Basic skills and flight training...

[Frank Giger]

For my entire lifetime, there has been a split in the aviation community between the "aviation is transportation and all that matters is driving the airplane from A to B" camp, and the "aviation is about flying in all three dimensions, mastering the environment and the machine, camp.

Wes

I'd be a bit more generous than that in saying that the transportation guys are looking to master flying, but concentrating on different skills.

It also got me thinking this schism developed very early in aviation, back in the barnstorming days.

On one hand you had Voss doing power off loops and landing dead stick on a dime for properly awed crowds, showing pilot skills and stunts that nobody would routinely attempt today.

On the other there was Lindbergh staring at a poorly lit panel in pitch darkness proving that the mail could be delivered regardless of the time of day and visibility using the cutting edge of technology of the day to "automate" flight.

Both camps had more than their fair share of wrecks perfecting their arts.

I reckon that if one were to put them together they'd soon disagree on what "real flying" was all about, no matter how respectfully. Both were dangerous occupations that relied on different focus of piloting skills.

Today the schism is much narrower because the bulk of pilots fill the void between them. Aerobatic and stunt pilots are a tiny group that get our notice by name, and true transportation pilots (commercial airline) are nearly nameless because they do their jobs too well.

Even in the GA population, the numbers of instrument rated pilots is thin compared to the bulk and those that are current makes it even thinner - mostly because the average IFR Joe is going to fly VFR whenever possible. Yet the schism still exists, and gets over magnified.

Why?

First, there's a bit of elitism that goes with an IFR rating, which is natural. It's a skill set that isn't easy to obtain and maintain (time and cost) and it shows a dedication to flying. While intellectual curiosity in everything aviation isn't the sole bailiwick of instrument ratings, they do go hand in hand. This was the thinking behind one of Mac's articles about the difference between pilots and aviators, where he was a bit clumsy and cast the average VFR only pilot as akin to the Sunday Duffer. Like most things Mac writes, he's a bit right and a bit wrong - intellectual curiosity is mutually exclusive of ratings.

Second, there's a bit of reverse snobbery on the part of the self proclaimed "stick and rudder" group* that will snort at automation and computerization as useless information overload. The Macs of the world aren't really flying the aircraft so much as managing systems, and at best are sucking the fun out of it almost criminally and at worst is resulting in people who are ill equipped to meet with critical tasks when the electronic fairy dust runs out....if they're not being led to their deaths by blindly following it anywhere it would lead when it's seeming working perfectly. It's a thinking that is as wrong as IFR snobbery.

Third, and I think most importantly, there's a huge financial gain to maintaining the schism by manufacturing firms. If we're to believe their press a pilot who doesn't have the latest dual flatscreen system isn't just behind the times, he's doing it wrong. And they go after us where we live - safety. Does a Cub really need an EFIS and a Garmin 796 with the moving map, artificial terrain, updating weather, and traffic informations? No. In fairness, it's an option beyond the standard panel for a Carbon Cub - but why? Because Garmin and the whole of the industry have done a full court press on us that in order to be safe and do things correctly we need their products.

Aviation related media is funded by them through advertising, and that directly influences how and what they write about. Not in the nefarious way one immediately thinks about, though. If I were running a magazine that featured a lot of advertisements about high tech avionics I'd make sure I had staff that were knowledgeable about it to give honest reviews and opinions about what companies are peddling on my pages. And since they're on staff I'd have them write on other stuff, too....and they'd all tend to focus on what they know and love best - IFR skills - using their experiences and viewpoints as a guide.

Based on the number of replies to this thread, I think I should have titled it "Mac is wrong again."

* I'm card carrying member number 7686383.

[Louis]

If dead reckoning is going to be replaced by electronics it would seem to follow that we should not waste time in schools teaching kids how to do arithmetic by hand when there's pocked calculators everywhere. At least my kids are still doing long division and multiplication problems by hand and I'm glad for it. Even if one does have a calculator with him at all times having an innate sense of how the numbers work is very helpful for seeing whether or not the answer makes any sense when you hit the wrong key. The same , in my opinion is true of navigation. I just wonder how many pilots these days are punching the wrong waypoint into the gps and heading off in a direction which deviates absurdly from the course to their destination. ....Louis

[WLIU]

I will suggest that just as learning multiplication and division provides a foundation for using calculators, stick and rudder skills provide a foundation that you build on as you learn to fly more complicated airplanes and systems.

Or to put it another way, pilots still crash after shooting a precise GPS approach to a runway that requires circling to land, at night, with the clouds near minimums. This extreme example illustrates how a pilot can master the systems and the navigation, but fail in flying the airplane.

I will suggest that if we want to de-emphasize stick and rudder skills in our curriculum, then we have to stop complaining about the accident rate and just live with the number of crashes we see. A friend showed me a video the other day where a Mooney suffered and engine failure after takeoff. Started a turn with no visible lowering of the nose. Stall, spin, explosion on impact.

In truth, your average pilot is not often called upon to demonstrate superior stick and rudder skills. So we debate.

Best of luck,

Wes

[Frank Giger]

The thing that rocked me back in my seat when reading the article is that Mac was suggesting those things for students.

Now, then, if he was speaking about individual pilot proficiency training plans I'd be on board with him. As a very average pilot, I try to work through at least two of the things needed in order to fly a plane well besides boring a hole in the sky.