On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 05:00:37 -0700 (PDT), Dan
wrote:

On Mar 25, 7:25 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

Larry, I don't think your point is that far from Dudley's

Really? I think Mr. H. believes that changing the presentation in the
flight manuals is the key to graduating more airmen, while I believe
such a change would minimally affect the rate of issuance of new
certificates. I'd say we are pretty far apart, almost polar in this
discussion.

but I think
you're missing the overall assumption, to wit, that today's GA new
pilot induction system is too inconsistent and too confusing, and thus
indiscriminately filters out people who have the requisite desire,
money, and mental acuity.

I believe it takes someone with the burning desire to overcome the
obstacles to his/her achieving their dream of flight to make a
competent airman, not someone who needs to be coddled into it. There
is so much to MASTER (physics, motor skills, navigation, meteorology,
regulations, command, communications, procedures, ...), that mere
coaxing and prodding isn't going to be a sufficient motivational force
for someone who lacks the inate desire, and yes love, of flight. Of
course this is just my subjective opinion.

People who seek out a CFI to learn to fly are a self-selected group.
They know how to read, drive, make a schedule, write a check -- and so
are probably equipped with all the ability they need to join the ranks
of airmen/women.

Personally, I don't believe ability alone is adequate to produce a
good quality airman.

You don't have to be an engineer to understand basic engineering
concepts. And -- quite frankly -- there's not much "engineering
knowledge" required to fly VFR or IFR into the most complex airspace
in the NAS.

There may not be much engineering knowledge required to navigate the
NAS, but there is definitely some. Those who lack the ability or
temperament to successfully apply engineering principles in any single
phase of flight, will fail. Imagine a soccor-mom type trying to work
the weight and balance of a PA28 with their arcane graphs, or
attempting to grasp the dynamics of weather, esoteric IFR procedures,
or even the FARs. I don't mean to stenotype all housewives, but
hopefully you get the idea.

GPS in its current incarnation does not make it easier for new pilots
to join our ranks because GPS units fail, so they must also know
Pilotage, Dead Reckoning, and Radio navigation.

While it is true that back up procedures must be mastered, I believe
there is little doubt that NASA's Highway In The Sky equipment could
be seen as an enabling technology for those who are uncomfortable with
all the internal visualization required to remain positionally aware
via VOR navigation, or IMC operations.


But we're losing a large fraction of potential new pilots every year
because the [sic] come to the airport, walk around and look at airplanes,
yet never get greeted, never get someone's interest, and never get
"sold."


I don't believe that it is appropriate nor desirable to "sell"
becoming an airman, anymore than it is appropriate for a clergyman to
sell religion. One is either smitten or not. Further, I don't
believe those potential flight students who are lost through
intimidation by less than optimal flight schools are the sort of folks
that make good pilots. The last thing I would desire to see foisted
on would be aviators is the deceit and duplicity of marketeers.

--
The true Axis Of Evil in America is our genius at marketing
coupled with the stupidity of our people. -- Bill Maher