VAF Forums

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)
-   RV General Discussion/News (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   "Say Type Experimental..." (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=171006)

Saville 05-01-2019 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343686)
.I'd rather know that you're an RV or a Breezy or a P-51 than know that you're "Experimental".

Yes that is what YOU think and that's what YOU would rather know.

Pilot135pd 05-01-2019 04:54 PM

Of the 5 Hazardous Attitudes All Pilots Should Avoid I think I see 4 of them. Just my opinion of course:

The following seems to be an example of Anti-authority: “Don’t tell me!”
Pilots with an anti-authority attitude tend to believe that rules, regulations, and safety procedures don’t apply to them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343684)
I'll worry about if/when someone finds me a case of someone who was cited following an accident ......Seriously...this is a tempest in a teapot. Has anyone in an RV in the last 5-10 years ever even been handed a violation for just calling themselves "RV XXXXX"? ....


The next examples might demonstrate 3 more of these hazardous attitudes:

Invulnerability: “The risk taker. It won’t happen to me!”
Many people—not just pilots—fall into a pattern of thinking that accidents happen to others, but never to them. This attitude of invulnerability can become a safety concern when pilots fail to consider the risks of their actions.

Macho: “I can do it!”
Pilots with a macho attitude are always trying to impress others and prove themselves by taking unnecessary risks.

Resignation: “What’s the use?”
Pilots with an attitude of resignation lack the confidence and conviction to believe they can make a difference in what happens to them. These pilots tend to give up easily when faced with challenges and don’t take criticism well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343677)
Life is full of risks. I'll take my chances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343686)
I don't drive on the freeways alone, either, but I don't worry too much about people whose registration tags have expired. Call me a risk-taker, I guess...

The truth is, anyone can be guilty of one or more of the hazardous attitudes, which are a normal part of human nature. Understanding these attitudes and recognizing when they occur will help pilots make better decisions and avoid unnecessary danger. http://hartzellprop.com/5-hazardous-...-should-avoid/

RV7ator 05-01-2019 05:04 PM

Finally, a thread on using "experimental" has some legs. Seems there are three divisons: The Legalist, The Prideful, and the Abstainers.

I remain firmly an Abstainer (post 5).

To the Prideful: How do we know you're not a poser who didn't build it? An upside might be you'll make a few more spamcanners desirous of our freedoms.

To the Legalist: Uh, huh. Tell me you never exceed the speed limit either (he who is without sin...etc.) Anyone ever hear of any enforcement initiated simply over not announcing per regs/OpLims? Hardly likely since ATC doesn't bother themselves with "experimental" particulars most of the time. The real turkeys are the ones who say "experimental..." with any and all transmissions to anyone anywhere and never say the type.

Anyone know the history behind codifying what's pretty useless, especially in today's ATC environment? I consider "experimental" moribund. The less it's used, the sooner it will disappear. Perhaps some enlightened future day (not within any of our lifetimes) announcing "experimental" will sound just as silly as today saying "Standard Cessna 172 blah, blah".

John Siebold

Pilot135pd 05-01-2019 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7ator (Post 1343697)
Finally, a thread on using "experimental" has some legs. Seems there are three divisons: The Legalist, The Prideful, and the Abstainers.

I remain firmly an Abstainer (post 5).

To the Prideful: How do we know you're not a poser who didn't build it? An upside might be you'll make a few more spamcanners desirous of our freedoms.

To the Legalist: Uh, huh. Tell me you never exceed the speed limit either (he who is without sin...etc.) Anyone ever hear of any enforcement initiated simply over not announcing per regs/OpLims? Hardly likely since ATC doesn't bother themselves with "experimental" particulars most of the time. The real turkeys are the ones who say "experimental..." with any and all transmissions to anyone anywhere and never say the type.

Anyone know the history behind codifying what's pretty useless, especially in today's ATC environment? I consider "experimental" moribund. The less it's used, the sooner it will disappear. Perhaps some enlightened future day (not within any of our lifetimes) announcing "experimental" will sound just as silly as today saying "Standard Cessna 172 blah, blah".

John Siebold

I already addressed the Anti Authority hazard so I won't mention it again but I do find interesting the last part where you say "Standard Cessna 172" like if that was a way of identifying yourself at some time. I've been doing this for 4 decades and I've never heard that on the radios so maybe that was way before my time or maybe, follow me here, it was someone who didn't follow rules and decided to identify himself that way thinking it won't hurt anyone and I think it's dumb the way the Regulations tell us to say it. Hmmm, go figure...

RV7A Flyer 05-01-2019 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilot135pd (Post 1343696)
Of the 5 Hazardous Attitudes All Pilots Should Avoid I think I see 4 of them. Just my opinion of course:

The following seems to be an example of Anti-authority: ?Don?t tell me!?
Pilots with an anti-authority attitude tend to believe that rules, regulations, and safety procedures don?t apply to them.




The next examples might demonstrate 3 more of these hazardous attitudes:

Invulnerability: ?The risk taker. It won?t happen to me!?
Many people?not just pilots?fall into a pattern of thinking that accidents happen to others, but never to them. This attitude of invulnerability can become a safety concern when pilots fail to consider the risks of their actions.

Macho: ?I can do it!?
Pilots with a macho attitude are always trying to impress others and prove themselves by taking unnecessary risks.

Resignation: ?What?s the use??
Pilots with an attitude of resignation lack the confidence and conviction to believe they can make a difference in what happens to them. These pilots tend to give up easily when faced with challenges and don?t take criticism well.





The truth is, anyone can be guilty of one or more of the hazardous attitudes, which are a normal part of human nature. Understanding these attitudes and recognizing when they occur will help pilots make better decisions and avoid unnecessary danger. http://hartzellprop.com/5-hazardous-...-should-avoid/

Oh, please. That's quite a bit of over-analysis about someone you don't even know. Let's see - anti-authority? Hardly...I tend to be a stickler for rules (it's the systems engineer/mathematician in me), but every body of law has some that are plain silly... https://www.policeone.com/police-hum...ws-in-America/ not counting things like routine minor traffic violations. Doesn't make one anti-authority. Risk taker? Given that I deal in risk management *all the time*, I'm at least capable of understanding the C part of the LxC matrix, and here's a C= epsilon (not even C=1). I.e., virtually zero consequences for *anyone*. And since there's really zero risk, one wouldn't be very macho by taking it, would they? :) Or be exercising futility by accepting it.

RV7A Flyer 05-01-2019 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7ator (Post 1343697)
Finally, a thread on using "experimental" has some legs. Seems there are three divisons: The Legalist, The Prideful, and the Abstainers.

I remain firmly an Abstainer (post 5).

To the Prideful: How do we know you're not a poser who didn't build it? An upside might be you'll make a few more spamcanners desirous of our freedoms.

To the Legalist: Uh, huh. Tell me you never exceed the speed limit either (he who is without sin...etc.) Anyone ever hear of any enforcement initiated simply over not announcing per regs/OpLims? Hardly likely since ATC doesn't bother themselves with "experimental" particulars most of the time. The real turkeys are the ones who say "experimental..." with any and all transmissions to anyone anywhere and never say the type.

Anyone know the history behind codifying what's pretty useless, especially in today's ATC environment? I consider "experimental" moribund. The less it's used, the sooner it will disappear. Perhaps some enlightened future day (not within any of our lifetimes) announcing "experimental" will sound just as silly as today saying "Standard Cessna 172 blah, blah".

John Siebold

Thank you...

RV7A Flyer 05-01-2019 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilot135pd (Post 1343698)
...the last part where you say "Standard Cessna 172" like if that was a way of identifying yourself at some time. I've been doing this for 4 decades and I've never heard that on the radios so maybe that was way before my time or maybe, follow me here, it was someone who didn't follow rules and decided to identify himself that way thinking it won't hurt anyone and I think it's dumb the way the Regulations tell us to say it. Hmmm, go figure...

Or, since all the Cessna spamcans fly at about the same speed range, and look pretty much alike, it was fine to just call them all "Cessna". I notice how the guys flying Citation jets don't do that, now, do they? Why do they call themselves "Citation" or "Citationjet"? Hmmmm...

plehrke 05-01-2019 05:52 PM

Godwin?s Law
 
I can feel a comparison to Hitler coming soon on this thread.

Pilot135pd 05-01-2019 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343705)
Or, since all the Cessna spamcans fly at about the same speed range, and look pretty much alike, it was fine to just call them all "Cessna". I notice how the guys flying Citation jets don't do that, now, do they? Why do they call themselves "Citation" or "Citationjet"? Hmmmm...

Did you notice in your quote that he said "Standard Cessna 172"? I don't ever remember hearing "Standard" in any identification. I also don't think when anyone said "Cessna 172" and the controller saw the speed on their scope they'd confuse it with a Cessna Citation. Regarding why a pilot flying a Citation would omit Cessna, maybe one of those hazardous attitudes again since the Regs say what, make and model? They could say Cessna Citation and nobody would be harmed, or maybe just their ego slightly.

Pilot135pd 05-01-2019 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343702)
Let's see - anti-authority? Hardly...I tend to be a stickler for rules (it's the systems engineer/mathematician in me), but every body of law has some that are plain silly...

So since you think they're silly they don't apply to you = Anti Authority.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer (Post 1343702)
Risk taker? Given that I deal in risk management *all the time*, I'm at least capable of understanding the C part of the LxC matrix, and here's a C= epsilon (not even C=1). I.e., virtually zero consequences for *anyone*. And since there's really zero risk, one wouldn't be very macho by taking it, would they? :) Or be exercising futility by accepting it.

You said you were a risk taker in your own reply. Again I don't mind if you take risks when it's just you up there but there are others who your risk taking could affect = Invulnerability

I'm not a psychologist, I'm just filling in the blanks with your own statements.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:54 AM.