Nearly 50% of men who have never flown or landed an airplane think they could safely land a passenger airplane
- Thread starter wwillson
- Start date
Quite aside from the myriad controls... on a small piston engined aircraft, how would you know the frequency or frequencies to talk to flight control... (as someone pointed out)? How would you guard against carburetor icing? Etc etc etc...
- Joined
- May 28, 2014
- Messages
- 2,515
People say a lot of out of this world garbage.
Facts- most people are just that TALK.
Facts- most people are just that TALK.
The devil is in the details.
You start with what you know. I knew enough to face forward in the seat and put my seat-belt (harness) on. But even that was a challenge. I fiddled with the harnes for a while and had to ask how it worked. Then I had to get the seat forward. The seat is unlike anything I've ever seen, pretty cool actually, but you have to know how to operate it as it's complex, I didn't. Again, I had to ask how to get the seat forward. Then fun then begins. Where do you start? I know how to fly and know the operation and function of the instrument cluster, but the 767 doesn't have an 'instrument cluster' like I'm used to, it's way cooler than that, but I had to ask over and over, where is this, where it that. I figured out where the radios are, but the controls are way different than anything I've used. Probably the funniest "where is?" was when I needed elevator trim and asked, "Where is the elevator trim?". My left thumb was touching it, but I didn't know. It sure was easier to fly when properly trimmed.
Let's land. How do we set up the ILS, where are the localizer and glide slope indicators, how do I tell if the ILS is flagged or good, what is the max gear extension speed, when to extend flaps, when to arm the spoilers, how do you arm the spoilers, how many degrees of flaps for landing, where are the flaps, what speeds in many different configurations, how to I turn the instrument lights up and the cabin lights down, what speed for approach, how much power for approach, how to decouple the autopilot, how to turn the autopilot on (super complex to set it up to do what you want), where are the auto brakes, how do you arm the auto brakes, where is the gear handle, how do I know I have three in the green, when do the engines go to idle, when do I start to pitch up on landing, how to use the thrust reversers, what is my max turn-off speed, how to turn the auto brakes off, where are the manual brakes, how do I steer. That's just landing and that's only the tip of the iceberg. I knew what to ask and had the answer man sitting beside me.
Then you actually have to fly the airplane, forget about the autopilot, none of the surveyed people could use it, because it's too complex. Deploy the flaps and get a major pitch up (my estimation is that this would cause most of the people surveyed to stall and crash). I also think that nobody would be able to get the airplane slowed down, because it takes too much coordination with throttles, speed brakes, flaps, and gear. If you are too fast and you have to do a go-around, it's game over. The surveyed group would never be able to handle the airplane at full thrust, full flaps, and gear down, then try to coordinate cleaning the airplane up. Just the concept of coordinating pitch and power would likely doom others. They don't know flying airplanes.
I landed the airplane 5 times without any 'help', meaning his hands off the controls. I have thousands of landings and understand the premise of how to land an airplane. My co-pilot generously gave me no crosswind, no turbulence, severely clear skys, no ATC, and even made it daytime, how nice of him! Oh and he also talked me though landing the first time as I landed. I wouldn't have know when you pitch up to arrest the descent rate or to hold the nose off, else slam it into the runway and it will SLAM it into the runway if you let it. He also deployed the thrust reversers, because I was a bit busy being overwhelmed keeping the airplane in the center of the runway, because the whole airplane was unfamiliar to me.
The 767 flies just like an airplane, but the complexity is remarkable. I have about 1,500 hours mostly instructing (instructing will teach you a heck of a lot about flying) and still found the airplane to be a complete handful, because I wasn't familiar with it.
If I opened the cockpit door to two dead pilots and the only option to live was to get the airplane on the ground. You can bet I would try, but it would be very difficult to land safely. If I could get an answer man on the radio to walk me though controls and procedures, then I might stand a chance. The first thing I would do would be to tune 121.5 and declare an emergency, then tell them I need a company pilot to talk to that flies that airplane, figure out how much fuel we have, then get vectors to an airport with clear skys and huge runways and hope my bag of luck is full.
Last edited:
Honestly, the first thing they did on the flight controls. There is so much you need to know.
The last time I heard that term, it was Joe Pesci who said it in, "My Cousin Vinny"..... I still don't know what it means.Try being a lawyer sometime!
Everyone - and I mean everyone - thinks they know the law, are excellent at "arguing," (arguing, and argument are two distinct animals), and can win jury trials. Then I ask them how they would conduct voir dire and they say they'd file a brief.
Probably the intersection with Americans who think they could defeat a lion/elephant/whatever the animal was unarmed
The aspect of flying any airplane that I find amazing, (and assume to be one of the most difficult), is flaring and landing. More precisely when to flare. I watch landing after landing video from the cockpit, and this is the part I find most impressive.
And the part I can't possibly imagine a non pilot performing without either stalling to high, or else pile driving the plane into the ground. Or else overshooting.
And then there is having the airspeed precise. Proper lineup and sink rate. All planes handle different. And they all require different airspeeds to accomplish the same thing.
Look at all the different heights these airplanes sit when they're parked at the ramp. Compare the left seat height of a Piper Arrow to a 747-400. It's like being on the roof of a 3 story apartment, as opposed to sitting on your back patio.
Now factor that into the landing. Add in a "pilot" that knows none of the above, and the only "education" he has on the plane is what he read from the card on the seatback in front of him. Good luck with that.
I'm afraid at best it would turn out like this.
And the part I can't possibly imagine a non pilot performing without either stalling to high, or else pile driving the plane into the ground. Or else overshooting.
And then there is having the airspeed precise. Proper lineup and sink rate. All planes handle different. And they all require different airspeeds to accomplish the same thing.
Look at all the different heights these airplanes sit when they're parked at the ramp. Compare the left seat height of a Piper Arrow to a 747-400. It's like being on the roof of a 3 story apartment, as opposed to sitting on your back patio.
Now factor that into the landing. Add in a "pilot" that knows none of the above, and the only "education" he has on the plane is what he read from the card on the seatback in front of him. Good luck with that.
I'm afraid at best it would turn out like this.
If Ted Striker can do it with the assistance of Elaine and Otto, I surely can too.
Reading through a lot of this thread reminds me of these armchair firearms experts, many of which have never fired a weapon, make some absurd statement the likes of, "How can you possibly miss with a shotgun?"
Fair enough answer. I guess just because I’m the King of JB Weld doesn’t make me King of the skies haha.
I will preface this by saying the closest I’ve ever gotten to flying was a flight simulator at the Kalamazoo air zoo when I was like 12… or maybe the pick up lane that one time I got my sister in law from O’Hare.
I do enjoy playing Microsoft Flight Simulator however and I do think I’d do “better” (I’m using that term incredibly loosely here) than someone who’s never even by proxy of a video game seen the inside of a cockpit, but there is still a 99.99999999999999% (add a few more 9’s to that) chance we’re crashing as I know just enough to be incredibly dangerous but not enough to fix a problem.
TL;DR? I’d either land the plane or far FAR more likely die trying, which is preferential to doing nothing at all IMO.
I do enjoy playing Microsoft Flight Simulator however and I do think I’d do “better” (I’m using that term incredibly loosely here) than someone who’s never even by proxy of a video game seen the inside of a cockpit, but there is still a 99.99999999999999% (add a few more 9’s to that) chance we’re crashing as I know just enough to be incredibly dangerous but not enough to fix a problem.
TL;DR? I’d either land the plane or far FAR more likely die trying, which is preferential to doing nothing at all IMO.
Well this isn’t at all surprising to me for a couple reasons.
First I don't trust survey data because I don’t take surveys. If I’m ever asked to take a survey I always decline. I figure anyone willingly taking a survey is getting paid, has some kind of axe to grind or is an idiot with nothing better to do. In all cases I don’t trust the opinion of the person taking it. And the results by association.
Second if I were to take a survey with completely irrelevant topics like “could you land a plane” or “could you wrestle a bear?” I would totally lie my butt off just for kicks. I think it would be hilarious to be like “heck yeah, I can wrestle a bear. I’d whoop up on a bear. Ain’t no bear gonna punk me out.” So yeah I wouldn’t trust me either.
Finally people are generally delusional when it comes to their opinions about themselves and their capabilities. People grossly over estimate their competence. We all do it or have done it in some form or fashion. And men are WAY worse than women when it comes to admitting they cannot do something tied to ego. Best example is fighting. Every man thinks he can fight. The vast majority cannot. I have trained in various forms of martial arts and every new guy (myself included) walks into the gym on day one thinking he is going to do great… And he does not. It is exactly the same with both striking and grappling. New guy thinks he knows how to fight until he spars with someone who actually knows how to fight. New guy is helpless. But ego will not let people see the truth before the reality is experienced. Sometimes not even then. The landing a plane thing is probably no different.
First I don't trust survey data because I don’t take surveys. If I’m ever asked to take a survey I always decline. I figure anyone willingly taking a survey is getting paid, has some kind of axe to grind or is an idiot with nothing better to do. In all cases I don’t trust the opinion of the person taking it. And the results by association.
Second if I were to take a survey with completely irrelevant topics like “could you land a plane” or “could you wrestle a bear?” I would totally lie my butt off just for kicks. I think it would be hilarious to be like “heck yeah, I can wrestle a bear. I’d whoop up on a bear. Ain’t no bear gonna punk me out.” So yeah I wouldn’t trust me either.
Finally people are generally delusional when it comes to their opinions about themselves and their capabilities. People grossly over estimate their competence. We all do it or have done it in some form or fashion. And men are WAY worse than women when it comes to admitting they cannot do something tied to ego. Best example is fighting. Every man thinks he can fight. The vast majority cannot. I have trained in various forms of martial arts and every new guy (myself included) walks into the gym on day one thinking he is going to do great… And he does not. It is exactly the same with both striking and grappling. New guy thinks he knows how to fight until he spars with someone who actually knows how to fight. New guy is helpless. But ego will not let people see the truth before the reality is experienced. Sometimes not even then. The landing a plane thing is probably no different.
GON
$150 Site Donor 2025
I had a neighbor that was a flight engineer for American Airlines for many decades. Prior to that he was part of the Army Air Corps.
This AA flight engineer retired working DC 10s. Prior to that he worked 727s.
I asked him this same question, could he land that 727/ DC 10 if the CAPT and FO became incapacitated. He said he thought so, but said "yes" with much hesitency. It was not an easy yes from him. Here is a FE that had 40 years in the cockpit, yet he himself was reserved when trying to answer the question posed on this thread.
On a side bar (Astro will likely better correct my statement), this FE said United and American had completely different requirements to be a FE, At UA, they looked for FEs with one type of background, at AA they looked at FEs for another type of background. Amazed they FEs at UA and AA were working in the same cockpit, but the airlines had very different background criteria of to be a FE at their airline.
This AA flight engineer retired working DC 10s. Prior to that he worked 727s.
I asked him this same question, could he land that 727/ DC 10 if the CAPT and FO became incapacitated. He said he thought so, but said "yes" with much hesitency. It was not an easy yes from him. Here is a FE that had 40 years in the cockpit, yet he himself was reserved when trying to answer the question posed on this thread.
On a side bar (Astro will likely better correct my statement), this FE said United and American had completely different requirements to be a FE, At UA, they looked for FEs with one type of background, at AA they looked at FEs for another type of background. Amazed they FEs at UA and AA were working in the same cockpit, but the airlines had very different background criteria of to be a FE at their airline.
I don’t find what I do difficult anymore but it still took 7 years of training and I’ve practiced it at least 4x per week for the past 15 years. I often get the comment from a parent watching, “That was easy.”
No, it wasn’t. It just seemed easy because I’m well trained and good at what I do. They are not thinking about the anesthesia I used placed in just the right way and in just the right place to block just the right nerves and to them I just stuck ‘em with the needle. They don’t understand or have the hand skills to work upside down in a mirror in a confined space to prep the tooth with a very specific set of characteristics. To them, I just made the hole. Then, they don’t know the manufacturer’s instructions on how to place the material and adjust it afterwards. To them, I just put the filling in. Well trained people with technically demanding jobs like doctors, dentists, lawyers, pilots, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, etc make difficult things look easy and in the end there is no substitute for experience. Landing an airplane requires experience and even though pilots make it look easy I can imagine a layman having absolutely no clue where to begin all the while constantly getting closer to the inevitable ending at 500mph.
If I was the only person available I’d give the landing a try but in the back of my mind I’d be thinking this will be a much more interesting story of my death compared to something like he went to poop and died of a heart attack on the toilet. Everyone cashed out at some point - just a matter of when and how and that’d be quite a how.
Honestly, my best hope would be I could at least spare the lives of people on the ground. Not too hopeful I could even do that, but I’d want to try.
No, it wasn’t. It just seemed easy because I’m well trained and good at what I do. They are not thinking about the anesthesia I used placed in just the right way and in just the right place to block just the right nerves and to them I just stuck ‘em with the needle. They don’t understand or have the hand skills to work upside down in a mirror in a confined space to prep the tooth with a very specific set of characteristics. To them, I just made the hole. Then, they don’t know the manufacturer’s instructions on how to place the material and adjust it afterwards. To them, I just put the filling in. Well trained people with technically demanding jobs like doctors, dentists, lawyers, pilots, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, etc make difficult things look easy and in the end there is no substitute for experience. Landing an airplane requires experience and even though pilots make it look easy I can imagine a layman having absolutely no clue where to begin all the while constantly getting closer to the inevitable ending at 500mph.
If I was the only person available I’d give the landing a try but in the back of my mind I’d be thinking this will be a much more interesting story of my death compared to something like he went to poop and died of a heart attack on the toilet. Everyone cashed out at some point - just a matter of when and how and that’d be quite a how.
Honestly, my best hope would be I could at least spare the lives of people on the ground. Not too hopeful I could even do that, but I’d want to try.
Last edited:
...also this is a symptom of one of our society's biggest problems right now - the Dunning-Kruger effect. People with so little education and training that they don't know how much they don't really know but hey they "thought about it" or "it looks easy" so they're just going to use their good old common sense. Right...doesn't work that way but they'll never see it.
"Nearly 50% of men who have never flown or landed an airplane think they could safely land a passenger airplane"
And in other news, nearly 50% of men have ego's that make them utterly and hopelessly delusional.
As an A&P, I have had the fortunate privilege of knowing my way around a cockpit. The recent thread that had the pictures of the 707 cockpit and the Concorde.... At least in the 707 view, I knew what 99.8% of all those switches, knobs, and levers, and displays all do, how to work them, what they're telling me, and how to break them just in time as my supervisor is writing my yearly review. I know how to work the comm, how to set the transponder codes, how to set up the autopilot, what the glideslope and localizer are telling me, what the flight director does, and lots of other things.
I (and two others) were doubly fortunate to get some seat time in a 767 sim at the airline we worked for, as a reward for our grades in the company sponsored school we were attending. I had lots of R/C model flying time, I've landed a few singles over the years, and had done some stunt flying with a local doctor in his T-34. The other two guys were licensed private pilots.
I got two attempts to land the 767. Once completely clean and under ideal conditions, the other the instructor threw a #2 engine fire at me about a mile or so out. I crashed, both times. Not just a hard landing and broke the landing gear, I'm talking 30 degrees banked, 20 degrees nose down, 100 feet off center, human organs scattered all over the runway kind of crash. I was watching the airspeed, I kind of faked my way through what flap settings to use and when, I remembered to put the gear down, I knew once I tended to the engine fire the plane would start yawing heavily... it was a lot to think about, in a very, very short amount of time.... two minutes goes by really, REALLY quick when the runway threshold is visible and approaching at 180 knots and you're on fire and there's no beer involved. No wonder I crashed. Ego crushed. My underarms smelled like a sewer and my palms were drenched. And this was make believe.
The other two guys, the pilots..... landed successfully, both times, even with engine fires. Not beautiful landings, but survivable and airplane in one piece and probably reusable kind of landings. I was impressed. The instructor was certainly impressed. One of the pilots, who was legally blind in one eye, was certainly impressed with himself, in a very humble way. The other guy was a raging narcissist who I really wanted to see crash. Nope. My ego started to wonder just how realistic this $1-million simulator really was.
I think the experience of the average transport pilot, along with a lot of automation that has taken over a lot of what needs tending to (and I'm a big fan of that, and I realize some arent), has made the job look a lot easier than it is. Guys watching "Airport '75" reruns over and over with a beer in their hand while watching ATC talk stewardess Nancy into successfully driving a crippled 747 over a mountain doesnt help with the delusion that just anybody can hop in a cockpit and hit the gas and steer it around with little more difficulty than driving a '77 Camaro with a bad tire or two. Or that the average air traffic controller is a pilot working extra hours on the side to make ends meet, that just happens to be able to talk someone with zero experience into handling a four engine jet without throwing it into a death spiral. Whatever.
I think these 50% of men who think they could land a jet would be better served by merely learning how to set the comm to 121.5, yelling "mayday" at 150db and finally getting a voice on the other side, and telling that person to tell their wife sorry they cheated back in '89 and where to find the shoebox full of cash they have hidden in the garage and to turn on CNN so they can see drone footage of the smoking crater that will become their final resting place.
Dunning-Kruger, indeed.
And in other news, nearly 50% of men have ego's that make them utterly and hopelessly delusional.
As an A&P, I have had the fortunate privilege of knowing my way around a cockpit. The recent thread that had the pictures of the 707 cockpit and the Concorde.... At least in the 707 view, I knew what 99.8% of all those switches, knobs, and levers, and displays all do, how to work them, what they're telling me, and how to break them just in time as my supervisor is writing my yearly review. I know how to work the comm, how to set the transponder codes, how to set up the autopilot, what the glideslope and localizer are telling me, what the flight director does, and lots of other things.
I (and two others) were doubly fortunate to get some seat time in a 767 sim at the airline we worked for, as a reward for our grades in the company sponsored school we were attending. I had lots of R/C model flying time, I've landed a few singles over the years, and had done some stunt flying with a local doctor in his T-34. The other two guys were licensed private pilots.
I got two attempts to land the 767. Once completely clean and under ideal conditions, the other the instructor threw a #2 engine fire at me about a mile or so out. I crashed, both times. Not just a hard landing and broke the landing gear, I'm talking 30 degrees banked, 20 degrees nose down, 100 feet off center, human organs scattered all over the runway kind of crash. I was watching the airspeed, I kind of faked my way through what flap settings to use and when, I remembered to put the gear down, I knew once I tended to the engine fire the plane would start yawing heavily... it was a lot to think about, in a very, very short amount of time.... two minutes goes by really, REALLY quick when the runway threshold is visible and approaching at 180 knots and you're on fire and there's no beer involved. No wonder I crashed. Ego crushed. My underarms smelled like a sewer and my palms were drenched. And this was make believe.
The other two guys, the pilots..... landed successfully, both times, even with engine fires. Not beautiful landings, but survivable and airplane in one piece and probably reusable kind of landings. I was impressed. The instructor was certainly impressed. One of the pilots, who was legally blind in one eye, was certainly impressed with himself, in a very humble way. The other guy was a raging narcissist who I really wanted to see crash. Nope. My ego started to wonder just how realistic this $1-million simulator really was.
I think the experience of the average transport pilot, along with a lot of automation that has taken over a lot of what needs tending to (and I'm a big fan of that, and I realize some arent), has made the job look a lot easier than it is. Guys watching "Airport '75" reruns over and over with a beer in their hand while watching ATC talk stewardess Nancy into successfully driving a crippled 747 over a mountain doesnt help with the delusion that just anybody can hop in a cockpit and hit the gas and steer it around with little more difficulty than driving a '77 Camaro with a bad tire or two. Or that the average air traffic controller is a pilot working extra hours on the side to make ends meet, that just happens to be able to talk someone with zero experience into handling a four engine jet without throwing it into a death spiral. Whatever.
I think these 50% of men who think they could land a jet would be better served by merely learning how to set the comm to 121.5, yelling "mayday" at 150db and finally getting a voice on the other side, and telling that person to tell their wife sorry they cheated back in '89 and where to find the shoebox full of cash they have hidden in the garage and to turn on CNN so they can see drone footage of the smoking crater that will become their final resting place.
Dunning-Kruger, indeed.
Speaking of Dunning-Kruger...here's a great example. Survey science sits at the cross-section of psychology, business, and mathematics. You can take entire courses on the science of survey design, data collection, statistical treatments of that data, and interpretation of the results. PhDs are granted to people who work exclusively in survey science because it is a bonified discipline. It exists because it DOES provide accurate and informative data WHEN done WELL.
Enter Atex7239 who has "thought about it" and from his armchair and he has had the novel idea that people who participate in surveys may not always be accurate or truthful in their answers or according to him they are likely an, "idiot with nothing better to do." The Dunning-Kruger here is his assumption that all these people who study and implement surveys never thought about participants who are inaccurate or lie or are stupid. He doesn't know enough about surveys to know that those are central topics in the field and that they have been addressed with cold hard science and mathematics. This of course doesn't stop him from declaring all survey data useless and the best part is even after reading this it will likely still never occur to him that he simply just doesn't really understand this topic and he will inevitably just double down.
I'm not making any statement about the OP survey - some surveys are good and some are bad but the suggestion that ALL survey data is useless is ridiculous.
Similar threads
