I have no idea, but I am *soooo* up for giving it a try. Who do we know with a horse?Colonel Sanders wrote: Can the AvCan Brain Trust (tm) teach a horse calculus?
Inquiring minds want to know.
"Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Forever?"
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Well as extending the gear was really the inspiration for this theme, I can say that assuring the correct gear position could be the minor procedural item, and its omission only minor, as long as checking the landing gear position prior to landing is done in good time. The major mistake is failing to check gear position, and if this major omission mistake is not made, failing to select the gear becomes minor if the configuration is assured before its too late.but "minor" procedural or communication / navigation items that could always be done, at a little higher level of competency,
Allow me to quote myself from this same discussion (though different event) earlier this year:
So we've been squabbling about some unfortunate chap who slid on a Citation. For the sake of discussion, I'm going to presume he was appropriately trained and current. So what are learning [again] from this?
We have pilots here reading, who have never flown RG, and are getting more and more uneasy with what must be this awesome complexity, which causes experienced pilots to keep sliding on. Yes, one of you "never flown RG" pilots will one day fly an RG, and slid it on - it's just the reality of statistics. So, try hard to make it the other pilot - not you!
Then we have the newbies, just flying RG's, who are really paying attention, and probably getting this right,
Then we have the " 'been doing this for a while" pilots, who are becoming dangerous,
And, he have the "pros", who seem to have a rather alarming record of omission.....
EVERY time a plane slides along the ground on its belly, training has failed. That training failure, enabled a pilot failure. Sure, the pilot was trained to move the little round knob up and down when he should. And, he was trained to read the checklist which reminded him to check that he had done this. And he might even have another eager pilot along with him, who has that very same training - so what's missing? The training missed something....
In the mega 182 amphibian, I even have a lady's voice, but I STILL have to co think where I'm about to land it, she can't tell...
I opine that the training has to focus strongly on configuration assurance at each phase of flight. Use of a checklist is a great way to do this, and I know a lot of pilots who stop and read many times per flight - I can't criticize this, as long as they maintain a watch, leave time so they don't get behind, and actively prevent an interruption from causing missed checklist items.
But, what if the training was more basic? Forget primary focus on "type training", focus on "configuration assurance" training:
"I plan to next do _ _ _ _ _ with this aircraft, that will require _ _ _ _ _ configuration". Have I selected the configuration correctly? Checked, yes. We're done. ('till the next phase of flight).
I am so nervous that you lot will one day be having at me for putting the Teal on the surface with the wheels in the wrong position, that EVERY landing is preceded with (at altitude) verbal "Wheels are down/up for landing on land/water", and the same again on short final, with an out the window visual check. If I catch myself that I forgot one of those out loud configuration assurance speaks - it's a circuit, until I get it right. Happily, my 10 year old daughter often beats me to the second one these days, but I still smile and say it again to her.
I am surely not perfect, and statistics say I'm bound to bugger something up as the years pass, but I'm doing my best to keep whatever it is to be, so inconsequential, that it never makes news here!
Configuration assurance......
- Shiny Side Up
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5335
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Group W bench
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
I believe its teachable, but only so to those who want to learn it. I don't think everyone can be made a good pilot. Some of that's aptitude, some of its attitude. I do think that those traits are largely learned, but that's often well before they get to me, or any school. Only in the rarest of cases would I say someone is physiologically unable, though many are socially or psychologically unsuited.Big Pistons Forever wrote:
In aviation I think common sense and good airmanship are synonymous and I firmly believe good airmanship is teachable. If you inculcate a system of organized, predictable thinking, actions and anticipation of what is going to happen I think the end result will be a "sensible" pilot.
In this discussion I'm not sure common sense would be the right terminology since lots of sensible things you probably wouldn't find common in the pilot crowd. Many pilots strive to become specialists, which is unfortunate since it is somewhat self limiting and not even would you find agreement on how to fly a basic trainer.
The big problem I find with many pilots is that they often don't think critically about things, and often take everything at face value. A bad instructor can do a lot of damage, since most people learn by repeating what they see others do. One might say its not in our nature to question why. one only needs to make the mistake around small children with using matches and knives and then leave them in reach to find this out - though that might be both parties learning things the hard way. Not so desirable with airplanes. Either way, lots of things get propagated in the pilot world without question. The most obvious thing would be the whole "ACTPA" that spreads through the radio waves. If you ever ask anyone who says it why they say it, they won't have an answer, indeed they probably haven't thought about it. The lack of critical thinking about what we do. The best thing you can instill in someone is to question everything - but that's a lot of hard work. Its a brute force way of learning about stuff that generally makes people uncomfortable since one will come to the realisation of how little one knows.
What's more disappointing though is when one comes to the realisation that everyone else doesn't know a lot either. Its ok when they know and are trying to learn more too. Its disappointing when too often though, they think they've learned enough.
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
- Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Agreed 100%, but that's not a popularI don't think everyone can be made a good pilot
sentiment. Expect to be attacked for
being "elitist" for stating that fact.
I have been instructing continuously for
over 20 years (not as long as any of the
AvCan Brain Trust (tm)) and in that time,
I have concluded that there is a certain
percentage of the population - call it X% -
which simply should never be a PPL,
regardless of how much tireless remedial
training they receive.
There is also a certain percentage of the
population - call it Y% - that should never
work as a CPL. At the risk of enraging the
Brain Trust, Y > X.
Again, agree 100%. Too many pilots aremany pilots is that they often don't think critically about things, and often take everything at face value
slave to really inferior dogma, and simply
don't think. They have religion, printed
on paper, and it substitutes for thinking.
There you go. I wish that low-time pilotsA bad instructor can do a lot of damage
would learn that almost everything their
instructors teach them is wrong, or at
least severely arbitrary. Most of the time,
flight training sucks, and it's up to you to
teach yourself to fly well, despite it.
PS Here's another one:
Some people can throw a baseball at 100 MPH.
People are essentially equal.
Therefore anyone can be taught to throw a baseball at 100 MPH.
I would love to meet even a single member
of the AvCan Brain Trust (tm) that both holds
a PhD in Mathematics, and can throw a baseball
at 100 MPH.
Simply a matter of training, right?
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1461
- Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
- Location: YXL
- Contact:
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Maybe it just reduces itself to pure bullsh1t luck -- there are many unbelievable stories out there -- seems one only needs a horseshoe firmly embedded up their ass --

I can walk and chew gum at the same time -- I are pilotI would love to meet even a single member
of the AvCan Brain Trust (tm) that both holds
a PhD in Mathematics, and can throw a baseball
at 100 MPH.

Black Air has no Lift - Extra Fuel has no Weight
ACTPA
ACTPA

-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:22 am
- Location: In Position
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
I’m a big fan of this thread already!!
As far as I understand it, Common sense is the ability to learn from your mistakes, and apply it with forethought. It’s the ability to look forward given the variables you already know, apply mistakes in the past that you have learned from to get the best possible outcome given the situation. I personally feel that common sense and airmanship go hand in hand, but that’s just me!
HMV
As far as I understand it, Common sense is the ability to learn from your mistakes, and apply it with forethought. It’s the ability to look forward given the variables you already know, apply mistakes in the past that you have learned from to get the best possible outcome given the situation. I personally feel that common sense and airmanship go hand in hand, but that’s just me!
HMV
Courage is facing the challenge with a healthy fear, not being fearless - Les Stroud
- Shiny Side Up
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5335
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Group W bench
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
I wouldn't quite say that, only that they should do some thought on it themselves. You're not supposed to learn to fly by rote, but often people do. Learning shouldn't be a combative exercise after all, but instructors should have good reason for doing things. I hate to say it, but often when you find that someone does something that's not reasonable, the only reason that they do it was because they were taught or shown, or some cases saw someone else do it, and the only back up that line of reasoning often has is that their source "has lots of experience". It never occurs to anyone that someone with lots of experience might be wrong, but frequently no one takes a close look at what they are taking to be "lots of experience". One might say that it should thus be easier to take instruction from someone with low experience that you know isn't experienced so that its easier in your mind to question what's being taught. Something to think about.There you go. I wish that low-time pilots
would learn that almost everything their
instructors teach them is wrong, or at
least severely arbitrary.
I would say that for the most part, a majority of the people out there have the potential to become good at whatever physical activity one would choose to learn, but that's a different matter from "sense" and experience. Most people might be able to learn how to throw a 100mph fast ball, but it takes experience and learning to know when you throw one. The act of learning a physical skill is simply the application of repetition with a critical eye for improving. No sense repeating something wrong. Instruction really only comes in to help people past these kinds of blocks so that they can apply more repetition. Since learning something of that sort requires time, obviously not everyone can be good at everything, no one has figured out Ra's al Ghul's immortality secret yet. Wisdom or sense is what we learn from others, and can be learned on one's own if you're so equipped or a lot can be learned from the experience of others, though one must be a ruthless editor while doing the latter.
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Interesting discussion.
There is a component of humility to common sense.
That is, to have the sense to think that maybe I've gotten this wrong and should look at this situation in another way or from someone else's viewpoint.
There is a component of humility to common sense.
That is, to have the sense to think that maybe I've gotten this wrong and should look at this situation in another way or from someone else's viewpoint.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1461
- Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
- Location: YXL
- Contact:
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
so we can go full cycle and simply call it CRM --- by definition it also covers single pilot as well ---
Black Air has no Lift - Extra Fuel has no Weight
ACTPA
ACTPA

- Shiny Side Up
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5335
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Group W bench
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.rxl wrote: There is a component of humility to common sense.
William Shakespeare
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
- Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
I have been patiently waiting for the strenousYou're not supposed to learn to fly by rote, but often people do
objections to the above, because that's EXACTLY
how people learn to fly - and that's exactly how
licenced pilots are supposed to fly - with a thick
"How To Fly An Airplane" book open in their lap,
head down reading it instead of looking outside,
slavishly performing each step without any thought.
Incredibly, when you suggest that perhaps there
might be a better way to fly an airplane, well,
the attacks begin. Don't mess with their religion,
and don't challenge their Bible, which is their uber
thick checklist (do-list) that they use to fly an airplane.
Right - what happens when the "How To Fly" opusoften when you find that someone does something that's not reasonable, the only reason that they do it was because they were taught or shown, or some cases saw someone else do it, and the only back up that line of reasoning often has is that their source "has lots of experience". It never occurs to anyone that someone with lots of experience might be wrong, but frequently no one takes a close look at what they are taking to be "lots of experience".
is wrong? Well, obedient little pilots have accidents.
Harmless example. Couple weekends ago, glider towplane
developed excessive mag drop. It was obvious that the
problem was that they didn't lean on the ground, and idled
too slow. But they were told - and it was written in their
printed bible - NOT to lean on the ground, and NOT to idle
at 1100-1200 RPM, as Lycoming says to in the Operations
Manual PDF. So their bottom spark plugs fouled.
This is what happens when someone uses a printed piece
of paper as a substitute for their brains. This is what is
expected from pilots in Canada - follow the checklist, and
damn the consequences, OR ELSE.
Don't mess with the checklist religion. Only bad elitist
people do that. Egalitarian people religiously follow the
checklist, even if it leads them to a smoking hole in the
ground.
A great example of this is the 777 pilot who had a double
flameout on short final at LHR. Wasn't his fault - was a design
flaw in the fuel heaters, which let chunks of ice loose.
Against the QRH, he popped the flaps up from 35 to 25 to
reduce drag. He was crucified for it, despite the fact that
after six months of analysis, the AIB concluded that he had
done the right thing in an instant - the extra drag of the 35
flap would have resulted in the aircraft hitting stuff short of
the runway.
He did the right thing, and they crucified him. How dare he
be correct, and not follow the QRH. They fired his ass and
made his life a living hell.
Lesson there for everyone - always follow the checklist, even
if it's wrong, and even if it results in the death of everyone on
board. You don't mess with the checklist religion. Really
nasty people.
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
So true. +1.Shiny Side Up wrote:A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.rxl wrote: There is a component of humility to common sense.
William Shakespeare
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Colonel Sanders wrote:I have been instructing continuously for
over 20 years
Well Said.Colonel Sanders wrote: I wish that low-time pilots
would learn that almost everything their
instructors teach them is wrong, or at
least severely arbitrary
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2233
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
- Location: YUL
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
I know of a pilot (who had a history of incidents similar to what I am about to describe) who was tasked early one winter morning to go do a single pilot flight in a Navajo to another city to bring back a load of passengers. This took place over 20 years ago......
He arrived at the hangar early in the morning, in the dark, towed the Navajo from the hangar, did his pre-flight, fueled it, and took off, single pilot IFR.
The previous night, the same Navajo had done a cargo flight with another pilot who had removed all the passenger seats, in order to make room for the cargo. When that pilot returned from the cargo flight, he stowed the Navajo in the hangar without taking the time to replace the seats in the Navajo.
Well our friend takes off, flies out 45 minutes to the other city and it is only when he was attempting to board his passengers in that other city that he realizes that there are no seats in the back for him to sit his passengers......
Another story, another pilot. This was a pilot in his mid to late thirties: We were doing a scheduled run to a town where we spent the night and which had no jet fuel. We had a cache of 55 gal drums and every morning before take off, we had to pump one drum into each wing. To do this, after rolling a barrel in front of each wing (which we often had to shovel out from under snow), we had to go to a trailer, recover the step ladder, an electric pump, and a car battery, which was always kept in the trailer connected to a battery charger. Then we would pump out the two drums, remove the wing and tail covers, disconnect the engine heaters, stow everything back into the trailer, re-connect the battery to the battery charger and then do the flight.
That day, I was digging out and placing the fuel drums while my FO was getting the step ladder, the pump and the battery. He came out to tell me there was a problem with the battery. I went inside and noticed that the battery had overflowed, and was covered in acid. The battery charger's cutout had malfunctioned. I tested the battery in the trailer and found it was still capable of pumping our fuel. I went back to the fuel barrels while my FO proceeded with installing the step ladder, and carrying out the pump and battery. We fueled the aircraft (my colleague moved the battery and pump from the first barrel to the second one) and I stowed the empty barrels and removed the wing covers etc while my colleague stowed the battery, pump and ladder back in the trailer. I told him not to re-connect the battery, that we would arrange for the battery and charger to be replaced before the next morning's flight.
We had two legs to do. Later on in mid flight my FO called out in alarm. His pants and trench coat were disintegrating on him. On both sides. He had battery acid all over him. He did not know what battery acid did to clothes.......
He arrived at the hangar early in the morning, in the dark, towed the Navajo from the hangar, did his pre-flight, fueled it, and took off, single pilot IFR.
The previous night, the same Navajo had done a cargo flight with another pilot who had removed all the passenger seats, in order to make room for the cargo. When that pilot returned from the cargo flight, he stowed the Navajo in the hangar without taking the time to replace the seats in the Navajo.
Well our friend takes off, flies out 45 minutes to the other city and it is only when he was attempting to board his passengers in that other city that he realizes that there are no seats in the back for him to sit his passengers......
Another story, another pilot. This was a pilot in his mid to late thirties: We were doing a scheduled run to a town where we spent the night and which had no jet fuel. We had a cache of 55 gal drums and every morning before take off, we had to pump one drum into each wing. To do this, after rolling a barrel in front of each wing (which we often had to shovel out from under snow), we had to go to a trailer, recover the step ladder, an electric pump, and a car battery, which was always kept in the trailer connected to a battery charger. Then we would pump out the two drums, remove the wing and tail covers, disconnect the engine heaters, stow everything back into the trailer, re-connect the battery to the battery charger and then do the flight.
That day, I was digging out and placing the fuel drums while my FO was getting the step ladder, the pump and the battery. He came out to tell me there was a problem with the battery. I went inside and noticed that the battery had overflowed, and was covered in acid. The battery charger's cutout had malfunctioned. I tested the battery in the trailer and found it was still capable of pumping our fuel. I went back to the fuel barrels while my FO proceeded with installing the step ladder, and carrying out the pump and battery. We fueled the aircraft (my colleague moved the battery and pump from the first barrel to the second one) and I stowed the empty barrels and removed the wing covers etc while my colleague stowed the battery, pump and ladder back in the trailer. I told him not to re-connect the battery, that we would arrange for the battery and charger to be replaced before the next morning's flight.
We had two legs to do. Later on in mid flight my FO called out in alarm. His pants and trench coat were disintegrating on him. On both sides. He had battery acid all over him. He did not know what battery acid did to clothes.......
Last edited by Gilles Hudicourt on Fri May 30, 2014 1:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Great thread.
I think in certain circumstances there is a difference between small aircraft common sense and airline common sense. In small aircraft, and I remember this quite clearly, you are barraged with conflicting information about what is and isn't the correct way to operate. We all start off respecting our instructors, in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king, and in the flight school world the god-like Class I might only have about 2500 hrs. A Class IV might have 300-700 hrs. Do I trust a 700-hr pilot when he tells me to disregard published procedures because they are stupid? No win. Follow the POH, the flight school rules, the CARs etc. Sensible. You might feel like a naif, and be subtlely mocked. But you're not being sensible by trying to follow the lead of somebody barely one step ahead of you.
Then we graduate into the real world only to have our first boss talk, like some here are talking, out of both sides of his mouth. To wit, "follow the SOPs they are there to help you." But the moment the SOPs, or CARs, or (heaven forbid) common sense tells you to say no, you're admonished for being a pussy (perhaps not is so many words) or difficult, or unwilling to just get the job done. So which is sensible? This mag drop anecdote above, I wonder about the expectations being placed upon the example pilot; the POH from the manufacturer says one thing, and the grizzled 30-yr veteran says the complete opposite. Who to believe, who to trust? That doesn't require common sense, that requires a friggin rosetta stone. Follow the manufacturer- you're naive. Follow the veteran, off book- you get the job done, but at the cost of disregarding published procedures which in any commercial operation are regulatory. No win.
In the airline world there is no place and often no need for common sense. Just follow the procedures. Heroes who try to rebel against SOPs are the worst. Hey bud if you're so smart why not call up the fleet manager or chief pilot and tell him about your ideas? Likely there has already been a meeting (always the meetings), and vigorous discussion about your preferred method- and it was rejected. There is more than one way to skin a cat, yes. But nobody wants to hear your way. No airline anywhere uses procedures that aren't approved by the manufacturer. Can you imagine? And yet, airline pilots and those hoping to be (Seneca students) are mocked online for being book-smart nerdlingers with no common sense. Go buy an airplane and fly it your way if you need to but at work just follow the book, it's easier on everyone. The worst are those with so much common sense that they never felt the need to read a book. Is that sensible?
So I think that common sense is absolutely contextual. Don't Do What Donny Don't Does. Clear as mud.
I think in certain circumstances there is a difference between small aircraft common sense and airline common sense. In small aircraft, and I remember this quite clearly, you are barraged with conflicting information about what is and isn't the correct way to operate. We all start off respecting our instructors, in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king, and in the flight school world the god-like Class I might only have about 2500 hrs. A Class IV might have 300-700 hrs. Do I trust a 700-hr pilot when he tells me to disregard published procedures because they are stupid? No win. Follow the POH, the flight school rules, the CARs etc. Sensible. You might feel like a naif, and be subtlely mocked. But you're not being sensible by trying to follow the lead of somebody barely one step ahead of you.
Then we graduate into the real world only to have our first boss talk, like some here are talking, out of both sides of his mouth. To wit, "follow the SOPs they are there to help you." But the moment the SOPs, or CARs, or (heaven forbid) common sense tells you to say no, you're admonished for being a pussy (perhaps not is so many words) or difficult, or unwilling to just get the job done. So which is sensible? This mag drop anecdote above, I wonder about the expectations being placed upon the example pilot; the POH from the manufacturer says one thing, and the grizzled 30-yr veteran says the complete opposite. Who to believe, who to trust? That doesn't require common sense, that requires a friggin rosetta stone. Follow the manufacturer- you're naive. Follow the veteran, off book- you get the job done, but at the cost of disregarding published procedures which in any commercial operation are regulatory. No win.
In the airline world there is no place and often no need for common sense. Just follow the procedures. Heroes who try to rebel against SOPs are the worst. Hey bud if you're so smart why not call up the fleet manager or chief pilot and tell him about your ideas? Likely there has already been a meeting (always the meetings), and vigorous discussion about your preferred method- and it was rejected. There is more than one way to skin a cat, yes. But nobody wants to hear your way. No airline anywhere uses procedures that aren't approved by the manufacturer. Can you imagine? And yet, airline pilots and those hoping to be (Seneca students) are mocked online for being book-smart nerdlingers with no common sense. Go buy an airplane and fly it your way if you need to but at work just follow the book, it's easier on everyone. The worst are those with so much common sense that they never felt the need to read a book. Is that sensible?
So I think that common sense is absolutely contextual. Don't Do What Donny Don't Does. Clear as mud.
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
After reading this entire thread the only thing that keeps smacking me in the face is "I gently passed her off to another instructor, at
another school". Why wouldn't you just tell her she shouldnt be flying. I have had to look a hopeless student in the eye and tell them I dont think they can cut it as a pilot, shattering their dream....it sucks. If they chose to continue elsewhere there is nothing you can do about it. Instead of being honest you shirked it off to someone else.
You had an opportunity to prevent her from doing these stupid things and you didn't. Great job CS great job! Apparently common sense is short in some instructors also. I know one instructor I wouldnt trust.
another school". Why wouldn't you just tell her she shouldnt be flying. I have had to look a hopeless student in the eye and tell them I dont think they can cut it as a pilot, shattering their dream....it sucks. If they chose to continue elsewhere there is nothing you can do about it. Instead of being honest you shirked it off to someone else.
You had an opportunity to prevent her from doing these stupid things and you didn't. Great job CS great job! Apparently common sense is short in some instructors also. I know one instructor I wouldnt trust.
- Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Who died and made me God? ObviouslyWhy wouldn't you just tell her she shouldnt be flying
someone died and made you God. And
people here say I lack humility?!
Breaks my heart. I will cry myself to sleepI know one instructor I wouldnt trust
tonight.
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
First of all I fail to see what throwing a 100 mph fast ball, a PHD in mathematics, flying inverted aerobatics at zero feet or showcasing our truly inspiring humility in front of everyone has to do with equality. Different subject that has nothing to do with this thread.
Second, I've known extremely bright people with PHD's who shouldn't be left unsupervised in traffic or they'll be killed. They think I'm just as inept when they talk about things that are obvious to them.
People have different aptitudes and that's completely normal. For us we could be very highly trained and also naturally endowed with god-like prowess in an airplane, but we're still prone to making mistakes like forgetting to put the gear down. That's why we have checklists and procedures. I recently did something so unbelievably stupid in the airplane even the most inexperienced here would shake their head and think I was a complete moron.
Nobody is immune.
Second, I've known extremely bright people with PHD's who shouldn't be left unsupervised in traffic or they'll be killed. They think I'm just as inept when they talk about things that are obvious to them.
People have different aptitudes and that's completely normal. For us we could be very highly trained and also naturally endowed with god-like prowess in an airplane, but we're still prone to making mistakes like forgetting to put the gear down. That's why we have checklists and procedures. I recently did something so unbelievably stupid in the airplane even the most inexperienced here would shake their head and think I was a complete moron.
Nobody is immune.
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2233
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
- Location: YUL
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
All flying requires common sense. You need knowledge AND common sense.Dockjock wrote: In the airline world there is no place and often no need for common sense. Just follow the procedures.
Say you just took off for a long flight to a remote airport and you lose gizmo yxz. You know you can safely continue your flight without said gizmo because you have backup. The rules allow it. It is safe to do so.
But then your common sense kicks in. You ask your colleague to pull out your MEL. He/she replies that the MEL only applies to aircraft on the ground and that we are already airborne. That is correct. But you check it anyway. Then you discover that Xyz gizmo is not in the MEL or is not defer-able. It's a no go item.
Yes we can safely and legally continue. But when we land at the remote airport where there is no mechanic, no spare parts, we will be grounded there. So we make a u turn and come back to land in our home base..
Common sense made you take that decision.
- single_swine_herder
- Rank 7
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:35 pm
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
First, excellent discussion to date and thank-you everyone for expressing your thoughts and experiences.
I am particularly taken with the post by "dockjock" who has summarized our common experience well.
As someone who has introduced large aircraft attitudes to a smaller operation rife with professional conflict over how to fly, and what is important, I can tell you it is no easy row to hoe. Trying to educate (or un-educate) staff who have come from years of "Git 'er done" being the prime motivator in remaining employed can sometimes seem like an impossible task.
The conflict between doing things the way the regs, the manufacturer, ops people from more successful operations, etc vs the grizzled veteran of the 703 / 704 world who says that stuff is all BS is a really hard thing to overcome once those "techniques" have become entrenched as the only way to continue to make a pay cheque come in.
This is the spot where one person's "Common Sense" becomes becomes another person's idiocy. Lets look at a few seen and heard in the last few years ....
There's no need to put in control locks, because it just slows down getting the airplane started for the next flight.
Don't do the manufacturer's stated checks on the autofeather system which is supposed to be done before every flight because it just wears out the system and therefore will never work when its needed.
Doing mag checks only wears out the switch.
Fly a structurally damaged aircraft with passengers on board because its a busy day, and there's lots of flying to be done.
No need to do any preflight planning even though the regs to hold an AOC require it, so just fill in those blanks while flying so the times and fuel burns work out.
The approved training program is total BS, so we'll just do what makes sense for "the real world," and tick off the items and say they are all done.
The list goes on .... and on, and on.
The point that the line between "Common Sense" and aptitude is a grey one is worth considering as well.
Plain and simple, some people aren't to be given the responsibility to operate anything that moves because it is simply beyond them. One need only watch an episode of "Canada's Worst Driver" to see that in detail. Regrettably, some of these folks ... due to the ability to eventually "buy a licence" by simply spending more and more and more dual and flight tests until they eventually squeak through and walk away with a CPL, or Instrument Rating. Then they head out into the world to fly airplanes because its always been their dream to do so. They are a hazard .... a huge one.
The RCAF has the luxury of rejecting the vast majority of people who show up at a recruiting office saying "I wanna fly jets Sir...." and selecting only those with strong signs of aptitude and attitude. There are many wickets to pass through in the process of becoming a pilot graduating at Wings Parade. Civilians don't have that series of filters to prevent the inept from commanding an aircraft, and as long as a person keeps throwing themselves at the brick wall of standards and flight tests, eventually they will be let out into the system.
Have a look at "Donna" in this Canada's Worst Driver episode .... clearly demonstrating she has zero aptitude. But .... if she showed up at FTU after FTU with enough money ... after a couple of hundred hours of frustrating dual, could likely get a PPL and share the airspace with you.
http://youtu.be/Lmq5_2NUZVg
So .... back to my original question .... "Can Common Sense be taught?," the answer is .... "sort of" .... but a person needs to enter the process with aptitude and attitude. Otherwise, it is a waste of time and effort, because some people just shouldn't be near anything dangerous. The Common Sense of one pilot like "dockjock" who thinks that the procedures developed by Engineering Test Pilots trump the Common Sense of the grizzled Ops Mgr place a lot of people in the middle of No Man's Land .... the Engineering Test Pilot's "Common Sense" tells him anyone ignoring the serious factors which led to the development of procedures of how to fly this specific aircraft is grossly ignorant and lacking in Common Sense .... the Ops Mgr's Common Sense tells him that Aeronautical Engineers and Test Pilots are clueless about what it takes to make money in this business.
Thanks again for everyone who has taken the time to respond.
So for the folks who say ... "Ya either got it from birth or you'll be a Bozo forever," you are partially correct. The folks who maintain that aeronautical Common Sense is the result of a life-long learning experience based on training, mentoring, and solo experiences which build a library of knowledge are also partially correct.
SSH
I am particularly taken with the post by "dockjock" who has summarized our common experience well.
As someone who has introduced large aircraft attitudes to a smaller operation rife with professional conflict over how to fly, and what is important, I can tell you it is no easy row to hoe. Trying to educate (or un-educate) staff who have come from years of "Git 'er done" being the prime motivator in remaining employed can sometimes seem like an impossible task.
The conflict between doing things the way the regs, the manufacturer, ops people from more successful operations, etc vs the grizzled veteran of the 703 / 704 world who says that stuff is all BS is a really hard thing to overcome once those "techniques" have become entrenched as the only way to continue to make a pay cheque come in.
This is the spot where one person's "Common Sense" becomes becomes another person's idiocy. Lets look at a few seen and heard in the last few years ....
There's no need to put in control locks, because it just slows down getting the airplane started for the next flight.
Don't do the manufacturer's stated checks on the autofeather system which is supposed to be done before every flight because it just wears out the system and therefore will never work when its needed.
Doing mag checks only wears out the switch.
Fly a structurally damaged aircraft with passengers on board because its a busy day, and there's lots of flying to be done.
No need to do any preflight planning even though the regs to hold an AOC require it, so just fill in those blanks while flying so the times and fuel burns work out.
The approved training program is total BS, so we'll just do what makes sense for "the real world," and tick off the items and say they are all done.
The list goes on .... and on, and on.
The point that the line between "Common Sense" and aptitude is a grey one is worth considering as well.
Plain and simple, some people aren't to be given the responsibility to operate anything that moves because it is simply beyond them. One need only watch an episode of "Canada's Worst Driver" to see that in detail. Regrettably, some of these folks ... due to the ability to eventually "buy a licence" by simply spending more and more and more dual and flight tests until they eventually squeak through and walk away with a CPL, or Instrument Rating. Then they head out into the world to fly airplanes because its always been their dream to do so. They are a hazard .... a huge one.
The RCAF has the luxury of rejecting the vast majority of people who show up at a recruiting office saying "I wanna fly jets Sir...." and selecting only those with strong signs of aptitude and attitude. There are many wickets to pass through in the process of becoming a pilot graduating at Wings Parade. Civilians don't have that series of filters to prevent the inept from commanding an aircraft, and as long as a person keeps throwing themselves at the brick wall of standards and flight tests, eventually they will be let out into the system.
Have a look at "Donna" in this Canada's Worst Driver episode .... clearly demonstrating she has zero aptitude. But .... if she showed up at FTU after FTU with enough money ... after a couple of hundred hours of frustrating dual, could likely get a PPL and share the airspace with you.
http://youtu.be/Lmq5_2NUZVg
So .... back to my original question .... "Can Common Sense be taught?," the answer is .... "sort of" .... but a person needs to enter the process with aptitude and attitude. Otherwise, it is a waste of time and effort, because some people just shouldn't be near anything dangerous. The Common Sense of one pilot like "dockjock" who thinks that the procedures developed by Engineering Test Pilots trump the Common Sense of the grizzled Ops Mgr place a lot of people in the middle of No Man's Land .... the Engineering Test Pilot's "Common Sense" tells him anyone ignoring the serious factors which led to the development of procedures of how to fly this specific aircraft is grossly ignorant and lacking in Common Sense .... the Ops Mgr's Common Sense tells him that Aeronautical Engineers and Test Pilots are clueless about what it takes to make money in this business.
Thanks again for everyone who has taken the time to respond.
So for the folks who say ... "Ya either got it from birth or you'll be a Bozo forever," you are partially correct. The folks who maintain that aeronautical Common Sense is the result of a life-long learning experience based on training, mentoring, and solo experiences which build a library of knowledge are also partially correct.
SSH
Last edited by single_swine_herder on Fri May 30, 2014 2:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- Shiny Side Up
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5335
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Group W bench
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
The mistake here is tying how much one trusts what someone says with an arbitrary number that they have in their log book. Follow the rules, the lists, whatever else, but question why you are doing it. Think for yourself. Occasionally one might come across something that seems odd or awkward, and then especially question it. There might indeed be a valid reason for doing things that way, but make it your mission to find out what it is rather than slavishly follow it. Get lots of opinions. Get second opinons. Sort through them. Chances are not everything a 200 hour wonder might know is complete rubbish, and not everything a 10,000 hour pilot says is mountain top guru quality wisdom.Dockjock wrote: I think in certain circumstances there is a difference between small aircraft common sense and airline common sense. In small aircraft, and I remember this quite clearly, you are barraged with conflicting information about what is and isn't the correct way to operate. We all start off respecting our instructors, in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king, and in the flight school world the god-like Class I might only have about 2500 hrs. A Class IV might have 300-700 hrs. Do I trust a 700-hr pilot when he tells me to disregard published procedures because they are stupid? No win. Follow the POH, the flight school rules, the CARs etc. Sensible. You might feel like a naif, and be subtlely mocked. But you're not being sensible by trying to follow the lead of somebody barely one step ahead of you.
Its also worth noting that the "grizzled veteran" might not be as veteran as he would like to appear. There's one fellow I know, whom to listen to him he's an experienced spray pilot and has a lot of time fire fighting in an ol' B-25. Until you realise after hearing enough of the stories, that he didn't fly the B-25 or do any of the flying, he was the guy doing the filling and the washing and occasionally got to sit in the right seat on the odd ferry trip. I think he might have had a grand total of less than 500 hours when I actually seen his resume. I can't remember if he even had a multi rating.
I also get on occasion some heavily padded resumes from instructors. Lets just say there's plenty of BS that goes on in the pilot world so you need to have a good filter. That said, in general distrust heavily those who would loudly tout their qualifications. Really question anyone who makes stuff sound more complex or harder than it is. They've also never made an airplane for general consumption that would be considered a "fire breather", so if someone tells you it is they're probably full of crap. Never accept "safety" as a blanket reason for doing anything. For that matter, anyone who's main quality seems to be "safety consious" usually isn't, that's just a phrase bullshitters have learned sounds good on resumes and fools HR people. No one who's real concern is everyone going home in one piece at the end of a work day thinks in such doublespeak.
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
- single_swine_herder
- Rank 7
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:35 pm
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Some good points to raise SSU, but I would suggest being very selective in who you ask for info when you're questioning things .... and ..... use "Common Sense" to differentiate between the responses you accept .... how's that for being vague?
- Shiny Side Up
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5335
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Group W bench
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Actually I wouldn't be selective, but rather would prefer to sample a larger pool. One would hope that often that the most reasoned responses would become more evident.
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
- Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
Books are great. I love books. They have
lots of good facts in them. But they are not
a substitute for a brain.
If you had to choose between them - you could
only have either a book or a brain in a cockpit -
I would go with the brain.
lots of good facts in them. But they are not
a substitute for a brain.
If you had to choose between them - you could
only have either a book or a brain in a cockpit -
I would go with the brain.
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8133
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: "Common Sense, are You Born With it it or Screwed Foreve
You can't have one without the other and have a very good pilot.
Books without brains is Google. It has all of the facts, all of the answers, but absolutely no way to use them.
A brain...? Every living thing has a brain. Without facts and the ability to reason... it just responds to direct stimulus... it can't anticipate or improvise.
I want the pilot who is both book smart and can use his or her brain... the pilot who paid attention in ground school and worked very hard to be proficient in the air... the pilot who can follow checklists and SOPs to a tee... but when the rehearsed options are exhausted and they find themselves in the blank areas of the map.. they can keep the aircraft safe.
One is not exclusive of the other... you can (and should) have both.
Books without brains is Google. It has all of the facts, all of the answers, but absolutely no way to use them.
A brain...? Every living thing has a brain. Without facts and the ability to reason... it just responds to direct stimulus... it can't anticipate or improvise.
I want the pilot who is both book smart and can use his or her brain... the pilot who paid attention in ground school and worked very hard to be proficient in the air... the pilot who can follow checklists and SOPs to a tee... but when the rehearsed options are exhausted and they find themselves in the blank areas of the map.. they can keep the aircraft safe.
One is not exclusive of the other... you can (and should) have both.
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?