilots get hurt by disregarding DA effects on their flying.
And you want to do away with at least trying to educate them on it?

And what's wrong with having airspace numbered A thru G instead of
ridiculous acronyms?

As you can easily see, your view on what makes sense and what doesn't
is extremely personal...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)