UdoR wrote:
But come on, it really got a lot easier over the last decades.
I’m still amazed that using flight planning tools with access to detailed wind forecasts you can land within a minute or two of your flight planned landing time. In my first flying life (1983-1997) you got a wind forecast which was an average over large areas and only (at non-oxygen levels) for FL50 and FL100.
UdoR wrote:
Boy that was with huge paper maps, and no GPS, and you had to study French geographic encyclopedias. And then there was weather, absolutely impossible to forecast, you just had TAFs and your phone at home. We made a weather stop and a fuel stop, but other than that it all went well. This was a huge task in its days.
Of course today planning per se is easier and we have more possibilities regarding weather and so on. Nobody is questioning that. I had GPS even then and VORs and NDB’s. Yes, navigation is nicer today, so is weather products (even though a lot of people get more confused by the variety of those than by the then free briefings issued by professional forecasters).
My point was: Did you have to call Bordeaux or any of the other places for PPR, did you have to figure out what customs number to call and who else needed to pre-approve your then flight across the border? Today, almost ALL larger airports are PPR and quite a few are outpriced too.
NONE of my then regular destinations had any of the hassles which are showstoppers today: PPR for parking PPR for customs PPR for handling, red tape for actually being allowed to fly there, books of NOTAMS and airspace structures from hell. I never ever called ahead to an airport. Hotels? Land and ask the locals. Worked nicely. No, I did not need booking com and fake reviews, the locals know much better most of the time.
Clearly, it is more fun today with all the goodies we have, but what I really want back is the freedom to use airports without having to start weeks ahead of time to figure out who has what restriction to use. While flying then I sometimes decided short notice to land someplace, which is near impossible today unless you are talking of small airfields. Several of my favorite hangouts today are either outpriced or PPR’d into not available without prior confirmation. That is what I am talking about.
Airborne_Again wrote:
There are a fair number of FIs that teach precisely this for lift-off at least and object to using a rotate speed even if one is given in the POH. You can get away with this is you fly e.g. a Cessna 172 but with a PA28.
Yep. But once you start to fly a bit more capable airplanes….
LeSving wrote:
This is precisely why people stop flying. Everything is treated like an airline. GA is NOT a miniature airline!!!
Nobody said it was.
LeSving wrote:
This is however also the reason why people would be better off purchasing and using their own planes. None of this nonsense, and instead they use their time to actually get to know their plane, and get some needed currency.
I guess once people have their own airplane and don’t change type every time they fly, they might actually want to read the POH and all it’s annexes and figure out what they own and what they can do with them. Not all, but it’s certainly an incentive.
So yes, here I am with you: Knowing your own airplane (or any you fly) is a must.
Clearly, there are also pilots like some owners of cars who will never know they actually have air condition or how their on board radio / cd player works. For pilots however, I find that unacceptable.
As for take off technique, again this hugely depends on the airplane in question. And again, this is a question of knowing your airplane and how to operate it. The latter part being referred to as standard operating procedures by some.
LeSving wrote:
In my experience there are two things that are the causes of 80-90% of all incidents (that could easily lead to accidents) : Lack of currency in general, but particularly in the plane they are flying. Lack of basic technical knowledge about the plane they are flying.
No objection, on the contrary, full agreement.
LeSving wrote:
I don’t see how this will improve with some SOPs. There is no substitute for currency and basic knowledge about the plane, not for GA at least.
I wonder if your uptake what SOP’s are really corresponds to what some of us are talking about here as SOP’s will do much of what you suggest before. Following checklists and procedures in flight does not have to be airline like at all. e.g. it is normally SOP to have the gear up in flight and down for landing. It is SOP to use flaps for various flight conditions. Knowing which and when to use what in which phase of flight. Performing checklists is SOP. SOP make things easier, not more difficult, otherwise they are done badly and need revision.
This is getting into the same territory as the TEM discussion.
One person’s “stuff they always do” is another person’s SOPs.
One person’s “think about the specific risks, use common sense and don’t do anything dumb” is another person’s TEM.
Just because you give it a name it doesn’t mean you’ve invented something unique or are somehow doing it better.
Graham wrote:
Just because you give it a name it doesn’t mean you’ve invented something unique or are somehow doing it better.
Absolutely. And just because it was given a name doesn’t mean it’s “airliner stuff”.
