No, you have not. My question, once again, was what does it tell us about pilots that Frank Abagnale, by his own account, was able to take control of a commercial jet in midflight without the co-pilot identifying him as a fraud? This isn’t a difficult question.
Good for you. You gave a perfect description of a person, who is “not interested” to fly. But “not interested” is a euphemism. What is the right word?
What is your point?
Not the right example, actually, Don Simus, that one is of a person that is (as of the event) unable to learn to fly, not just uninterested. Which is irrelevant to how she may otherwise be a person of many and great talents and skills, just not involving flight.
But never mind that, “If [you are / he is] so smart why don’t you/he [fill in something the questioner considers worthy]?” is no real argument:
Don Simus: What Is Your Point?
Why don’t you tell us?
I’m guessing that “succinct” is not it.
This must be what filibusters feel like.
Maybe it’s “bored”. You know, like the way one would feel while performing a boring job.
Nobody could teach himself to fly. This is not sociology. What actually happened is that the guy had a pilot friend who taught him to fly. This is how you learn to drive a car. But while it is legal in the US to teach a friend to drive it is illegal for you to teach anyone to fly unless you have an instructor rating. And it is mandatory to fly at least 20 hours with the instructor. That’s why the guy did not have the license.
If you take off in an airplane you have to land it. So if you are to teach yourself you will have to do the most difficult procedure during your very first flight. This is obviously impossible. This is the same as if you without ever been skiing before take a chairlift to the place from which you can descend to the base only via double black diamonds. Actually this is not the best analogy since you can take off your skis and descend on feet. You do not have such an option when flying an airplane.
What is your point?
Really? There is this contraption called a parachute.
So I just looked up the local aviation school in my town. To get a private pilot’s license with no experience, I would have to pay $8,495 (which I can in no way afford). It’s an 18 day course, no experience required. One would assume “learning how to land” is part of this, and includes 20 hours of solo flight (and 25 of partner flying). In fact, the actual number of hours required to obtain a private pilot license is far less than that to drive a car. And while the school obviously has a vested interest, it claims learning to fly a Cesna is pretty easy and straightforward, and claims a 90% success rate in getting people successfully certified. (For what it’s worth, getting a commercial license is only a 5 day course, provided you have 240 hours of flight experience)
Now all of this is great, and all, but it still doesn’t shed any light on your point. That because you can’t do it by yourself since you might crash it’s inherently harder than things that you can learn on your own, despite the differing time commitment? That PhDs are frauds because many of them didn’t bother to pay almost 10k bucks to learn to fly, despite the low time requirement? That all fields are illegitimate, including flying? Shmoop da woop da wonk a wonk? That a woodchuck could chuck wood?
Now this sounds like peer-reviewed science. So he took off, practiced landing stalls up there, then bailed out. Repeated the procedure 10 times. Junked 10 airplanes. Tried a landing and junked another airplane, but at least survived. Repeated the last procedure another ten times junking additional several airplanes.
This is a truly viable alternative to what I suggested before.
What is your point?
I was pointing out that you are factually incorrect when you say that once up in a plane you have no other option than landing it. Since you like poor analogies, think of it as taking off your ski boots.
Like all great scientists who produce excellent peer-reviewed research you are good at big conceptual things. But when it comes to small practical things your analogies get lame.
After you take off your skis (not boots, by the way) you take your skis in your hands and descend to the base. And right away you take another lift which offers terrain more appropriate for your skills. When you bail out from an airplane - this aircraft will be completely destroyed. And it is 50K.
I actually did something similar to what I described. The first day I went downhill skiing I did green circle a few times and it was easy. Did blue square and it was OK. Then I decided to try black diamonds. And it was too much. So I had to take off my skis. Albeit I did not walk down. I did ski at a shallow angle to the edge. Stop, take of skis, turn them, get into them, and ski to the opposite edge.
What is your point?
But when it comes to making a point…
So? Bailing out of the plane is still an alternative to landing it. It’s option that you said doesn’t exist. You are factually incorrect.
Do you ever wonder about what else you may be incorrect in thinking?
And just like landing a Cessna, how would you know if I produce excellent peer-reviewed research? You seem to make a lot of assumptions.
So it comes to a minimum of 45 hours. Why do you say that it is less than to drive a car?
I have seen somewhere that about 50% of those who get a student pilot certificate finally get a license.
Many of them didn’t? Can you tell me how many sociologists actually did? And not just flying, but anything real at all.
When I got my license, I was told it was 60 hours in my state. It seems to have gone down since then, but they’re pretty close.
Oh sure, let me get out my master list of sociologists that have hobbi-what are you even talking about?
I would guess that these restrictions are for teenagers. Otherwise there are no minimum hours requirements whatsoever. You just need to pass written test and driving test. I got my drivers license after 10 hrs of training.
I am sure that this list will be pretty short. But why don’t you look at what they are writing here?
One of them insisted that some guy taught himself to fly. The absurdity of such a claim did not occur to him. And a simple explanation that the guy was taught by a private pilot friend escaped him.