Weighing In
Its been interesting reading these posts. Unlike previous editions of these same questions (regulation) it seems that more people are in favor of some kind of licensing and enforcement. I think licensing is a good idea, however, I do not think it should be easy to get a license (I'll explain shortly). I think that enforcement is currently sufficient and I'll explain that also. I do not think that laws are designed to keep us from doing what we would otherwise do. Okay, maybe speeding would be the exception for me. I do think that laws do reduce crime. If nothing else, they take the bad guys off the street for awhile and off the street means they are not committing crimes. Back to licensing. I would suggest the aviation model. You get a license after spending sufficient time with an instructor to meet the requirements of the checkride. Checkride is given by a designated person by the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). Your license is for life. However, to use the license you need to do a checkride with an instructor at least every two years. Failing the checkride does not cause you to lose your license. It does mean that the instructor can require you do do some additional instructional time to fix whatever deficiencies have crept into your skills. Enforcement in the aviation model is almost transparent. There are no sky cops. The Coast Gurad does not pull you over and do a safety check. The FAA does have the right to inspect your aircraft and talk to you on a random basis. In 30 years of flying that never happened to me, and I suspect that it is a rare occurance. If your actions are unsafe and it is noticed they will and can do anything from a simple chat to taking your license away. Learning to fly is a combination of developing the requisite skills and demonstrating an ability and judgement to perform the activity safely. The instructor has no interest in recommending you for a checkride if any of those qualities are missing. I know instructors who have had heart to heart talks with students advising them against the activity. And just to make it a little more controversial, I think the same rules that apply to aviation should apply to driving. At least a check ride every four years on renewal, with a private instructor not the DMV. By the way, instructors are evaluated by the FAA based on the pass rate of the checkride attempts. Again, regulation by performance. I spent four days in classes (BK) before I took out a small sailboat as captain. I spent four more days in classes (BC) before I could take out boats up to 34 feet. I spent ten days on the water in those boats and four more days in classes (BB) before I could take out the larger boats. I have done an all day anchoring class and 9 days of offshore training as well. Training does not hurt. A do agree that you can't teach judgement. However, with licensing, and required sign-offs, you can interfere with those whose poor judgeement is an issue. Will any of that prevent accidents, or Captain (or pilot) error. No, but it will reduce the incidence to acceptable levels of risk and it will gradually increase the general knowledge of the users. So, I am for licensing, but only if it includes a requirement for training and recurrent evaluation. Otherwise, it is as meaningless as the DMV sending out automatic renewals of my drivers license for the last 30 years or so. Dan Jonas (S/V Feije II)
