Jeff,

I think you missed my point. BTW, I agree with your comment on testing. If you can't do the chore, you shouldn't get the score.

My basic point is that testing to ability to perform a task is radically different from judgment as to when and if to do the task. For example, low and slow is safe over the numbers, but rarely anywhere else in a Lancair. Yet we get stall/spin accidents from low and slow away from the numbers. That's a judgment error. Flying in turbulence is OK when unavoidable, but willfully flying near thunderstorms is not. And so on.

Testing for judgment is difficult at best, and many of our failures are judgment, not technical skill. In Anesthesiology, we have three years to watch a resident and evaluate judgment. But that process failed in the example I listed. Others could be cited.

Technical ability is relatively simple to test. Lay out the task, and see if it is properly performed. Judgment is not so easy to evaluate.

Ted

On 1/30/2013 10:49 AM, vtailjeff@aol.com wrote:

Ted,

 

I would disagree about training. The US has become a society where everyone gets an A and passes. Our LOBO  training program does not reward the pilot who cannot meet standards. I am sorry but if you cannot fly to PTS standards you cannot get an IPC endorsement (instruement proficiency check) from us.

 

I have seen more than one training document signed by the instructor stating the pilot could not meet the instruement standards and the pilot signature acknowledging  that. If the pilot is willing to put in the time we can usually get them back up to speed but we will not compromise our standards.

 

Jeff --the hardass.