How intelligent/smart must you be to be a pilot??

[FN FAL]

Never mind, I thought the thread was titled, "How intelligent/smart must you be to be a helicopter pilot?"

 

[NYCPilot]

Well, that statement inherently accepts the premise that flying for a major is more demanding of skills than flying freight, and that major airline pilots are unitversally more competent than freight pilots, a conceit which I don't accept. Surely you must not be familliar with the process by which one arrives at the majors (and I don't mean just the interview) if you beleive this is true.

I do mean to postulate that there is more involved in flying a large turbine aircraft than a light twin flying night freight. Many of these pilots eventually do move on to the left seat of an international carrier. But many do not. The abilities required to conduct this more advanced operation require a lot more memorization, training and functioning on a whole than does flight instructing or even light twin charter. You need to be much more adroit at what you're doing.

As on moves up the chain, the skill level invariably increases. The hurdles one must go through becomes harder, the hiring criteria and testing becomes more difficult as well. The inital skills and abilities you possess that get you a job flying smaller, entry-level operations will not get you hired at a major airline. If the experience you gain becomes inculcated into you, then you will advance eventually after obtaining any minimums hours required.

My point using that example was that the criteria and level of knowledge and ability to perform at these higher level positions require more of the applicant. Thus, those who are more competitive end up in these positions.

Many FO's fail to upgrade to captain and eventually sign a waiver that they'll never bid for the positon again with the company.

Undoubtedly, some pilots can't make the jump from one level of flying to the next. This is due to a so called level of incompetency. It doesnt mean your inept, it just means that you have topped out in your abilities to perform a job requiring a little more of everything. This can range from personal skills to being able to cope with larger systems found on the "heavys" and many more protocols that must be followed. Each human psyche is designed differently and so we can not all make it into the left seat of a 747. Period.
To become a CFI and instruct is one thing, and takes a lot of work, but to say EVERY CFI has equal chances of making it as a 747 captain is untrue.

One rises to through the ranks until they can not handle or perform at the next level to the degree required.

 

[Lead Sled]

Never mind, I thought the thread was titled, "How intelligent/smart must you be to be a helicopter pilot?"

That reminds me...

What is the difference between airplane pilots and helicopter pilots? Airplane pilots break ground and fly into the wind. Helicopter pilots break wind and fly into the ground.

'Sled

 

[Lead Sled]

I do mean to postulate that there is more involved in flying a large turbine aircraft than a light twin flying night freight...The abilities required to conduct this more advanced operation require a lot more memorization, training and functioning on a whole than does flight instructing or even light twin charter. You need to be much more adroit at what you're doing...As on moves up the chain, the skill level invariably increases...One rises to through the ranks until they can not handle or perform at the next level to the degree required.

Sorry NYCPilot, I don't agree with any of that. The most difficult and challenging flying any civilian pilot will do is fly freight/charter in a light twin. Once you are able to start the progression up the ladder it only gets easier. One of aviations best kept secrets is the bigger the airplane the easier it is to fly.

'Sled

 

[NYCPilot]

Sorry NYCPilot, I don't agree with any of that. The most difficult and challenging flying any civilian pilot will do is fly freight/charter in a light twin. Once you are able to start the progression up the ladder it only gets easier. One of aviations best kept secrets is the bigger the airplane the easier it is to fly.

'Sled

I agree that this is true. Freight is challenging and things do get easier in terms of operations as you ascend up the latter. BUT, not every pilot is QUALIFIED to be in that higher position. That is my point. They reach a point where they can't competently perform the duties of a pilot at a major airline.

Many CFI's may barely teach and fly that plane, let alone advance to a freight position, for instance.

There are pilots who washout in training a few times and end up leaving the profession.

Many FO's don't have what it takes to become captain and fail their upgrades.

To think that if you can attain a private pilot license equates to being capable of eventually flying a 747 is false.

 

[livin'thesim]

Average intelligence is all that is required.

In over a decade of training pilots for all levels of certificates, I have noticed that excess intelligence can get one mired down in the details at the expense of good airmanship.

The perfect pilot probably has slightly better than average intelligence, good motor skills, and the ability to think ahead, along with a giant truckload of common sense.

I'd rather have an ex-cop in the seat next to me than an ex-professor.
I think that flying requires an inherent 'sharpeness' that has little to do with intellectual processing power. Think of the absent-minded professor.

Think also about this. Remember the DC-8 that ran out of gas because the CA was to deeply engrossed in diagnosis to think about fuel? Word was that he was one of the sharpest DC-8 guys around at the time. What would a less harp guy do? He'd realize that the emergency checklist didn't solve the problem, so let's go land before we're out of gas. Not to disparage the CA of that flight, just to illustrate that too much knowledge (if relied upon to the exclusion of other things) is as dangerous as too little.

The myth of the eagle eyed, all knowing pilot with the reflexes of a cat is a fiction of hollywood.

 

[Lead Sled]

To think that if you can attain a private pilot license equates to being capable of eventually flying a 747 is false.

Every 747 captain that I know (and I know several of them) was a private pilot once. I don't mean to get hung up on this, but the "average" private pilot won't have too much challenge in becoming a commercial pilot. The "average" commercial pilot won't have too much challenge in getting his ATP. By the time he reaches that point in his career, the "average" pilot won't have much problem - given adequate training - in obtaining any type rating. My 747 buddies tell me that the biggest problem they had in transitioning into the airplane was learning how to taxi it. Sure, there will be those who fail to measure up, but they aren't the average pilot. They key to all of this is a step by step progression together with proper training. Could a 70 hour private pilot go directly into a 747? No, but the average charter jet captain probably could - given proper training.

'Sled

 

[pilotyip]

I was never a private pilot, my first certificate was a Comm MEL, Inst. Got it by taking a 40 question test.

 

[pilotyip]

wrong button

 

[mar]

What we've established so far...

...is this:

Dumb people can fly.

An average person can fly well.

But what makes the real difference between the bad pilot and the good pilot is *ATTITUDE*.

I've seen capable pilots fail because of how they approach the operation.

 

[NYCPilot]

I accept the fact that it doesnt take a rocket scientist to pilot a plane, but I believe that everyone "tops off" in thier occupational ability. My feeling is that aptitude is a sliding scale.

Those who have risen to the ranks of a heavy jet captain are many. If you've made it, then you had what it takes. But how many have started and not made it to this point. I think there comes a point in an aspiring pilots career when he feels like the next level has too much on the plate and can't perform competently. Thats all.

It may be that this theory of being promoted to one's level of incompetence may be applicable to other occupations. Many executives in the business and financial world are generally promoted upon their abilites to reach and perform competently at the next level. Eventually, they reach a point where they can't efffectively accomplish this and end up finishing out their career at their present tier.

Maybe in aviation there a greater range of whats acceptable. That there can be a large gap between a good pilot and a bad pilot. Both of who are employed doing the same exact thing. This holds true for doctors too, I suppose.

 

[ePilot22]

But what makes the real difference between the bad pilot and the good pilot is *ATTITUDE*.

Black or white would be nice. Attiutde, knowledge (regs., systems etc.), ability, interest, judgment and much more is needed to be a good pilot.

If it were just attitude, then we could select all the good pilots by their attitude and reject all the bad ones.

Just a thought though.

eP.

 

[Lead Sled]

[quote='Sled]Every 747 captain that I know (and I know several of them) was a private pilot once.[/quote]

I was never a private pilot, my first certificate was a Comm MEL, Inst. Got it by taking a 40 question test.

You're not a 747 captain and I don't know you. My statement is still intact.

'Sled

 

[Lead Sled]

I accept the fact that it doesnt take a rocket scientist to pilot a plane, but I believe that everyone "tops off" in thier occupational ability.

You're making a big assumption here. Are you saying that guys only make a career out of flying "little" planes (bizjets for example) because they're not good enough or have the ability to fly the big ones (airliners)?

'Sled

 

[mar]

Certainly true in airline management

It may be that this theory of being promoted to one's level of incompetence may be applicable to other occupations.

I totally agree with this point. I think it's a real phenomenon--even on an airline seniority list. There are some lifetime FOs out there.

But to tell you the truth I thought I hit my ceiling about three or four times.

I was so discouraged during my commercial pilot training I thought I'd never learn to perform a frickin' Lazy 8. And then, when I was marginally proficient I took my checkride with a 70 year old female examiner and she demonstrated the *most* perfect Lazy 8 I'd ever seen...even to this day.

On my commercial checkride this lady taught me how to *properly* perform the manuever.

So I pressed on.

And nearly busted my CFI (to date, my most challenging checkride).

And I pressed on.

Long story short, a lot of our limitations are self imposed and given enough blood, sweat and tears we can overcome *most* of them....

...not to sound too much like Reader's Digest or anything.
Good luck.