From: John De Armond
Subject: Re: Large/small vehicle endurance
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:46:34 -0500
On 12 Nov 2003 19:04:35 -0800, email@example.com (El Alumbrado) wrote:
>Lon, back in the days when I was an active-duty military pilot, the
>USAF did a very interesting study on aviation accident rates. It
>became clear that those pilots that flew high-performance aircraft and
>identified themselves as being exceptionally cautious had a
>higher-than-average accident rate. This seemed a bit
>counter-intuitive, so the Air Force brought in some head shrinkers to
>see what was happening. It seems that the overly-cautious pilots never
>really felt that they were in full command of the aircraft, were (at
>some subconcious level) always worried about losing control, and where
>taking a significant amount of time making concious decisions when
>they should have been making unconcious corrections. Sort of like the
>pilot who was flying towards a mountain at 700 knots, and was trying
>to decide whether to go left, right, or over as he hit it dead center.
>In their wisdom, the Air Force decided to design a training program
>that enhanced a pilot's ability to react intuitively. They developed a
>set of tests to assess how comfortable (or in your words "relaxed") a
>pilot was, and decided that if you weren't "relaxed" when flying, you
>probably shouldn't fly since your timidity represented a significantly
>enhanced threat to yourself and others. A word to the wise, eh?
Same thing holds true for race drivers. When you get to the stage that you
start worrying about crashing, it's time to hang up the helmet and become a
spectator. I was lucky enough to realize that was happening and hang up the
helmet BEFORE I had a serious one.
>After reviewing some of your recent posts, I noticed that you have a
>prediliction for making personal attacks, labeling people as "idiots"
>and "morons" when you encounterd an opinion that ran counter to your
>own beliefs. This kind of behavior is almost always a sign of
>immaturity, reflects a severe lack of self-confidence (but then, many
>people have nothing to be confident about, I suppose), and often
>indicates a lower-than-average intellect (or at best
>lower-than-average verbal skills), so I won't hold your uncalled-for
>remarks against you. In short, you just don't know any better.
I absolutely could not have said that any better myself! Hang around her long
enough and you'll figure out that trying to civilize lon, sill, canoli and a
couple of others is like trying to teach a pig to sing - it always fails and
only annoys the pig. Just filter 'em and enjoy the rest of the group members.