![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
ups.com... I don't understand why there are so many negative comments discouraging high time solo students. Well, be sure first that you are correctly interpreting the "negative comments". For example, the post you replied to did not actually include any such "negative comments discouraging high time solo students" (I would say "high time pre-solo students", but I think I get your meaning). There's a different between asserting that some people may not be suited to being a pilot, and asserting that one can determine whether a person is suited to being a pilot by considering their time to solo. The former is what the post to which you replied said. Others have indeed said the latter, but those people appear to me to be in the minority. I didn't actually count, and it may be I'm just less sensitive to the question, but I don't get any sort of general wash of opinion that ought to discourage high time pre-solo students. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
ps.com... This is exactly the type of comments that makes me sad to hear from pilots - 'not everyone is cut out to be a pilot'. This attempts to make the point that pilots are some kind of superior being. Well, for better or for worse, the point is valid, even if the justification here is not. I tend to agree with you that time to solo is much more indicative of issues related to the instruction. Either a problem with the instructor himself, or perhaps related to stretching the flying out way too infrequently (I actually made two attempts to learn to fly...in the first, I flew 17 hours over the span of five months, and never did solo by the end of that time). However, I also believe that it is true that "not everyone is cut out to be a pilot". Of course, I also hold the radical view that not everyone is cut out to drive a motor vehicle or operate a personal computer connected to the Internet, to name a couple of things that as a society we take as a right rather than a privilege, even though that "right" carries great potential for harm to others. As you correctly point out, the bulk of being a pilot has to do with judgment and factual knowledge, rather than motor skills (especially with current aircraft design...this wasn't always true, IMHO). And frankly, not everyone is capable of exercising the judgment, nor of learning the factual knowledge, required to be a pilot. In some cases, this impairment is due to some real physiological issue, though in most cases it's simply due to a basic lack of motivation and responsibility on the applicant's part. Either way, you're left with the fact that there are people out there who simply will never be able to become a pilot. Pete |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"Peter Duniho" wrote: As you correctly point out, the bulk of being a pilot has to do with judgment and factual knowledge, rather than motor skills (especially with current aircraft design...this wasn't always true, IMHO). And frankly, not everyone is capable of exercising the judgment, nor of learning the factual knowledge, required to be a pilot. A coworker was at something like 30 hours before she broke off her training. She just couldn't get the hang of landing the airplane. She still wants to fly, and will likely try again sometime in the future. Though I'm not a CFI, I still want to say that I don't think her problem is judgement or motor skills (unless somehow she is different in the airplane than on the ground). When she starts her training again and gets to solo will be a treat. -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Bob Noel" wrote in message
... A coworker was at something like 30 hours before she broke off her training. She just couldn't get the hang of landing the airplane. She still wants to fly, and will likely try again sometime in the future. Though I'm not a CFI, I still want to say that I don't think her problem is judgement or motor skills (unless somehow she is different in the airplane than on the ground). When she starts her training again and gets to solo will be a treat. Well, since landing an airplane tests only motor skills and not judgment (that is, assuming the instructor aboard is handling the judgment side, ensuring that a safe landing is *possible*), I don't see what her failure to land the plane says about judgment. As far as what it says about motor skills goes, I agree that just because she didn't "get it" in 30 hours doesn't necessarily mean she won't after more training. Assuming she can drive a car, it's likely that with the right instructor and situation, she can learn to land in far less time than 30 hours. And just because this is Usenet, I should amend my previous post to clarify: yes, there are some people who are physically incapable of the motor skills to land an airplane (due to a physical handicap, for example). But the average human being, especially one that has already successfully been taught to drive a car, should have no trouble handling an airplane given proper and sufficient training. Motor skills just shouldn't normally be an impediment to being a pilot. Pete |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Part of the problem with the car analogy is that in a plane we are flying
through an unseen medium. Some people, I think can have a hard time viscerally comprehending that. You cna see a road and any bumps in it. Some can "see" the air pretty well and know what to expect, but some never really develope that sense. I learned in a hang glider, and I think that helped me a lot with my PPL since I was much more intimately aware of what the wind does. It really needs to become instinctive. If you could teach some of these "unteachables" in perfectly calm winds all the time, anybody who can handle a car should be able to handle a plane. Just teach to the numbers. Throw in some wind, which is almost always (if not always) present, and their reactions aren't there. Most should get it at some point, but there may be a few who never will. mike "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... As far as what it says about motor skills goes, I agree that just because she didn't "get it" in 30 hours doesn't necessarily mean she won't after more training. Assuming she can drive a car, it's likely that with the right instructor and situation, she can learn to land in far less time than 30 hours. And just because this is Usenet, I should amend my previous post to clarify: yes, there are some people who are physically incapable of the motor skills to land an airplane (due to a physical handicap, for example). But the average human being, especially one that has already successfully been taught to drive a car, should have no trouble handling an airplane given proper and sufficient training. Motor skills just shouldn't normally be an impediment to being a pilot. Pete |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
My perspective:
I have yet to solo. I have 5 hours under my belt and in my logbook, starting with no prior experience. I've done everything the FAA wants at least once (except land the plane). My CFI tells me I'll solo by 10. I'm about 50, I'm having fun, and I see no reason to push it faster than I can handle it. It's all confidence and practice (aside from the money). Fred |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm about 50, I'm having fun, and I see no reason to push it faster
than I can handle it. It's all confidence and practice (aside from the money). An excellent attitude toward training in any endeavor, Fred. I wish I could have done the same. Unfortunately, that money thing prevented me (and many more like me) from taking such a relaxed approach to flight training. When I learned to fly I had a finite amount of money that could be devoted to the endeavor, setting in an account that I set up specifically for the purpose of learning to fly. When that money was gone, I knew my training would be finished -- certificate or not. I had two little kids, a house, and a wife working part-time so that she could raise our kids. There was NO margin for error. This gave me a great incentive to finish up, and -- as a result -- I really kept my nose to the grindstone. Although this approach served me well, I truly wish I could have had the luxury of taking it a bit slower. I would have learned a lot more, IMHO. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"fred" wrote:
My perspective: I have yet to solo. I have 5 hours under my belt and in my logbook, starting with no prior experience. I've done everything the FAA wants at least once (except land the plane). My CFI tells me I'll solo by 10. I'm about 50, I'm having fun, and I see no reason to push it faster than I can handle it. It's all confidence and practice (aside from the money). Fred Excellent attitude. Ron Lee |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Recently, fred posted:
My perspective: I have yet to solo. I have 5 hours under my belt and in my logbook, starting with no prior experience. I've done everything the FAA wants at least once (except land the plane). My CFI tells me I'll solo by 10. And, if it turns out that you don't, it's no big deal. If you feel like you are ready when your CFI says "go", then have at it, if not, take another hour to sort out your concerns. I'm about 50, I'm having fun, and I see no reason to push it faster than I can handle it. It's all confidence and practice (aside from the money). Absolutely the right attitude. There is no prize for soloing sooner and no penalty for soloing later than the next guy. One thing about those of us who started flying in our middle age; we're more conservative. When I started, I knew that there was no real chance that I'd have a career in aviation, so there was no pressure to follow some fast-track notion of progress. It's better to get it right, rather than get it fast. Neil |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"mike regish" wrote in message
... Part of the problem with the car analogy is that in a plane we are flying through an unseen medium. Some people, I think can have a hard time viscerally comprehending that. You cna see a road and any bumps in it. Some can "see" the air pretty well and know what to expect, but some never really develope that sense. I don't think so. Most drivers aren't paying any attention to the road over which they travel, and the basics of operating an airplane are easy enough to master without considering at all the physical nature of the air through which one flies. I agree that this perception makes a difference in how good a pilot (or driver) is. But it's not necessary, and many people in both activities never develop that perception (though probably this failure occurs more often for drivers than pilots). The car analogy works just fine...a person who can be taught to drive can be taught to fly an airplane. It might not be possible to make them a pilot, but they clearly have the motor skills required for the basic control of an airplane. I learned in a hang glider, and I think that helped me a lot with my PPL since I was much more intimately aware of what the wind does. It really needs to become instinctive. If you could teach some of these "unteachables" in perfectly calm winds all the time, anybody who can handle a car should be able to handle a plane. Just teach to the numbers. Throw in some wind, which is almost always (if not always) present, and their reactions aren't there. But just as not being in "perfectly calm winds" causes problems for some would-be pilots, so too will not being on "perfectly smooth roads" cause problems for some would-be drivers. It really is the same issue, the main difference being that the standard of qualification is lower for drivers, and so we actually have "certificated drivers" who are not capable of safely dealing with any road condition significantly different from clear and dry. Just ask the millions of drivers here in the Seattle area who earlier this week clogged our roads with vehicles improperly equipped for the snow conditions, driven by drivers unqualified to operate in those conditions. Most should get it at some point, but there may be a few who never will. Agreed. But it usually has nothing to do with basic motor skills. There are lots of people who are permitted to drive a motor vehicle who still aren't suited for being a pilot. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 03:55 AM |
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 02:24 PM |
Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 11:35 AM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |