Cheers P2.
I had time to take a stroll through the UP thread; there are some 'good heads' on there, worth the time spent. However; (only a small one) a notion which may assist.
I spent some time today looking back at 'learned' knowledge; can't count the times that 'education' kept me out of harms way; but, I believe (firmly) that back in the early days, the thing which saved folks scraping me off a hill side or troubling the fire fighters (Bless 'em) was a humble, wonderful gentle-man known as Max Flutter(legend). Back in the day, there was 'operational control' and full position reporting. You attended the briefing office, submitted your flight plan and, if it was within the bounds of legal, then it got stamped. Before that, you had an option; pick up the 'printed' weather forecast (needed to support the flight plan) or, you found time etc 'chat with the 'Met Man'. For me it became almost a go – no go' decision if there was no one on duty. I made it a habit to rrive early enough to ensure I could spend time with Max; the 'education' freely offered was ffar and way 'superior' to any time spent on course. The man simply 'understood' the weather and could make it comprehensible to the young Luddite begging his indulgence. Typical of the 'senior' breed at the time. Engineers who always had time to explain; of CAA 'Examiners of Airmen' who always, without fail sought to put a polish on a rough performance. Same-same from grown up pilots. I could bang on.
I just wonder if the 'tick a box' system whilst 'justifying' the issue of a certificate is simply compounding a problem. CASA id off the hook; government so remote and utterly divorced as to be considered off the planet. Take a simple thing – let's say a cross-wind landing. Say the book demands that three be done to satisfy the 'requirement' – box ticked; moving on. BUT what of the 'quality' of the approach, landing, runway control and even the 'assessment' of the 'planned' approach? Sure three landings in cross-wind – TICK – but is that enough to ensure an acceptable approach and landing in seriously bad weather with horrible winds?
I don't know; but somewhere, somehow, the system is failing: there is no such animal as 'inadvertent' entry into non VMC – except perhaps on an instrument approach, at night when there is an unseen band of lower than minima cloud;or, a Genie is pissing on the windscreen, without warning.
For whatever the reasons these event reoccur, year after year, perhaps it is time a solution was sort. Some folk will never stop doing it; but maybe, perhaps, we can 'dissuade' some of the more adventurous to think twice. Old true words – 'Measure twice – cut once'. That's it – said my say – Endit...
Toot – toot...
I had time to take a stroll through the UP thread; there are some 'good heads' on there, worth the time spent. However; (only a small one) a notion which may assist.
I spent some time today looking back at 'learned' knowledge; can't count the times that 'education' kept me out of harms way; but, I believe (firmly) that back in the early days, the thing which saved folks scraping me off a hill side or troubling the fire fighters (Bless 'em) was a humble, wonderful gentle-man known as Max Flutter(legend). Back in the day, there was 'operational control' and full position reporting. You attended the briefing office, submitted your flight plan and, if it was within the bounds of legal, then it got stamped. Before that, you had an option; pick up the 'printed' weather forecast (needed to support the flight plan) or, you found time etc 'chat with the 'Met Man'. For me it became almost a go – no go' decision if there was no one on duty. I made it a habit to rrive early enough to ensure I could spend time with Max; the 'education' freely offered was ffar and way 'superior' to any time spent on course. The man simply 'understood' the weather and could make it comprehensible to the young Luddite begging his indulgence. Typical of the 'senior' breed at the time. Engineers who always had time to explain; of CAA 'Examiners of Airmen' who always, without fail sought to put a polish on a rough performance. Same-same from grown up pilots. I could bang on.
I just wonder if the 'tick a box' system whilst 'justifying' the issue of a certificate is simply compounding a problem. CASA id off the hook; government so remote and utterly divorced as to be considered off the planet. Take a simple thing – let's say a cross-wind landing. Say the book demands that three be done to satisfy the 'requirement' – box ticked; moving on. BUT what of the 'quality' of the approach, landing, runway control and even the 'assessment' of the 'planned' approach? Sure three landings in cross-wind – TICK – but is that enough to ensure an acceptable approach and landing in seriously bad weather with horrible winds?
I don't know; but somewhere, somehow, the system is failing: there is no such animal as 'inadvertent' entry into non VMC – except perhaps on an instrument approach, at night when there is an unseen band of lower than minima cloud;or, a Genie is pissing on the windscreen, without warning.
For whatever the reasons these event reoccur, year after year, perhaps it is time a solution was sort. Some folk will never stop doing it; but maybe, perhaps, we can 'dissuade' some of the more adventurous to think twice. Old true words – 'Measure twice – cut once'. That's it – said my say – Endit...
Toot – toot...