Page 1 of 1

UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:43 am
by AirportDude
Phew - now that all that spambot nonsense has been done away with... glad I saw it relatively early and alerted you Jack!


Ponds vs. Lakes :mrgreen:

I grew up in Maine, and we have a lot of them! I can tell you that there is no true distinction for the naming convention of what body of water constitutes a lake and what's a pond. Many ponds should have been lakes, and vice-versa.

My family had a camp in eastern Maine on a body of water called Upper Lead Mountain Pond. There was also a Lower and Middle Lead Mountain Pond. In my mind Middle was a pond, and Lower & Upper were lakes. Upper was at least 2 miles long, and about 1/2 to 3/4 mile wide. It was shallow at the north end, but about 70 ft deep on the south end. But it was a large body of water, and when the wind picked-up we would get small breakers on it and being in a boat kinda sucked! But I call it a lake.

If it takes you more than 15 minutes to row a boat from one side to the other, it's a lake. It doesn't matter if it has an island, or is clear to the bottom, or is shallow enough for aquatic vegetation to grow above the surface, or has a stream feeding/flowing out of it. If it takes time to traverse it, IT'S A LAKE.


Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:48 am
by cozy171bh
UCAP Gang,

The topic of the “militarization of GA” came up late in this episode, so time did not permit to fully address the subject. Perhaps a follow-up in a future episode would be beneficial. It is an interesting topic.

In my perspective, as one who has been wearing a civilian airline pilot uniform for 29 years, I am not seeing this as “militarization” in a negative sense. Perhaps the uniform has military roots, as do many other good things which have been adopted by civilian aviation (such as checklists), but the airline pilot uniform has become so ubiquitous that it is seen by most people for what it is. Recall the old Pan Am uniform? With the double-breasted blazer and distinctive accoutrements, its design was modeled after those worn by crews on ocean lines, which was intended, since they flew flying boats back in the day. Are there military roots in there somewhere? Perhaps, but the Pan Am captain looked more like the captain of the Titanic than a general. In my experience, people see an airline pilot when they see me in uniform. Very rarely has anyone mistaken me for a military officer. More often, I am mistaken for a ticket agent!

Personally, I like the connection to the military, as in many respects our rich civilian aviation history is inextricably linked to military aviation, and I love our rich aviation history. I like the warbirds at Oshkosh, and the military aerial routines. Sometimes you see an airplane owner who has painted stars and bars on their Piper, or shark teeth on a Mooney. That’s just fun.

Some of the Part 141 flight schools have their instructors wear a uniform. These schools tend to be very structured and disciplined, and the uniform is a part of that culture and contributes, I think, to safety and the learning environment. If it works for them, great.

My primary instructor was a former P-51 pilot, with confirmed kills to his credit. He was a great instructor, and he always wore jeans and a polo shirt.

Enjoyed the episode, as usual, and I got a kick out of the “lost comm” issue in the middle of the episode! You guys deserve a break. Have a great Christmas, and we’ll see you after the New Year!


Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:32 am
by jackhodgson
Brian, aka cozy171bh,

Thanks for sharing your perspective on this.

Your post has gotten me to thinking about how to explain my feelings on this better. But it's a complicated subject, and I want some time to organize my thoughts. But I do want to say a couple of things right away.

First, and maybe most importantly, I hope that I did not give the impression that I have anything but the deepest respect for those who have served in our military. The men and women who have accepted the risk, and often paid a price, to serve our country in the military, deserve our profound thanks, and I'm proud that there are a few of them who call me their friend.

Second, kinda related, I want to be clear that I do not believe there is anything inherently wrong with something being "military". There are certainly situations where the structure and regimentation of the military are an effective way, maybe the best way, to accomplish a mission. In addition to our armed services, I think the civilian police and fire departments are good examples of this.

My concerns with the "militarization of GA", which I may expand upon later, are, put simply, about it making aviation seem dangerous in a way that it's really not, and whether it is properly respectful of the actual military.

Thanks again.

// Jack

Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 12:58 pm
by AirportDude
RE: Militarization

I heard this on the podcast too, but chose to overlook it. However, I spent 20 years in the AF so I'm partial to uniforms. That said, I don't see airlines have having military-styles in their clothing or attitudes.

Lastly, I have flown with a flight suit on many occasions and I must say they are awful comfy! In the immortal words of Ferris Bueller, "It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up."

Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:08 am
by DaveA
Re: Lake vs Pond conundrum.

If you can fly a Cub with floats off it: It's a Lake.

If you can fly a Lake LA4 off it: It's definitely a Lake...

Anything smaller is a Pond...especially if there's an island in the middle.

Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 2:14 pm
by AirportDude
HA -- Algae Poo! I just listened to that episode (96 or 97) the other week!!!

LG-P00.jpg (150.45 KiB) Viewed 10099 times

Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:08 pm
by SkiandflyUtah
Jack, I too was somewhat confused by the "militarization of GA" comments and even after your follow-up comments remain so.

From my GA flying experience, other than the whole Oskosh Warbird thing, which Martha Lunken has had some fun poking with a stick in her Flying Magazine column, I don't see the connection. CAP may be a bit heavy on the military influence but to the general population in the US my guess is most folks don't draw any connection between the military & GA flying.

Overwhelmingly here in the Salt Lake City area, I suspect in the rest of the country as well, what I see is an inevitable knee-jerk reaction that "small airplanes are falling out of the sky in increasing numbers & threatening the public' whenever there's an occasional small aircraft crash in the area. There may be a hundred or two car crashes including some fatals in the general vicinity of our GA reliever airport, those don't get commented on, but if one plane comes up short on landing, etc, with or without injuries the general public, at least some, are up in arms and demanding the airport be closed.

I think GA has much more to fear from the general public's perception of pilots as being well-to-do folks that are irresponsibly endangering others with their expensive hobby than any connection with military type flying.

My 2 cents worth, thanks for reading.

Re: UCAP443 - Domestic Dispute Landing

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:13 pm
by Scofreyjet
I don't see any issue with using rank titles or symbols for PIC of commercially operated GA flights. In my mind, it's equivalent to a the "captain" of a commercial ferry boat captain (or oil tanker, or cruise ship, or...)

In fact, in some countries even the pilot of a private piston aircraft has a much easier time of it if they wear a uniform shirt with captain's epaulets.

Senor Capitan Higdon (Episode 52) comes to mind! ;)