What is the definition of REAL pilot?

[Arkarian]

This is turning out to be the debate of the century.

 

[Jixxerz]

One of the replies mentioned us not being pilots but just controlling a computer. Airbus jets operate via fly by wire. The pilot isn't actually controlling the aircraft directly. Does not mean he or she is not a pilot. When I go out flying with my drone i am piloting it by any definition of the word and that's my story and I'm sticking to it!

I guess I'm just not pretentious enough to compare myself to an airbus pilot that literally has the lives of hundreds of people in his or her hands every time he or she takes off just because I fly remote controlled toys. But whatever makes you sound cool in front of your buddies.....if it works for you go with it I guess.

 

[cderoche]

Does this mean I can't wear my flight suit and look like this when I film with my Mavic now?

 

[cderoche]

// from www.theuav.com

Doesn't matter what some random dude with a website calls it.

// Per FAA

Doesn't matter what government or military call it, they're living in their own world.

Doesn't matter what dictionaries call it, the word "pilot" as applied to aviation is ~100 years old, and its meaning all these years did not need any qualifier whether the person controlling an aircraft is flying with it or not, nobody 100 years ago could imagine that flying a remotely controlled by radio waves aircraft is possible (at that time, even radio was at its infancy).

What matters is what WE call ourselves. If we come up with a term that is used ubiquitously, that's the word that will end up in dictionaries.

And as soon each household will have a drone, almost everyone (esp. male) will have it, calling hundreds of millions of people f'n around with plastic toys, taking selfies, etc. but with their feet planted on the ground - calling all of them "pilots" is nonsense. They're DRONERS. A pilot is a person actually flying with their aircraft.

Hope there is a cooler name than that one! Droners sounds like a person hooked on heroin lol. Maybe Dronies, Quad Gods, RC Stick Jockeys, Flying Camera Operators?
Was thinking about putting a Weeble in a flight suit to pilot mine. I'll just refer to myself as Ground Control. My Weeble's name is Major Tom, by the way. He didn't actually earn his commission per say, it was more of a honorary title.

 

[cderoche]

// Droners sounds like a person hooked on heroin lol.

Urban Dictionary: Droner

How 'bout "DRONIST" then?

dronist - Wiktionary

Sure, sounds better than the definition of Droner Hahahahaha

 

[Jixxerz]

Does this mean I can't wear my flight suit and look like this when I film with my Mavic now?

Brother if that's what makes your flying experience enjoyable then I say go for it!!

 

[Jixxerz]

That's it, thanks to the brainstorming, the proper word for a drone operator is found, and it's actually already in use! (e.g. #8 Top Pilot Interview with dronist ''Romeoch'' Romeo Durscher)

dronist - Wiktionary

Hello, Mavic DRONISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(said in "Seinfeld" Newman's voice, "Hello, Jerry" - "Hello, Newman")

We're watching history as it unfolds, dear dronists!

It's still fine to call the act of remote controlling an aircraft "piloting" (i.e. steering, controlling, directing). But not everyone who is piloting, is a pilot. A pilot is a person controlling an aircraft they're onboard of, or attached to, and flying with. A pilot is airborne; a dronist is not.

"Droner" can be used as a derogatory form of "dronist", e.g. someone who flies close to airplanes, breaks the laws, flies recklessly, endangers or annoys people. Droner = dronist + stoner.

/end of polemics

Nuff said!!
Now who else feels like the debate should end here?? That statement was pretty nuclear as far as I'm concerned.

 

[mlash]

Don't forget about the "Pilot Bearing!"

 

[reckless]

Nuff said!!
Now who else feels like the debate should end here?? That statement was pretty nuclear as far as I'm concerned.

Seems to be a popular discussion. Why do you want to end it? I enjoy reading people's opinions even if you don't.
If you are tired of it don't click the link.... Nuff said!!

 

[Mavman]

You all are funny. But I can't stand logical errors so....

I've seen some "real" pilots and their sympathizers use a couple qualifications to denigrate Mavic pilots including but not limited to....
1. Level of tech in the mavic making it "easy to fly"
-since when does capability of a device/craft make its operator somehow lesser....if you drive a Tesla with no gear changes automatic or otherwise it doesn't make you less of a driver when you hit that sweet lap time at laguna seca. Just because the nature of your concerns during the craft's operation have evolved alongside evolving technologies, doesn't mean we need to stick to the old metrics despite their newfound irrelevance. In some ways the mavic is more difficult to pilot in a way a non-stabilized quad could do more easily. There are trade offs everywhere. Autopilot on an airliner doesn't make the pilot any lesser - it's just that the best tool for the job is used, and turns out computers are much better than people at geospatial calculations hence why airliners are on autopilot so often. Just because your car doesn't wobble from side to side and randomly turn left/right/slide a lane over while you're driving it doesn't make you a non-driver, it just means you have a solidly engineered vehicle.

Also, there is a wide gamut of piloting ability with the mavic, just because it's stable and (for the most part) stays where you put it doesn't mean there is no skill to be displayed flying it.

2. No skin in the game / no danger involved.
- please. The mavic can be dangerous if flown dangerously. Somebody can get a concussion if you crash into them. You can probably cause a car accident if you fly where you shouldn't and lose control... you can easily bleed if you encounter the mavic's blades. There are consequences for failure. Maybe not for some of you, but $1000 is also NOT an inconsequential for many, many people.

3. Not in the craft, remote operator.
- a la the matrix prepare to question the nature of your reality! If you're flying FPV, you put on goggles and block out the outside world, for all intents and purposes you are in the craft as far as your brain is concerned. Who here has never naturally flinched at a close call with a tree?

Bottom line, being obsessed with titles is stupid and childish.

 

[Jixxerz]

Seems to be a popular discussion. Why do you want to end it? I enjoy reading people's opinions even if you don't.
If you are tired of it don't click the link.... Nuff said!!

Simple statement of fact only. It has been ended by the info provided in the statement I was referring to. Anyone with an IQ higher than 40 can see that so if you don't then.......NUFF SAID!!

 

[Jixxerz]

You all are funny. But I can't stand logical errors so....

I've seen some "real" pilots and their sympathizers use a couple qualifications to denigrate Mavic pilots including but not limited to....
1. Level of tech in the mavic making it "easy to fly"
-since when does capability of a device/craft make its operator somehow lesser....if you drive a Tesla with no gear changes automatic or otherwise it doesn't make you less of a driver when you hit that sweet lap time at laguna seca. Just because the nature of your concerns during the craft's operation have evolved alongside evolving technologies, doesn't mean we need to stick to the old metrics despite their newfound irrelevance. In some ways the mavic is more difficult to pilot in a way a non-stabilized quad could do more easily. There are trade offs everywhere. Autopilot on an airliner doesn't make the pilot any lesser - it's just that the best tool for the job is used, and turns out computers are much better than people at geospatial calculations hence why airliners are on autopilot so often. Just because your car doesn't wobble from side to side and randomly turn left/right/slide a lane over while you're driving it doesn't make you a non-driver, it just means you have a solidly engineered vehicle.

Also, there is a wide gamut of piloting ability with the mavic, just because it's stable and (for the most part) stays where you put it doesn't mean there is no skill to be displayed flying it.

2. No skin in the game / no danger involved.
- please. The mavic can be dangerous if flown dangerously. Somebody can get a concussion if you crash into them. You can probably cause a car accident if you fly where you shouldn't and lose control... you can easily bleed if you encounter the mavic's blades. There are consequences for failure. Maybe not for some of you, but $1000 is also NOT an inconsequential for many, many people.

3. Not in the craft, remote operator.
- a la the matrix prepare to question the nature of your reality! If you're flying FPV, you put on goggles and block out the outside world, for all intents and purposes you are in the craft as far as your brain is concerned. Who here has never naturally flinched at a close call with a tree?

Bottom line, being obsessed with titles is stupid and childish.

I agree 100 percent. It is very childish for anyone to say they are a pilot when the only thing they fly is a toy they bought at Best Buy.

 

[Jixxerz]

You all are funny. But I can't stand logical errors so....

I've seen some "real" pilots and their sympathizers use a couple qualifications to denigrate Mavic pilots including but not limited to....
1. Level of tech in the mavic making it "easy to fly"
-since when does capability of a device/craft make its operator somehow lesser....if you drive a Tesla with no gear changes automatic or otherwise it doesn't make you less of a driver when you hit that sweet lap time at laguna seca. Just because the nature of your concerns during the craft's operation have evolved alongside evolving technologies, doesn't mean we need to stick to the old metrics despite their newfound irrelevance. In some ways the mavic is more difficult to pilot in a way a non-stabilized quad could do more easily. There are trade offs everywhere. Autopilot on an airliner doesn't make the pilot any lesser - it's just that the best tool for the job is used, and turns out computers are much better than people at geospatial calculations hence why airliners are on autopilot so often. Just because your car doesn't wobble from side to side and randomly turn left/right/slide a lane over while you're driving it doesn't make you a non-driver, it just means you have a solidly engineered vehicle.

Also, there is a wide gamut of piloting ability with the mavic, just because it's stable and (for the most part) stays where you put it doesn't mean there is no skill to be displayed flying it.

2. No skin in the game / no danger involved.
- please. The mavic can be dangerous if flown dangerously. Somebody can get a concussion if you crash into them. You can probably cause a car accident if you fly where you shouldn't and lose control... you can easily bleed if you encounter the mavic's blades. There are consequences for failure. Maybe not for some of you, but $1000 is also NOT an inconsequential for many, many people.

3. Not in the craft, remote operator.
- a la the matrix prepare to question the nature of your reality! If you're flying FPV, you put on goggles and block out the outside world, for all intents and purposes you are in the craft as far as your brain is concerned. Who here has never naturally flinched at a close call with a tree?

Bottom line, being obsessed with titles is stupid and

True, airliners fly themselves nowadays. The key difference is this. The PILOT in charge of the aircraft carrying hundreds of lives onboard can PILOT the aircraft and its passengers to safety in the event of a complete systems failure by manually controlling the rudder, ailerons, flaps, elevators, engine speed, etc. Hence his or her certification as an actual PILOT. In the event of a failure causing us (drone enthusiasts, RC Hobbyists, Dronist) to have to assume full control of the Mavic, I can confidently say that AT LEAST 85 percent of the DRONISTS, RC HOBBYISTS, or DRONE ENTHUSIASTS on this site would end up inverted and PILOT their Mavic directly into the ground, themselves, or an innocent bystander.
If anyone is wondering, no I am not a pilot. Have no desire to be one, but I have the utmost respect for those of you who are. In my opinion, and I don't care who likes it or disagrees with it, it's just plain disrespectful and pretentious to put yourself in the same boat as an actual flight school certified pilot because you fly your RC toy twice a day.

I currently own 3 drones, one of which has absolutely no systems to fly itself, 8 RC airplanes, none of which fly themselves, and 4 RC helicopters, all of which I have to completely control and are in fact dangerous enough to kill me and several bystanders if I screw up.

1. Flying all these toys in no way makes me a pilot.

2. I am an adult child RC ENTHUSIAST.

3. I am completely fine with that.

4. If I ever complete flight training and become certified to fly an actual passenger aircraft I will then call myself a pilot.

5. I guess since I own and shoot the weapon most used by our Military Snipers, and I also have some camo cargo pants..........holy cow I can tell everyone I'm a Sniper in the armed forces.

 

[geigy]

PIC = pilot in command. So the FAA says we are pilots.

We are low man on the totem pole, compared to pilots of manned aircraft. They are gods compared to us drone pilots because they risk their lives every time they fly, and have a much greater skill set.

 

[reckless]

Simple statement of fact only. It has been ended by the info provided in the statement I was referring to. Anyone with an IQ higher than 40 can see that so if you don't then.......NUFF SAID!!

And yet you are still here..... NUFF SAID!!

 

[ben1991]

If you own a ‘drone’ you are navigating a controllable craft through the air. Whether it’s a tiny mavic drone or A380 respect must be shown to all airspace users. The big sky theory sadly no longer applies. I operate my passenger carrying jet aircraft just like I operate my drone. Safely, conscious of all risks and other users.
It’s all about respect. I’ll operate the big jet in controlled airspace to published airports because I expect my fellow airspace users or ‘pilots’ to give me the same respect. Drone operators or pilots have all of the uncontrolled airspace to use! That’s loads! More than me! Use it! Just don’t infringe my space when I’ve got hundreds of lives to account for.
Please enjoy your drone! Enjoy flight and enjoy photography but please don’t risk others in doing so. We all want to enjoy the airspace together.
Let’s not cause a divide and argue. Let’s work together to make sure our skies stay safe whether it’s piloting a drone or multi million dollar jet.
At the end of the day would you like your jet hit by a drone when you next go on holiday?
Learn to respect airspace and this hobby will remain free for everyone to enjoy.
Not a rant but an attempt to get all airspace users to respect the rules.

 

[Jixxerz]

And yet you are still here..... NUFF SAID!!

And so is the lame I'll just repeat what the other guy says over and over until it's painfully obvious how low my IQ............oh wait that's you.
NUFF SAID!!!!!!!!

 

[dirkclod]

Let's chill on the insults guy's .
I know everyone in this can be civil .
Thanks

 

[NinjaNut]

I 'pilot' a 200hp, 0-60 in 2.5 sec. zx-14r.....I say 'pilot' because I believe if I put wings on it, it'd fly! LOL

 

[Mavman]

Or we should look at this from a political point of view .... perhaps we SHOULD be pushing to classify us as users of an RC toy so that there's less chance we are heavily regulated... so despite the technical AND legal definitions that say we ARE pilots, maybe we should tow the "toy" party line ... for the sake of keepin our hobby free...ish.