Paying attention to the attitude indicator is absolutely not the right way to fly in visual conditions for many reasons. The best way to deal with reduced visibility under VFR is by doing a thorough preflight planning (e.g. stay on the ground when the weather is marginal) and applying proper risk management techniques in the air (e.g. divert, turn back, land etc when the weather deteriorates)
In the U.S. we are required to give at least 3 hours of instrument training for Private Pilot license. There is no such requirement for Sport Pilot or Recreation Pilot License
In my experience teaching hundreds of private, instrument, and commercial pilots 3 hours is not enough to develop any kind of instrument proficiency. For people who take the instrument rating course it usually takes around 20 hours to develop minimal instrument proficiency. Simulator training helps a lot when done with a qualified instructor who understands how to teach instruments in a sim (unfortunately many don't). But even the students who nail the sim portion often struggle in the real aircraft when they are faced with task saturation.
> I can't think of a single U.S. city that does this. They're all exact change only or proprietary ticketing systems
MBTA in Boston had the mTicket app for mobile ticketing and payments for years. I live in Boston and use the app regularly. Can't comment on other cities because when I visit for a short trip I typically don't bother installing apps.
Amtrak and most airlines use mobile boarding passes too. Interestingly enough, on my recent trip to Europe I used the mobile boarding pass in Logan airport just like everyone else. But in Frankfurt when I showed my phone to the agent they looked at me like I was from another planet, probably thinking "stipid americans"
And while we're on the subject of transportation, about 5 years ago I visited a bunch of european countries, including my home country in Europe, and at that time the only way to call a cab was via dialing the local phone number, cash only of course. Funny because on that trip heading to the airport in the States was matter of acouple taps in the Uber app.
FinMason | System Administrator (Junior to Midlevel) | Boston MA | ONSITE | Full-Time
We are a fintech startup in downtown Boston. This position is responsible for operation, maintenance, provisioning, and installation/configuration of systems hardware and software and related infrastructure.
Must be comfortable with Linux and AWS, and be a quick learner.
This article is factually incorrect. Here's some glaring examples:
> United States and European Union, which still compel pilots to meet stringent standards to keep their licences valid, including a requirement to actually fly a plane.
Not true, at least not in the US. According to 14 CFR 61.56 (i) "A flight simulator or flight training device may be used to meet the flight review requirements of this section"
> There is a whole host of skills you don’t exercise in a simulator
True, but the opposite is also true. I can think of number of scenarios that can be practiced in a sim but cannot be safely or legally practiced in aircraft. Example of such scenario: engine failure in instrument meteorological conditions.
> If you had a heart issue, would you go and see a heart surgeon that hadn’t operated in five years
I wonder if Mr. McConnell is aware that every single line pilot who files B787 or A380 today did all their training for that airframe and passed the rating test in a flight simulator.
The reality is all airline pilots train in flight sims these day. There is no practical way of doing that in actual aircraft. If one can do all their training and pass the license test in a sim why can't they do periodic flight review in a sim?
Ok I'm going to agree that Flytenow's operation obviously fails the duck test, no sure what they were hoping for. In fact I met with one of the founders when they started and told him no way it was going to fly (pun intended) with the current FAA regulations.
But is the current regulation reasonable? So a private pilot putting 3 pax in the back of his 1956 Skylane on Angel Flight is ok but the same pilot taking people up to circle around their neighborhood is suddenly dangerous? Ah no it perfectly safe if they just smiled and walked away after the flight. But if they offered to chip in for the fuel then they were well into the "danger zone" right?
The way FAA regulates commercial air transport is outdated and harmful for businesses. Here is another example. A 10000 hours commercial pilot who happened to own a brand new twin cannot take paying passengers, that according to the FAA is dangerous. But a 500 hours 18 year old kid with a wet ink on his commercial license taking 10 pax in a beat up C402 is just fine. What's the difference between the two? The latter works for a company that paid slightly over a million dollars to the FAA for the part 135 certificate.
It's a bit more than "unscrew this, replace that". Even the relatively simple maintenance procedures often require multiple steps and referring to bunch of charts and tables. Something small like using incorrect torque setting can have disastrous consequences. Most of mx manuals are not available in languages other than English. And it has nothing to do with competence of overseas mechanics, it's just humanely impossible to memorize those procedures. So yeah it's kind of a big deal.
PS: Also from personal experience I can tell that US does have significantly higher training and work standards than certain other countries when it comes to aviation. I immigrated to the US from overseas, am currently employed in aviation industry and hold a dozen of aviation certificates and ratings including those from FAA.
Toto Washlet
House