I find it interesting that drivers could stand some more of this prioritization. (Texting is communicating; it can wait until the driving is done.)
>> Pilots know that no one else can help them fly their aircraft in an emergency.
My first solo was... interesting. Takeoff was fine. Climbed to about 400ft and then a full on panic attack (2nd time in my life) as I realized the implications of the empty seat next to me. Thought process was something like this:
What if I need that guy? Well you can call him on the radio, but there's nothing he's gonna say that you dont already know.
What if I can't do this? What if I have to wash out? Well that's OK, but first I gotta get back on the ground before deciding that.
Then I leaned on the window, looked at the plane ahead of me, made my turns, and by the time I was on downwind it was starting to pass.
After landing I taxied back to where I had dropped off my instructor, but he was nowhere to be seen. He'd said to do 3, so I went back out for 2 more takeoffs and landings without incident.
What a way to face your fucking demons.
Then there was some major stress in my personal life, and after that I lost a bit of nerve. Was working back up to solo flight again and then had to hang it up for a while. Hoping to get back to it one day. There's something about it that's different than any other thing in life.
That is the western pilot culture. Russian pilots have a different approach. Rather than a lone pilot in control of "their" airplane, a Russian air force pilot is flying the people's airplane. In some situations nearly every action, every turn or switch, can be commanded by a ground controller. A western pilot will trust his over instruments over ground control. A Russian pilot will likely obey ground control over his own instruments. Neither culture is better or worse than the other, only different.
Go back to the 1950s and 60s and military aircraft, even in the west, were literally controlled by ground control. Autopilots were cued by ground control computers, thereby freeing pilots to manage other systems such as early radars. An aircraft, particularly an interceptor like the FOXBAT, was seen less as an aircraft under control of a pilot than a missile platform, an airborne SAM site. Ground controllers could manage the radars and even fire missiles.
Interestingly enough, just last week saw the first flight of a completely autonomous manned US spacecraft: The Inspiration-4 flight in a SpaceX Dragon. There was no professional astronaut pilot onboard, and the four tourist crewmembers had less than a year of training, I think closer to six months.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_c...
"The manual described TCAS as "a backup to the ATC system", which could be wrongly interpreted to mean that ATC instructions have higher priority.[5]: 80 [BFU 13] This ambiguity was replicated in the Tu-154 Flight Operations Manual, which contained contradictory sections. On the one hand, chapter 8.18.3.4 emphasised the role of ATC and describes TCAS as an "additional aid",[5]: 53 [BFU 14] while chapter 8.18.3.2 forbade manoeuvers contrary to TCAS.[5]: 103 The BFU recommended that this ambiguity should be resolved in favor of obeying TCAS advisories even when these were in conflict with ATC instructions."
This had me wondering several things (as a layman), notably: did the use of autopilot make for certain doom in these cases, as possibly an aircraft without might have entered a state of descent allowing its occupants to regain consciousness; and, what avionic solutions could aid in this type of accident, which seems inevitable given the rapid cognitive toll of hypoxia? A vigilance switch for the autopilot to remain engaged (on some aircraft currently but uncommon)? Controlled descent by the autopilot when fuel is depleted? And especially, remote piloting by instruments, which seems invaluable in a variety of related emergencies?
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522 and the two linked in '#See also'
Absent such a system, the autopilot probably didn't doom the occupants any more than no autopilot would have. It's extraordinarily unlikely that an uncommanded and uncontrolled descent from FL280 or higher (28K feet) would level off at an altitude above the ground but below around 15K feet to allow the crew to recover the airplane. (For one, a wing would probably roll off at some point in the process, leading to a spiral, but even with a wing-leveler, it's not likely the plane would be trimmed to descend and if it did, it would be unlikely to level off above terrain for long enough.)
If drivers had to go through 1/10th of the training/certification a private pilot does, our society would look very different.
Here in the UK, we have the Light Aircraft Pilot's Licence, with lower requirements than the ordinary PPL.
While the 40 hours is a minimum, most people require more to complete their PPL training and pass their exam.
Some aircraft do not require a pilot license but I’m hard pressed for good reasons to fly without prior training.