AOPA Pilot Magazine - April 2020 - 22

PROFICIENT PILOT

Airmanship

BY BARRY SCHIFF

What does it mean to you?

BARRY SCHIFF

has seven flight
instructor ratings
and has been
instructing since
1956.

22 | AOPA PILOT April 2020

FLYING AN AIRPLANE is a complex challenge, and to
do it safely-we are told-requires something called
"airmanship." Although most of us have a visceral
sense of what this is, it almost seems incapable of
being comprehensively defined. I've been hoping to
find a good definition ever since I began instructing,
one that might serve as a guide for my students.
Dictionaries provide incomplete definitions.
Merriam-Webster, for example, defines airmanship as
"skill in piloting or navigating aircraft." Its definition of
seamanship is similarly disappointing.
I was recently reminded of my decades-long
search for a satisfying definition of airmanship
when reading William Langewiesche's article, "What
Really Brought Down the Boeing 737 MAX?" in the
September 18, 2019, edition of The New York Times
Magazine. In it, Langewiesche asserts that the crew
of Lion Air Flight 610 "was weak in an essential quality known as airmanship." I was hoping as I continued
reading that he would define this term and satisfy my
desire for the quintessential definition. No such luck.
He did, however, conclude that "the two downed airplanes [were] textbook failure[s] of airmanship." (The
other 737 MAX accident involved Ethiopian Airlines
Flight 302.)
The FAA attempts to define airmanship on the first
page of its Airplane Flying Handbook, wherein it states
that airmanship is "a sound acquaintance with the principles of flight; the ability to operate an airplane with
competence and precision both in the air and on the
ground; and the exercise of sound judgment that results
in optimal operational safety and efficiency." Frankly,
this definition leaves much to be desired and seems little
more than an incomplete list of desirable traits.
Hoping that one or more of my friends might be
familiar with a better definition, I sent out a batch of
emails asking if any of them might have some thoughts
about the subject. Although none could provide a comprehensive definition, several offered thoughts worthy
of our attention. Rabbi Don Weber, for example, says
that "airmanship is making the aircraft do what you
want it to do without making it seem as though you are
doing anything at all." Mark Oberman says that it is "a
measure of how well knowledge, experience, judgment,
and safety are integrated."
Tony Bill suggests that "airmanship is the innate
ability-born of experience and/or instinct-to keep an

aircraft aloft and then place it on the ground as safely
as possible." Bruce Douglas adds that "it is the ability
to operate an aircraft as safely as possible in the face
of unexpected and deleterious changes in aircraft or
environmental circumstances." Other offerings include
mention of "stick and rudder," "attitude flying," "judgment," "taildraggers," and so forth.
Rod Machado, a master of original thought, says
that "we tend to be specific in attempting to define airmanship, and that this is a trap." He doesn't believe that
"airmanship" should be limited to listing a combination
of specific behaviors. Rather, he offers, "Airmanship is
a general term that requires a general definition." This
explains why Rod defines airmanship as "an assessment
of a pilot's behavior compared to the assessor's ideal
of what that behavior should be during a given set of
circumstances."
In his letter to the editor of The New York Times
Magazine, Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger responds to
Langewiesche's article. In that letter he says that airmanship is "the absolute mastery of the aircraft and the
situation at all times."
I doubt if very many pilots have had absolute mastery of either their aircraft or their situation at all times,
but it certainly is a goal to which pilots should aspire.
In the final analysis, there might not be a perfect
definition of airmanship, although I recently was sent a
good one. Brian Souter, a pilot in New Zealand, told me
that the International Civil Aviation Organization, an
agency of the United Nations, has proposed the following: "Airmanship-the consistent use of good judgment
and well-developed knowledge, skills, and attitudes to
accomplish flight objectives."
I wonder. Is it possible to teach something-airmanship-that is so difficult to define?
Rob Haynes thinks that perhaps we should concentrate on attempting to define an airman (or airwoman)
instead of airmanship. He paraphrases the literary offerings of the late, great author Ernest Gann: "An airman
has a passion for flight; he laces his devotion with humility; he understands that rudder pedals are for more than
steering his aircraft on the ground; he does not need
bells or buzzers to know that his wings are soon to stall;
he does not become dismayed at the annoyance of an
engine failure; and he sets down his aircraft with the
tender loving care that it deserves."
AOPA
barryschiff.com
http://www.barryschiff.com
AOPA Pilot Magazine - April 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Pilot Magazine - April 2020
