Culture - and thread drift....

[PilotDAR]

I come here to read about things we do with planes, hopefully fun productive things, but when that's not the case, I hope to perhaps learn something which will make me a better pilot, and keep me focused on safety. I also enjoy the possibility that information I can provide, might help and encourage newer pilots and owners - after all, we're supposed to grow our industry by sharing positives, right?

However, recently, more than I had noticed in the past on AvCanada, there appears to have been a disproportionate amount of infighting and name calling. Does this present the image we would like to portray? Not for me. And I've met a few of you infighters... you're nicer in person than you portray here.

I know that some thread drift is inevitable, but when I read nearly a page of infighting, with little relevant or new information about an recent aviation event, I wonder why I opened the page again. I sure would not sit for such discussion, were it to be in person at the flying club, on a rainy day! It does not mean that some disagreement is not tolerable, but it should not be the focus...

I pretty much abandoned PPRuNe, because certain members seemed more focused on bringing other members down, and climbing to the top of the pile of carcasses at the end. I can't say I'm completely blameless, but I'm aiming to be better. I would much rather read discussions here which made it obvious that we all share a passion for aviation, rather than fighting!

I will always try to write here as though I were speaking to all of you in person - anyone else?

[CID]

Well...

When one first arrives on the scene here at the AvCanada forums, there are a few instant misconceptions that are easily arrived at. The line that lists the moderators imply that discussions are moderated. That's really not the case. There is nobody who actively keeps the discussion on track. Moderators only arrive on the scene when someone complains about something.

The other misconception is that this is a democracy. A rather dubious expectation. It can't be a democracy. The people who are legally tied to these forums must protect themselves. And like any media outlet, they have the right to control the content in accordance with their principles and ideologies.

And there there is the huge misconception that using your real name or exposing your identity on an anonymous forum somehow legitimizes your opinion and give you the right to bully and expose others who prefer to remain anonymous. (ie: I am speaking for myself here, not my company and not my peers or business associates).

Then there's the pride factor. NOBODY likes to admit they are wrong. And only a few will actually (begrudgingly) do it. Even in the face of overwhelming fact. That minority will not only concede that perhaps their statements were incorrect, they will "defend" their statements by attacking you.

That is the microcosm of the forums on AvCanada.

I've been posting here long enough to know that. I think I've contributed a great deal of positive information here and sometimes it's at the cost of hurting one's feelings but when it comes to aviation and safety, I'd rather have the correct information out there than worry about hurt feelings.

I've also learned that with the lack of continuous moderation (I'm not saying that its practical or possible) some treads become very messy but good information can be gleaned from it.

Yes, sometimes things get off track but I don't agree that the side discussions about automation or culture were off track in the Asiana thread. And I further don't think it's off track to re-establish some of those points in other threads. It's interesting to me that people will strictly defend a statement in one thread then completely contradict themselves in another. Or how prejudices are exposed in the same manner.

For example, in the Asiana thread, people were calling for the pilots to be shot and pissed on because of their lack of basic pilot skills. But....on an older thread about a botch landing in a Global Express that was written off due to "pilot error" during a landing, people were "feeling sorry" for the pilots!

Yes, these are messy, discouraging and frustrating forums but I think there is good information once in awhile and the more intelligent of the group can pick through the BS and learn something.

[Canoehead]

Hi PilotDAR

I notice your join date is 2012 here. I can assure you that this isn't new in the past 2 years- it's been like this as long as I've been lurking/posting here.

What's interesting is that I was hanging out on the AEF since about 1996 or 97. That place was pretty brutal too back then- generally because of bad blood between regional pilots and AC pilots. Back then, the term 'mainline' didn't yet exist. It's a different crowd there, more airline directed than gen av.

It got so bad I stopped going there. But it has since turned a corner (I think) and because of some pretty knowledgeable types, I enjoy reading there, and occasionally add my 2¢.
But so often here, I don't even bother looking. It often depends who the topic starter is (you'll notice I obviously read your post . I have my mental list of 'don't bothers' though.

Bottom line is I guess that in an anonymous forum, people are like drivers safely in their own car. Usually they have no problem yelling at others or flipping the bird etc., but I always wonder- would they do that in line at the grocery store checkout? I would think not.

I'm also certain that generational change plays a role here, and it's been discussed ad-nauseum. But there truly has been a major shift (generally) in attitude and ability and respect (I could go on...). I've seen it both as a trainer and on the line.

I understand the reasons for anonymity here. We know people of 'power' frequent here (DaveP). Imagine the ones who don't post! But I think we should all consider 'would I sign my name to this?' before hitting the submit button. If not, don't say anything.
The insults and truly childish posts of some are tiring, and I'm often on the fence considering just deleting AvCanada off my bookmarks.

That said, I have to look in the mirror. I'm not perfect, but I will endeavor to think twice before speaking.

[LousyFisherman]

Hi PilotDAR,
I agree with you in general, however, it is the internet so there are limits on the effectiveness of communication.

I split the users into 3 groups:
- Those who have far more knowledge than me and are able to communicate it to others, despite their shortcomings (Hedley's sensitivity, CatDrivers battle with Transport Canada rants, etc.). These people I admire and respect.
- Those I find amusing, for example, pdw and the extremely dangerous variable winds. (Aren't all winds variable to some degree or another? )
- Those I have no interest in their knowledge or opinions.

For example, any topic started by CS, CatD, or anyone in Group 1, I will read, even if I believe I'm not interested, because I will most likely gain knowledge or be entertained.
I almost never read non-aviation topics.
As soon as anyone demonstrates ignorance about the subject being discussed I ignore their posts unless they are in Group 2.
And if you slander another person or group I will be one of the ones to slap you down. Furthermore, after correcting those in Group 1 I find that they usually accept their mistake. As you mention there is a large amount of noise and drivel here, however, this site is one of the most invaluable aviation resources I have found. The fact I have to work to pull the gems of wisdom out is irrelevant.

By the way what is a DAR? I had hoped to get the answer when CatD made a valid challenge to someone else, however, the question was never answered.
Designer of Aviation Regulations Naww, can't be that, too many people like you

Personally I am glad you have joined this online bar-room and I hope you ignore the fights and continue to contribute to the (sometimes heated) technical discussions. Even in your short time here, you have aided this low-time pilot. Thank you

IMHO
LF

[CpnCrunch]

Avcanada is a lot better than it was a few years ago, although there is still a huge amount of bitching, name-calling and ego from a few people. I always thought that pprune was a lot better in this regard - it seems to be a lot more civilized. I don't generally go to pprune however because there isn't much happening there (at least in the Canada section).

[PilotDAR]

By the way what is a DAR

DAR is Design Approval Representative, a delegation from Transport Canada, though I am self employed. Within the scope of my delegation, I evaluate and test modified aircraft to confirm that they continue to conform to the applicable design requirements, and when that is demonstrated, I issue an STC for the modification.

I can remember a while back, as a new pilot, feeling inadequate in the inevitable group of sky gods in the club on a rainy day. However, enough of them took me under their wing, and made a really good impression through mentoring, and I am in, and serve aviation as a result.

Where will the next generation of true patriots to aviation come from, if it appears that the vocal members of the industry are a bunch of whining criticizing codgers? Who'd want to put themselves into such a group? I don't care that the internet is as anonymous as a car window in traffic when you cut someone off, how difficult can it be to rise above, and write as though you were speaking face to face - the way we used to!

The benefit of this format of communication is that many more people can participate (you don't have to drive to the airport), but it should not cause communication so casual as to offend others, even if you are sitting in your underwear while you type posts!

[Beefitarian]

Sorry, I think everyone wants to be like the actors they watch on television. Too many gangster shows on. No more Brady Bunch. Being nice is no longer something people aspire to.

[Jellyman]

DAR - I have to applaud you and feel the same way you do. I have had some very good interactions on AvCanada and have gotten some very good advice. But, like everything you do need to read between the lines sometimes. Everyone on here has something to offer, but as soon as one person makes a stab at one sector of aviation, the claws come out.

Someone bad mouths float drivers or corporate or airlines or instructors or the bush guys and it goes on and on and on sometimes. I have heard it all in on form or another. I have heard instructing pilots are usless, but were did you learn from, and airline guys are "button pushers," but what did they do before they got there? And that no-one is as good as aerobatic pilots, but when was the last time you flew down to minimums in turbulance with a broken auto-pilot? (at night)

The fact is, and I think most will agree, everyone has something to offer. We just have to try not to get our backs up when our sector of aviation has someone taking shots at it.

We are all PILOTS, we are all GODS, and we are all RIGHT! Lets keep it clean and come out swinging!

[cgzro]

This is not an AvCanada only issue. Since the early days of Bulletin Board systems and modems (1980s) there has been nastiness from anonymous people. Back then we invented the happy faces, frowns and terms like troll etc. So its unfortunately human nature and I dont see it changing any time soon:(

[Cat Driver]

but when was the last time you flew down to minimums in turbulance with a broken auto-pilot? (at night)

Flying down to minimums in turbulence without an autopilot was the normal method of flying IFR because the airplanes did not have autopilots....

.....therefore we thought it was normal to fly IFR manually.

[CID]

Cat Driver, you've brought an important point into this discussion. Context. If you flew an aircraft manually in IFR in 1970, it was likely in airspace that was either not very busy or under ATC separation that is nothing close to what it is today in busy airports. And you likely did it in a low automation smaller aircraft that was designed to be manually flown. Fast forward to 2013 and put yourself in a 777 or an A380 and that seemingly simple task of flying manually in turbulence at night suddenly becomes much more of a handful. Lump in some high density traffic and all of the new-fangled COM and NAV procedures and it would make any pilot sweat. Or at least the smart ones.

To be fair, Jellyman didn't provide any context.

But it is a serious problem on these forums. Taking statements out of context tends to reverse the discussion as people scramble to make sure their point or facts weren't misinterpreted by being presented out of context.

Sometimes its an honest mistake, other times it's just mean spirited antagonism. Either way it's disruptive as hell.

[Meatservo]

Of course there is also the fact that there is a huge range of reading comprehension levels here, and even among those who are talented at communicating via the written word, there is room for misunderstanding. I'm quite sure I have unnecessarily shot back at someone I thought was being rude, or hostile, when it may be the case they weren't. Sometimes it's difficult to tell what a person means when you can't see their expression, or hear their tone. Many people seem to enjoy sarcasm (I do) in real life, but it doesn't translate very well here, even with the rolly-eyes thing. I've just thought about it and realized that all sarcasm when written has the same amount of bite, because the tone of voice is missing. It's actually quite humiliating to be on the receiving end of it even when it's meant in fun.

Out of the hundreds of pilots I've encountered in my twenty-five years of flying (if you count private flying before I was a professional) I can count on one hand the number of stupid ones I've run into. Maybe a couple more of them were jerks, but very few. Mostly I find as a group air pilots tend to be intelligent, well-rounded and sometimes quite charming men and women, who like to share their enthusiasm for flying. Even helicopter pilots! I think the whole bulletin-board thing brings out the inner jerk in most of us. It's cool that we're talking about it. Maybe we can all be a bit more civil here. That could last as long as a few days.

I'd like to give a shout out to "Panama Jack" in particular. I have always been impressed with his politeness, even during disagreements.

[Beefitarian]

Out of the hundreds of pilots I've encountered in my twenty-five years of flying (if you count private flying before I was a professional) I can count on one hand the number of stupid ones I've run into.

That puts us in a pretty elite little group.

[Cat Driver]

When comments such as this are made I feel I need to answer.

Cat Driver, you've brought an important point into this discussion. Context. If you flew an aircraft manually in IFR in 1970, it was likely in airspace that was either not very busy or under ATC separation that is nothing close to what it is today in busy airports.

We flew auto parts from Chicago O'hare and Detroit and the traffic was as busy as today.

And you likely did it in a low automation smaller aircraft that was designed to be manually flown. Fast forward to 2013 and put yourself in a 777 or an A380 and that seemingly simple task of flying manually in turbulence at night suddenly becomes much more of a handful. Lump in some high density traffic and all of the new-fangled COM and NAV procedures and it would make any pilot sweat. Or at least the smart ones.

So modern aircraft are far more complex and so difficult to fly today some crews just can not fly them without automation?

[Troubleshot]

Starting to slip right now ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^hahahahaha

[Cat Driver]

................yeh, because I am mean spirited and antagonistic...and don't know jack shit about flying..

[Troubleshot]

Honestly I don't care what people say here, strictly entertainment for me. Sure I have learned things on Avcanada...I can't verify any of it really ,but it sounds legit. Getting in a turd slinging debate sometimes is just more fun. Some huge ego's here who just love taking people down a peg or two, they are just douche-bags. All in all, 90% entertainment 10% factual info.

The site is really nothing more than "keeping up with the Kardashians" episode but with a aviation theme. Enjoy for what it is people.

[Doc]

Cat Driver, you've brought an important point into this discussion. Context. If you flew an aircraft manually in IFR in 1970, it was likely in airspace that was either not very busy or under ATC separation that is nothing close to what it is today in busy airports. And you likely did it in a low automation smaller aircraft that was designed to be manually flown. Fast forward to 2013 and put yourself in a 777 or an A380 and that seemingly simple task of flying manually in turbulence at night suddenly becomes much more of a handful. Lump in some high density traffic and all of the new-fangled COM and NAV procedures and it would make any pilot sweat. Or at least the smart ones.
.

I'd be interested in the thought process that would make you believe hand flying a modern airliner, at night, in the rain, would be somehow more difficult than it would have been in a DC8, or even a DC6? The "new-fangled" make it simpler. Not more complicated. A monkey (know several) can hand bomb a glide slope on a modern GPS. Try a radio range approach into good old ORD in the golden years. I know I'm happy to have missed those days! But I did fly auto parts into KORD, and several other hot spots in the old DC3. It was plenty busy, WAY back then. No auto pilots. It's certainly no harder today. Give me the course on the 777. I'll wager I can hand bomb the puppy into KORD at 3:00 am. Might not be any prettier than a 777 driver shoehorning a DC3 into some northern Ontario reserve strip at 3:00 am, in the rain, with 20 knots straight across the strip. Point is we can all do what the other guy can do. A descent baseball payer can hit a cricket ball.

[Cat Driver]

Doc, modern highly automated jets fly no different than any other fixed wing airplane as far as control inputs and control responses goes.

During my training sessions in the A320 sim at Airbus Industries we would hand fly it in direct law and see who could do the shortest circuit just for some entertainment.

It flew exactly like any other airplane, the training pilot who was an Airbus test pilot pushed a bit to far trying to tighten up the circuit amd dragged a wing in the turn landing.....when it crashes it is so realistic it almost stops your heart.

[onetreehill]

I'm hammerd out of my fu$king mind.

[swordfish]

Doc, modern highly automated jets fly no different than any other fixed wing airplane as far as control inputs and control responses goes.
During my training sessions in the A320 sim at Airbus Industries we would hand fly it in direct law and see who could do the shortest circuit just for some entertainment.
It flew exactly like any other airplane, the training pilot who was an Airbus test pilot pushed a bit to far trying to tighten up the circuit amd dragged a wing in the turn landing.....when it crashes it is so realistic it almost stops your heart.

Actually, muscling a DC3 around a circling approach at night in a crosswind is WORK...big time. The newer generation of FBW aircraft, while responding to control inputs and (simulated) feel responses in the same manner as any other plane, it's much easier when you can select the airspeed and the autothrust will manage the most difficult part of maneuvering for you. Plus you have a guy in the right seat who is typed & proficient on the plane, and the 2 of you are following a mature SOP during the whole maneuver. (i.e. REAL assistance, rather than having to fly, use your judgement, experience and skills on your own)

[PositiveRate27]

Cat Driver, you've brought an important point into this discussion. Context. If you flew an aircraft manually in IFR in 1970, it was likely in airspace that was either not very busy or under ATC separation that is nothing close to what it is today in busy airports. And you likely did it in a low automation smaller aircraft that was designed to be manually flown. Fast forward to 2013 and put yourself in a 777 or an A380 and that seemingly simple task of flying manually in turbulence at night suddenly becomes much more of a handful. Lump in some high density traffic and all of the new-fangled COM and NAV procedures and it would make any pilot sweat. Or at least the smart ones.

To be fair, Jellyman didn't provide any context.

But it is a serious problem on these forums. Taking statements out of context tends to reverse the discussion as people scramble to make sure their point or facts weren't misinterpreted by being presented out of context.

Sometimes its an honest mistake, other times it's just mean spirited antagonism. Either way it's disruptive as hell.

Actually, it's not even context that is the breakdown between Cat Driver and those he chooses to "argue with" or "antagonize". It's simply a lack of any true reference points that both parties can identify with. His latest comment on this thread has an underlying implication that pilot's back in the day hand flew their machines down to minimum's with the ease of a Sunday drive. They absolutely never crashed an airplane, and if they did it certainly was not from a lack of flying skills or intelligence. Of course, if you look at the statistics, this simply is not true. They crashed. A lot.

I've never hand flown a DC-3 down to minimums, so I have no reference as to how difficult that is. Therefore Cat can tell me that he, along with God as his FO, were the first ones to actually do it. I would have no way of knowing if it were true or not. I can't disprove it, and I'm smart enough to know that it probably is a good challenge. The problem is, it's impossible to get a direct comparison between hand flying an old piston pounder and a modern jetliner from an anonymous internet username. I could easily go create a new username and start typing up stories about flying old war birds back in the day... How would you know they are true? I suggest you simply enjoy the banter and place as much worth on advice you get from people on the internet as you paid for it.

[Colonel Sanders]

How would you know they are true?

In the past, I have suggested that people - if they want -
scan their ATPL's in, and email them to Joe, in confidence.

And Joe adds a tiny mark or something next to your
username when you post. You remain anonymous.

It's not the best metric in the world, but if someone
has 1500TT and a MIFR and wrote a couple of exams,
they probably have some clue about what they speak.

When someone posted something, you could glance
and see if they had some flying experience, to weight
their opinion.

However, the backlash against the above was amazing,
and telling. You'd have thought I suggested we start
neutering everyone with an IQ under 130.

So, how things are, is how people want them to be.

[Beefitarian]

Do many of the problems here stem from people doubting Cat's experience?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

The problem is, it's impossible to get a direct comparison between hand flying an old piston pounder and a modern jetliner from an anonymous internet username.

Well PositiveRate27 I will do my best to fix your problem about anonymous posters....I am posting this under my real name instead of Cat Driver which I normally use.


Let me correct a few of your comments .

They absolutely never crashed an airplane, and if they did it certainly was not from a lack of flying skills or intelligence. Of course, if you look at the statistics, this simply is not true. They crashed. A lot.

I never ever crashed one and there are a lot of older pilots on here with thousands of hours hand flying in bad weather who never crashed one.

I've never hand flown a DC-3 down to minimums, so I have no reference as to how difficult that is. Therefore Cat can tell me that he, along with God as his FO, were the first ones to actually do it. I would have no way of knowing if it were true or not. I can't disprove it,

If you have no way of knowing if I have done it why do you feel the need to cast doubt as to my integrity?

it's impossible to get a direct comparison between hand flying an old piston pounder and a modern jetliner from an anonymous internet username. I could easily go create a new username and start typing up stories about flying old war birds back in the day... How would you know they are true? I suggest you simply enjoy the banter and place as much worth on advice you get from people on the internet as you paid for it.

Now you have something to help you understand old airplanes versus modern jets PositiveRate27 as I have flown both and given my opinion on how they fly using my real name so you won't think I am just making this stuff up.....

.....but you are correct about anonymous posters they can claim anything with no fear of being exposed as ignorant bullshitters.