Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Actually those who didn't think the SNJ difficult made an Aviator and the others simply could not. I think it might have been very difficult for the student pilots to master very complicated T-6s or SNJs but these were the just basics.
My comment is based on a writing made by an ex-JASDF instructor/pilot who used to wash out one incompetent student after another while he taught flying in the T-6s in early 60's.
In one of the USAF study about pilot trainings I noted an interesting comment. In 50's when the Air Force still used T-6s for the primary training there were number of students just quit from the training course mainly because of the nature of the aircraft which demanded students too much. I think I got it from NASA library.
What I would like to mean was that the aircraft like T-6 or SNJ must've been very useful to connect simple trainers and complicated front line machines. In this being a taildragger alone would not mean much but the aircraft and system in a whole would.
BTW does anybody have experience in flying T-28s? I see it was an improved T-6.
And I would love to fly one some day.
...the same principles are there now that were there in 1940
But that's the point of the check ride - to ensure the pilot is safe and has the decision making capacity to do the right thing. And then you have the flight review given every two years to once again ensure the competency of the pilot. There is always the encouragement for GA pilots to get additional ratings (instrument, commercial, ect.). It is hoped that those not competent or safe enough eventually stop flying. I think last year there were 650 GA accidents and about 450 deaths - that's one tenth of what existed say 40 years ago.I would like to point out however, in "our" hobby flying there are no screening existed after just one or two days of checkrides by the examiners. Pilots not competent enough for a long run can easily be pass through that and what will happen are the accidents after ten or twenty years.
In my opinion screening of the pilot candidates is primarily to prevent possible accidents or unsatisfactory performance of jobs or business in the air.
And then you have the flight review given every two years to .......650 GA accidents and about 450 deaths - that's one tenth of what existed say 40 years ago.
85 for me - you did real well....That is what we didn't have and do not still. ICAO once did an audit of our system, had pointed out that one. These are some of the recurrency trainings and safety educational classed held at many locations recently but I see these scarcely take effect. It is mainly attributable to the size of our GA or private aviation. I flew on a non-paid basis for more than 25 years but it was exceptional among ours.
BTW what was your first written exam score for the PPL, Flyboy? Mine was 97.