Revelation wrote:kalvado wrote:Being a pilot says nothing about author's "airmanship", as he nicely proves in the article. Sully ay be the only person in US with "airmanship" proven in action.
Awards can easily come from being scandalous and unprofessional, as opposed to rigorous reporting.
My message was totally different, though. Is there any other mass profession where specific talent is required, as opposed to regular trainable skill?
Policemanship, teachership, doctorship, janitorialship? Drivership, maybe? Flightattendantship?
Entrepreneurship is the only one I can think of the top of my head - but what is the success rate of startups, do you remember?
Seeking for specific talent is OK for austonauts - while there are at most few thousand people who flew to the orbit as a peak of their career; for hundreds journalists of top tier newspapers. Not sure how many pilots are there, but million worldwide is probably about right. There are no that many people with specific talents...
IMO a lot of the reporting in this space has been flawed because the journalists involved have little or no aviation training, and are under time pressure to get a story to press.
Clearly this article does not suffer from those concerns.
I would say it is opinionated, but if you read his father's book, it advocates that pilots have a deep "stick and rudder" understanding of aviation, so the article's approach is no shock to me.
I would say his dad's book is a classic in the aviation field, but does cause a lot of controversy, because not everyone agrees that such an approach is the right one.
I know from personal experience that at least three people involved in my training as a glider pilot recommended that I purchase and read the book, and indeed I did so.
I can also say others told me not to bother reading that outdated nonsense.
Unfortunately, I found a lot of diametrically opposed opinions during my gliding training, so I went to a commercial operator and just did what their staff wanted done to get my license.
The commercial operator had a copy of "Stick and Rudder" on the book shelf behind his desk!
What does it all prove? Pretty much nothing IMHO. There are lots of good educative books around; the main thing they teach is that same mistakes are done over and over again.
Moreover, even a good book can send a bad message. Is it a good idea to learn above and beyond? Sure. Should that be considered as a requirement? No, it is just that- above and beyond.
Look at BOeing engineering job postings. Anything about specific dedication, anything going above and beyond? Nope. SO why that becomes a requirement for a plane operator?